pakodominguez wrote:Mark K wrote:Can't stop my GAS and bought one. Wonderful piece of small lens which does everything my Minolta beercan does without an adapter.
The beecan is good at some points. Compared to the Minolta/Sony 70-200 f2.8, it close focus "better" (less distortion, a little bit closer, the beercan has a "macro" range) with similar magnification. But Bokeh (important for some), overall sharpness, SSM and a much better control of fringing makes the f2.8 a much better lens. Then, it is up to you if yo want to pay the extra money for it...
The beercan was not really an expensive lens at introduction (250 $ of 1986, about 500 $ in today's money) it I believe it was not meant to become a legend in the Minolta world if it was not a cheap good performer. But specially cheap. 20% cheaper than a Canon similar lens in 1986...
The new Sony 70-200 OSS f4 is probably a better lens than the Sony 70-200 f2.8 GII. Sony is working with a different technology now, I think there is little Minolta DNA on the new designs (but probably Minolta could follow the same path Sony is taking) and there is A) a big demand on this lens and/or B) production is low due to special request in producing and assembling parts.
I own a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 macro and I'm quite happy. I thought about buying the new Sony F4 but I'm not sure yet. Not because the price since I believe it worth it, but because I'm not sure I want to have one of this lenses for each system I own... Too much money invested while the LAEA4 works quite well (but the Tamron is bigger and slower AF)
in any case, even if the beercan is a fine lens, I sold it the day I compare it against the Tamron, that sport a moderns design and focus closer and better. We all know it is a good lens. But it is popular because is cheap.
bfitzgerald wrote:Which tamron version the newer or older 70-200mm?
The beercan is a cracker for the price, subject to getting a good copy. Only weak points I can find are CA (at times) and flare can be an issue (it flares badly in direct sun - one of the few lenses where a hood is mandatory)
I doubt I'd ever sell mine it's a fun lens to use and in my hands I work it hard and get the results from it.
I might get an f2.8 at some point, but Sony's pricing is so OTT it almost guarantees people will run to Tamron (Both versions)
There would be no point at all Sony releasing an f4 70-200mm at £1000 or over it is simply not worth spending that on an f4 lens. At £500-£600 it might be
Very few are stocking the FE mount 70-200mm f4 in the UK WEX are looking for £1250 which is bit heavy if you ask me
My priorities are optical quality and stuff like SSM and white paint jobs come second place. Bokeh wise I can't fault the 70-210mm esp at the tele end it delivers
bfitzgerald wrote:I think over time people are starting to wake up to what's going on..and some of the plain rip off pricing on optics from OEM makers. I simply buy Tamron and I'm far from unhappy with that choice so far.
bfitzgerald wrote:What the optical performance like Pako on the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) Macro 001S ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests