Nice review, and great to see this beast still getting some love these days. The only drawbacks I think you forgot to mention are the weight (it does get heavy, more in the bag than attached though) and the paint - yours looks magnificent, and how I remember mine looking when I got it back in 2014, but it looks worse for wear now that a lot of the paint has rubbed off. Since then I've put almost 110,000 shots through it (Lightroom is handy to find this stuff out!), mostly sports but many portraits and other types too, and it's a truly fantastic lens! It's a little clunky and loud, but SO fast, and the image quality is outstanding. One other thing it has over newer lenses is that it's tough! It's built like a tank. I once had it fall out of my bag from just over a metre high onto concrete and land directly on the lens while it was attached to my A700. It ended up putting a tiny little dent near the front of the lens, but it ripped the mount right off the A700, to the point where the camera was done, but the lens still worked perfectly! Even on full frame at 42mp, it's beautiful. Compared to the latest SSM expensive lenses it's perhaps slightly slower and a lot louder, but the margins are way smaller than you would expect. I'm hoping to move to a Sony SSM II lens now just to take advantage of the hybrid focus, but I'm not expecting an increase in image quality at all, as this one is that good. Fantastic lens!
I did put the weight in the spec, it's not light is it! But it's a bit lighter than most 70-200mm's some are near 1.5KG, this is also more compact. I never used the SSM 70-200mm G Minolta or Sony, evidently it can't hold a candle to this for some reason (perhaps the slightly shorter range helps). Lot of first Gen versions were not as good as newer ones. Let's look at it like this cost of 70-200mm G F4 used, is higher than this (by quite a bit), cost of the 70-200mm F2.8 GM way way more, and even the new Tamron 70-180mm not exactly bargain priced in comparison. Are they better optically these lenses? I've used the GM and I it's a sweet lens, I couldn't say it's optically better though ;-D Seems to hold up even on high res bodies nicely, I don't have 42mp but I know a few who say it handles it easily. Thanks for dropping in, I was considering the 200mm APO F2.8, but this is so good at 200mm I think I made the right choice!
Mine has almost no paint including the hood. There is a nice stainless steel finish under the paint, clearly these things have been designed to last lifetimes.
Great job on the review. Thank you going so in-depth with the bokeh, that was the best bokeh review I have ever seen and I appreciate the time and effort you put into that.
It really is ridiculous for a lens of this age can still outperform most modern AF offerings. So well that their price is between $800-1200 US. Minolta colour, Bokeh and sharpness , highly desirable.
Minolta nailed it with this lens, whoever was working on the design they did their homework. Many new lenses can't match it, the rendering is super smooth shoot at F2.8 and not worry about it. Surprised me just how good it was. GMaster might have the sealing and nano coatings and AF motors, but it's not up to this lens for optical performance and I've used that lens enough to see that. Prices vary you can find good copies at reasonable cost, avoid high prices unless they give a warranty
@@aural_supremacy prices are going down, you are right, Japan prices on EBay seem to be the benchmark for “Quality” lenses. If you compare the resolution out of the Minolta v Sony it’s a better deal than looking at newer Sony focal ranges at far cheaper price point.
Minolta lenses “Still” have so much to offer, even Sony’s version of many Minolta lenses don’t quite rate as high as the originals, just check Dyxum.com for comparison. One could buy 6 best performing Minolta lenses and have superior glass for an extremely affordable alternative. The great part about these high quality G glass is they hold their value.
Agree even some of the more affordable ones still offer excellent performance at a crazy silly low price. I've done videos on many, I have more to do. I have stuck with my Minolta lenses, and even though A Mount has been neglected and basically left to fade away - I have no plans to re-buy lenses on native MILC system, the cost alone is astronomical. The 70-200mm G SSM was never able to match this particular lens, older or not this is the one to go for. Or grab a beercan if the F4 is good enough also use that quite a lot and the other one shown 100-200mm F4.5 deserves more respect than it gets. Thanks for dropping in
Mr Baz Reviews I was looking at the Sony 70-200f2.8, the Minolta 70-200 f2.8, the Sigma equivalent (with the massive lens extension) but this Minolta really is the pick of the little, price v performance, it’s a hands down number.
@@leemccurtayne9489 I wouldn't bother with the SSM 70-200mm unless it was crazy cheap. If the SSM fails you'll have a job finding the parts. Sony doesn't even seem to have spare parts on many lenses still being sold on A mount. The only one I'd consider is the 70-400mm G which is a bit different. Optics on this difficult to find fault shoot at F2.8 across the range and get great results.
Hey there, Very cool reviews. Reminds me of kurtmunger but this time on youtube. Nice job really :) This lens is awesome. I agree when you say that these Minolta tele lenses present a smoother OOF transitions and better rendering than some new E-mount sibblings lenses.
My findings sometimes tie up with Kurt other times not so much depends on the lenses. He was one of the few who did reviews on Minolta's and I continue with that - still have more to do, and people still seem to have an interest in them Yes the rendering on this lens is exceptional, some new modern lenses are not - the Tamron 70-180mm a good example of not so good, IMO they would have been better making an 80-200mm like this ;-D thanks for dropping by,
I recently got the 50mm 1.4 and 100mm f2.8 macro from Minolta for my A7IV and have fallen in love. Definitely going to be looking into getting this as well soon. All of these still wonderful lenses for less than the cost of just one of my more modern lenses. It's crazy what a gold mine these lenses are!
If you have the adapter and right body (the new adapter only works for screw drive with a few cameras), then get stuck in, there are some excellent Minolta lenses. This is one of their best, it's not perfect (there is some CA at times), but it was way ahead of it's time, and is a bargain for the focal range. I didn't find the 80mm start a big issue v a 70mm. It's the 200mm end I like A classic lens this one, no question.
@@MrBazReviews Oh I wasn't aware of that, I still don't really know much about adapting. I have the A7IV and LA-EA5. Would this work? I'm totally fine with some imperfections. If the difference is this much money I'm all for it. I have a 24-70 already and don't really see myself desperately needing 70-80. This would basically round out every focal length I would ever use!
@@ShibiChan That will work. The LA-EA5 works for screw drive with: A7IV, A7RIV, A7RV, and the A1 for full frame. For APS-C the only body is the A6600. There is no video AF though with these screw drive lenses, with the adapter, which for me was a show stopper. I was sad to let go almost all of my A Mount gear, this lens in particular I miss. I wish Sony had more bodies supported or came out with the adapter 3-4 years ago, I might have stuck around.
I like it a lot I might do a follow up video on it as I've been using it more real world stuff (v testing) I used a Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 G2 for a while on a Canon and the Minolta tore it up, big time - it wasn't even close at 200mm, this lens sings at F2.8. I'll keep using this for a long time to come It's not perfect there is some CA at times - it just has a look I like a lot and it delivers wide open across the range
Great and useful review - thank you! I can't help wondering whether this lens is worthwhile as far as sharpness and overall image quality are concerned, considering that I do own the beercan .. ? And then there is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD - which one of these stands out .. ?
Depends if you need the F2.8 or not. The beercan is still very good, for an F4 lens The Minolta owns the Tamron with ease, it is decent but not in the same league
@@kjellhmyhre2374 Copies vary I find mine pretty good wide open at 210mm good enough. The F2.8 is coming down in price it's nice, you'd notice the weight for low light shooting worth considering - otherwise I like the beercan very good contrast/rendering
@@MrBazReviews Thanks for great review, Mr. Baz! I also have Minolta 70-210 F4 beercan. And for me it's the best value for money portrait lens. I've used Minolta 85mm 1.4 also a lot, and I love it for better bokeh. But it's fixed and I can do triple more shoots with beercan than with the fix 85mm in the same photo shoot. So, how do you find the bokeh between three of them? I also thought about Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 Di SP. But it seems that I will better take one more spare beercan cause it costs 5 times cheaper). Or will take the Minolta AF 80-200mm F2.8 HS APO G for a little more price.
It's a fast lens to focus, if you're using it with the LAEA4, it's competent but your AF point coverage is quite limited (even more limited than say an A99 body). You're also down to 2.5fps for continuous shooting, and there is no zone AF, which is quite useful for a lot of subjects. There is nothing wrong with the lens performance it's plenty quick enough, you just have to work around those issues on the adapter.
TIP: When buying any old lens, always check for oily aperture blades, if they look wet/shiny there is a good chance they might stick and give you over exposure, you can clean them, but its not an easy job, took me a couple of hours and I am experienced at repair. Old grease releases oil with age and thats how they become oily, its removed using Isopropyl.
It's more an issue on the older lenses the ones such as this I've not seen a problem, the beercan that can be as can the others though I've not had too many with it, couple of lenses from the 80's have had it
@@engjds That's pretty cheap usually the F1.7 goes for that price. Most of the ones I've used are early 90's and don't seem to have a problem, a few are from the 80's.
Hello, I bought the 80-200 APO 2.8 new (more than 20 years ago), and kept it when I acquired my A99. I have always been very satisfied with the lens. I guess the sony 24 75 f2.8 will be a bit 'better' but when it comes to price/quality the old Minolta is unbeattable. Question: On the digital camera I sometimes notice some colour fringing in contrasty pictures. How do you correct for that? On the camera itself (if so, which setting) or post production?
Most software has CA removal lightroom and other editors some are one click some have a spot tool. I don't find the CA to be bad at all on this, quite mild. The 70-210mm was fairly notable, even so I like the look of images from that lens too
Yes, as Mr. Baz said, you can use Lightroom. Also you can use profiles in Lightroom to fix it automatically. But I've found it unnecessary , because the CAs are happen not too often. On my beercan it's usually no more than 5-10 shoots from 300. I suppose that on the APO the CAs are a little bit more rare
@@hypercube33 When the LAEA5 came out I expected more firmware updates to support screw drive AF, but so far only the A7RIV and A6600 work with screw drive lenses on that adapter. I'm not sure what Sony will do down the road with it, but it's a lot less appealing with only 2 bodies working on screw drive lenses. We'll have to see if they do more updated over time, otherwise it's of limited appeal IMO unless you've already got those cameras or intend to pick one up.
@@chinitopinoy1726 At the moment no not working with screw drive AF lenses. The A1 does have support. So it's 3 cameras A1/A7RIV/A6600 only at this time. The A7iii got a firmware update today but I don't believe anything happened on the adapter. At this stage it seems support is not going to be very good for the LAEA5, so I wouldn't bother with it unless you have those bodies or plan to get it, or just use in lens motors. The LAEA4 is the only one that works pretty much across the range of bodies, albeit with limitations (I have this adapter) The other option is the monster adapter, I'm trying to get one to test if I can
I wouldn't put stickers on the paint it might be worse then leaving it. Some touch up the marks with auto paint, you can get lenses re-painted by some companies I know of no real solution unless you go with the black version which isn't as fast geared, but is the same optical design.
I did videos on quite a few lenses. This is a great one overall, bar a bit of CA at times it's excellent performance. The 100-200mm is tiny for a telephoto and costs almost nothing. Same for the 50mm 1.7, and the 100mm Macro is also a solid choice (and the 50mm Macro both are excellent) That's just a few I find useful.
@@MrBazReviews Although I didn't ask this question, I want to thank you for your response to it, because it answers questions for me as well - since I didn't know about this lens before, but it will be interesting to use it (primarily) for portraits on my A700. Anyway, I want to note that I really appreciate your channel, how you handle topics and how you respond to queries. Thank you so much for your wonderful work.
@@HeuerAndy Thank you very much it's nice to get a comment like that. I made the video mostly as a test one because there was little information on this, or examples in a video. Same thing for many of the other Minolta lenses and a few bodies, mostly overlooked. But I see people still watching them and the 70-210mm F4 is still popular even today. Decades after the lens was discontinued! I like the 80-200mm a lot, this lens is a classic in many ways. And still very competitive with modern lenses. I might do a follow up with other photos and field use of this lens. Though I use F mount mostly I have a few A mount things left.
@@MrBazReviews Thank you also for this reply and all the info. I appreciate it. Also, did you ever do a review on the black version of this lens? I'm not at all clear where the differences are aside from the faster autofocus.
