[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1310721274' post='10036']
The Minolta 300G was not so good but the Sony 300G SSM is a new design and much better.
[url="http://artaphot.ch/lens-comparisons/174-a900-28300-g-ssm-28300-apo-g-70-400-g-ssm-28200-apo-g-a-14x-apo-conv"]Comparison at Artaphot[/url]
Will you also test the F/2 series? (Minolta 28/2, 35/2, 100/2)
[/quote]
If my supplier stumbles across it I might test the 400/4.5G.
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1310725672' post='10039']
If my supplier stumbles across it I might test the 400/4.5G.
[/quote]
Also a gem, that they should not have discontinued (look at how popular the Canon EF 400mm f5.6 L USM is, for instance).
In the same Color Foto issue, they tested it too. Together with the Canon 400mm f2.8 L IS USM it came out on top in the 400mm group.
Other 400mm's tested: Leica R 400mm f2.8, Nikon AF-S 400mm f2.8 ED, Pentax 400mm f5.6 ED.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1310722176' post='10037']
It is not that an old lens, it is from the generation of the Canon EF 200mm f2.8 L USM (and Nikon 180mm f2.8). And these lenses have great contrast.
I have an old Color Foto magazine from 2001. In it they test a.o. 200mm teles:
* Canon EF 200mm f2.8 L USM II
* Minolta AF Apo 200mm f2.8 G
* Nikkor AF 180mm f2.8 IF-ED
* Zeiss Sonnor T* 180mm f2.8
All 4 are sharp, the Canon and Minolta score 22 points out of 30, the Nikon 21 and the Zeiss 20.
Contrast, the Canon scores 30 out of 30, the Nikon 29, the Minolta 28 and the Zeiss 27.
Distortion, Minolta 10 out of 10, Canon, Nikon and Zeiss 8.
Vignetting, the Canon scores 9 out of 10, the Nikon, Minolta and Zeiss 8.
All in all, a great group of lenses who do not have to hide for the newest designs. And they are so much lighter and compact compared to the 70-200 f2.8 zooms...
[/quote]
Thanks for the info
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1310726139' post='10040']
Also a gem, that they should not have discontinued (look at how popular the Canon EF 400mm f5.6 L USM is, for instance).
In the same Color Foto issue, they tested it too. Together with the Canon 400mm f2.8 L IS USM it came out on top in the 400mm group.
Other 400mm's tested: Leica R 400mm f2.8, Nikon AF-S 400mm f2.8 ED, Pentax 400mm f5.6 ED.
[/quote]
Well, the 400/5.6L is not exactly popular. The 100-400L IS is.
I reckon the popularity (and also performance) of the zooms (70-200G, 70-400G) is also the reason why Sony
didn't bother with the 200mm G and 400mm G anymore. The primes remain superior optically though.
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1310732226' post='10045']
Well, the 400/5.6L is not exactly popular. The 100-400L IS is.
I reckon the popularity (and also performance) of the zooms (70-200G, 70-400G) is also the reason why Sony
didn't bother with the 200mm G and 400mm G anymore. The primes remain superior optically though.
[/quote]
Now manufacturers only sell large FF zooms or large FF primes. But I think small primes are a better compromise: draw less attention, lighter to carry, good optically (easier to design). I often take around my Minolta 28/2 & 100/2 instead of Zeiss 24/2 & 85/1.4 simply because they are twice smaller and almost as sharp.
Carrying the A900 with the 28/2 or 35/2 is actually lighter than an APS-C body with a bright APS-C wide-angle lens. But the upcoming Zeiss 24 for NEX might make me change my mind.
http://flickr.com/ephankim
