Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
QuietOC
QuietOC Veteran Member • Posts: 5,019
Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM
4

I haven't seen these ever directly compared. Both on the A7RIV using the Sigma MC-11 and the Sony LA-EA3/LA-EA4R.

1989 Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G
8 elements in 7 groups
9 aperture blades
784 g

1991 Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM
9 elements in 7 groups
8 aperture blades
742 g without optional tripod foot

1989 Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G

1991 Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

Minolta @ F2.8

Canon @ F2.8

Minolta @ F4

Canon @ F4

Minolta @ F2.8

Canon @ F2.8

The Canon is better aligned and has less purple fringing but is more susceptible to veiling glare in these backlit scenes. The Canon is noticeably lighter despite needing both aperture and focus motors in lens.

 QuietOC's gear list:QuietOC's gear list
Pentax Q7 Sony a7R IV NEX-5T Sony a77 II Sony DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6 +85 more
Becksvart
Becksvart Contributing Member • Posts: 779
Re: Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

Thanks for this! The Minolta 200/2,8 certainly looks good and the hood is neat (the 300/2,8 is an unwieldy monster in comparison). How's the autofocus with the LA-EA4r? Fast,violent, accurate? How's the Canon on the MC11 in comparison?

QuietOC
OP QuietOC Veteran Member • Posts: 5,019
Re: Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM
1

Becksvart wrote:

Thanks for this! The Minolta 200/2,8 certainly looks good and the hood is neat (the 300/2,8 is an unwieldy monster in comparison). How's the autofocus with the LA-EA4r? Fast,violent, accurate? How's the Canon on the MC11 in comparison?

The Canon focuses much more quickly. The modified LA-EA4 is pretty slow and unreliable but eventually it works. I am sure the Minolta would focus better on the LA-EA5. A better aligned copy would probably focus better too. AF-S with the LA-EA4r did look the same as my careful manual focusing. The Minolta has more focus shift. Stopped down focusing would be nice to have for A-mount.

 QuietOC's gear list:QuietOC's gear list
Pentax Q7 Sony a7R IV NEX-5T Sony a77 II Sony DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6 +85 more
jqa New Member • Posts: 2
Re: Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

Hi, I've just read your post and can't resist to ask how old minolta's which you have perform optically on A7RIV. Does 60MPx are not too much for those old lenses as for an resolution resolve? Wish to download some full resolution files if you have posted some ware online. I'm bit surprise that you opt for Monster la-ea4r instead la-ea5 as you have r iv..

QuietOC
OP QuietOC Veteran Member • Posts: 5,019
Re: Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

jqa wrote:

Hi, I've just read your post and can't resist to ask how old minolta's which you have perform optically on A7RIV. Does 60MPx are not too much for those old lenses as for an resolution resolve? Wish to download some full resolution files if you have posted some ware online. I'm bit surprise that you opt for Monster la-ea4r instead la-ea5 as you have r iv..

I had the LA-EA4R prior to getting the A7RIV. I will probably sell it. It worked well yesterday with the Minolta 135 F2.8 "Pocket Rocket".

60 MP full-frame is about the same size pixels as 24 MP APS-C cameras. I would like even smaller pixels. I bought the FE 200-600 OSS and 1.4X prior to the A7RIV.

Minolta may not have made the highest resolution lenses, but most are more than sharp enough at some setting.

I ordered another Minolta 200 F2.8 and their 80-200 F2.8.

 QuietOC's gear list:QuietOC's gear list
Pentax Q7 Sony a7R IV NEX-5T Sony a77 II Sony DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6 +85 more
jqa New Member • Posts: 2
Re: Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G vs Canon EF 200 F2.8L USM

Thanks for replay. I also have la-ea4r working with a7 iii. I have quite few minolta lenses including 80-200 f2.8 (even both versions), 100 & 50 macros, all original beercans... and 500 reflex. Just wondered how they would resolve on R m4...

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads