Group: Member
Post: 16 (0 liked)
Join date: November 2014
Status:
|
|
on Nov 17, 2014 17:46:03 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 17, 2014 21:16:05 GMT by oldrado
The following are just some "everyday shots" to my dog and my daughter, but I think they can show well the impressive 3D effect of this wonderful lens
|
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Nov 21, 2014 11:09:57 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 21, 2014 11:32:52 GMT by Deleted
Very good shots indeed, Alessio, especially the second image. This lens may well be in one league with my Zeiss 80-200mm.
But congratulations on your surefire focusing too! Getting a moving object in focus with such a long lens at open aperture is quite a challenge...
Michael
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 16 (0 liked)
Join date: November 2014
Status:
|
|
on Nov 21, 2014 15:22:04 GMT
Posted: Nov 21, 2014 15:22:04 GMT
Very good shots indeed, Alessio, especially the second image. This lens may well be in one league with my Zeiss 80-200mm. But congratulations on your surefire focusing too! Getting a moving object in focus with such a long lens at open aperture is quite a challenge... Michael Thanks a lot. I agree with you: the second shot is the one I prefer more. It must also be considered that I shot in backlight conditions and the ML 80-200mm managed the flare really perfectly. Indeed, I think that this lens is one of the closer Yas to their Zeiss homologue.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Nov 22, 2014 2:54:34 GMT
Posted: Nov 22, 2014 2:54:34 GMT
Yes, these are wonderful results, Alessio. I'll have to add one of those lenses to my bag someday.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 35 (3 liked)
Join date: April 2015
Status:
|
|
on Aug 7, 2015 14:43:17 GMT
Posted: Aug 7, 2015 14:43:17 GMT
How does this lens compare to the 70-210 f4?
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,038 (562 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 7, 2015 15:56:42 GMT
Posted: Aug 7, 2015 15:56:42 GMT
How does this lens compare to the 70-210 f4? I'll try to make some time tomorrow to test them against each other.... |
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Aug 7, 2015 16:09:34 GMT
Posted: Aug 7, 2015 16:09:34 GMT
And please don't forget to clarify if there is a difference on yours A75 and A79 ones.
Regards
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Aug 7, 2015 17:23:49 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 7, 2015 17:25:53 GMT by dragos
Because the subject is open here, i will share a quick test. Still wondering about the milky mask of my 80-200 and the apparent missing ML coating. Tested against 70-210 4,5 @ f8 for both and at maximal, 200 and 210mm ML 80-200 f8 @200mm  ML 70-210 f8 @210mm  ML 80-200 f8 @200mm  ML 70-210 f8 @210mm  |
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,038 (562 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 8, 2015 17:13:36 GMT
Posted: Aug 8, 2015 17:13:36 GMT
I can see what you mean from your photos. I think you have just been unlucky with your 80-200; I've just checked images that I shot today produced by a 75.. and a 79.. numbered lens and I can't tell them apart. Both have good colour rendition and good contrast even though the coatings look different. Looking at your photos, the problem is partly an issue of poor contrast in your 80-200 and that will certainly be heavily influenced by the coatings on the elements; you may just have had the bad luck to find a rare ML lens that escaped quality control...
As for the difference between the best of my ML 80-200s and the ML 70-210 f4, well it's pretty close across the focal lengths but at f4, the 70-210 has the edge in contrast and sharpness.
I have attached a couple of piccies, also shot today, the first of which is from the 70-210 at f4 at 80mm, and the second is of the 80-200 at f8, again at 80mm, which is the point at which it matches the 70-210.
70-210 at f4, 80mm 
80-200 at f8, 80mm 
My conclusion would be that they are both very good lenses and if it wasn't for the 70-210, the 80-200 would be seen as a very good performer. The 80-200 used in this image has an A79***** serial number.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Aug 8, 2015 18:39:33 GMT
Posted: Aug 8, 2015 18:39:33 GMT
Thank you foe sharing this samples.
I will surprise you with another example, different lens. Again different serials on same lens.
As this was about 80-200, i will open now another subject separately.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 3 (0 liked)
Join date: May 2016
Status:
|
|
on May 16, 2016 7:12:13 GMT
Posted: May 16, 2016 7:12:13 GMT
Has anyone compared the 80-200mm f4 with the 200mm f4 prime?
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 23 (4 liked)
Join date: April 2015
Status: Yashica ML Collector
|
|
on May 18, 2016 5:05:31 GMT
Posted: May 18, 2016 5:05:31 GMT
Has anyone compared the 80-200mm f4 with the 200mm f4 prime? Not yet - what are you interested in? Sharpness, bokeh, close range, infinity? It might be interesting to compare the zoom and the prime. So far, I'd rate the prime as mediocre and the zoom as quite good (and much more versatile). |
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Aug 14, 2016 8:10:07 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 14, 2016 8:12:18 GMT by lenslover
How does this lens compare to the 70-210 f4? Your 75-150/4 ML lens would be better - because it's exactly a 2-times Zoom (2x), whereas the 70-210/4 is technically a 3x Zoom lens. And, by Design...the smaller the Zoomfactor, the easier the lens is to calculate & being optimized technically for the given focal length (here: Zoomfactor) The 70-210/4 is really good, but i won't give away my 75-150/4 for that lens. ;-) Thanks for showing the Samples of the 80-200/F4 vs. the 70-210/4, it clearly shows that the 80-200/4 is more fuzzy, less contrasty then the former one. |
|