@@HeuerAndy The optical design is the same on both, black and white bodies are metal, they went with the white paint on the HS one (the black paint holds up better over time so some say). They just geared it higher on the HS one, it's perhaps 30% faster, it's hard to measure, a rough guess. Images should be identical from both lenses. I'd also recommend the 100-200mm to go with it, costs almost nothing and the weight is super light. Surprisingly good lens too much smaller and lighter then the 70-210mm F4, I kept the 100-200mm as it's a great compact lens. This 80-200mm is a gem optically, when I get a chance I'll do a follow up video on it once I clear the review backlog (shooting report/samples)
For a lens designed in the 90's the optics are almost perfect, only some slight CA to note. The performance surprised me, it is one of the best Minolta lenses made so many said, and I agree with that. The "look" I have not seen as good as this from any comparable lens. Thanks for dropping in
@@MrBazReviews Aberration is very easy to correct in Lightroom, I have the Tamron 272E (one of the sharpest full open F2.8 lenses in existence) and the thing gives some CA as well but one click in Lightroom solves it. Can't wait to push the -3EV autofocus of the A77II and go full no Gucci with the lens🗿🗿 like a gentledawg asserting dominance with a legacy Minolta vs all the people who spend zillions on new generation gear
@@MrBazReviews 2 years with this lens, it's an absolute beast. I even dropped it from the height of my shoulder (around 6 feet) and it didn't suffer anything else other than a small dent on the focus ring that made the infinity focus tedious til a couple of months where it literally went back to normal. This lens is literally self healing. I love it, and it gives very neat results wide open at night.
Which mount E mount? They already have their GM and that's not nearly as sharp Sony probably own the rights to the lens design when they bought out Minolta, but any traces of Minolta are long gone sadly in Sony (in my view)
They have on both A mount and E mount. This version however arguably has a better look and feel with the images it renders. Its why some including me prefer the screw drive G lenses and older Minolta lenses to the newer Sony and Zeiss equivalents.
@@KeithHeinrich The FE 70-200mm GM varies quite a bit on copies I've used, they do have a new version - yet it's very expensive. General feeling was the older Minolta was mostly sharper (v the old one anyway), and had more pleasing out of focus areas. Sort of depends what adapter you are using and body. It works OK with the LAEA4, with some limitations, I've not used the LAEA5 yet. I would find it quite hard to let this go, it's not a perfect lens there is some CA at times (never found it to be a big issue), it's incredibly good across the range, near edge to edge - not something many 70-200mm's can pull off Screw drive doesn't both me, no motor to burn out, depends what bodies you use it with, works well on the A99
@@MrBazReviews agreed. I'm sticking with alpha mount (A700, A99) and have the most cosmetically challenged 80-200 HS on the planet. But does it take sensational images. And it was inexpensive too for the win. Alpha mount lenses are now super affordable since the cameras are no longer made. I just need to find a good 17-35G at the right price for a full set.
@@KeithHeinrich I do toy with moving to another system, yet when I start looking around, it's hugely expensive with mirrorless systems. I've decided for now to stick around, the A99 is quite good overall I find it a strong all rounder, for general use and even action it's worked out quite well (with this lens) I can't say I'm overly impressed with Sony's silent treatment of A mount users, hence I do sometimes ponder a move. The 17-35mm I've not used, not the G one, so I'd be interested to hear what your thoughts are on that if you get one.
You can support the channel via Amazon USA - amzn.to/2EQxob1 UK - amzn.to/2Gh5165
Or via Patreon - www.patreon.com/mrbazreviews
Nice review, and great to see this beast still getting some love these days.
The only drawbacks I think you forgot to mention are the weight (it does get heavy, more in the bag than attached though) and the paint - yours looks magnificent, and how I remember mine looking when I got it back in 2014, but it looks worse for wear now that a lot of the paint has rubbed off. Since then I've put almost 110,000 shots through it (Lightroom is handy to find this stuff out!), mostly sports but many portraits and other types too, and it's a truly fantastic lens! It's a little clunky and loud, but SO fast, and the image quality is outstanding.
One other thing it has over newer lenses is that it's tough! It's built like a tank. I once had it fall out of my bag from just over a metre high onto concrete and land directly on the lens while it was attached to my A700. It ended up putting a tiny little dent near the front of the lens, but it ripped the mount right off the A700, to the point where the camera was done, but the lens still worked perfectly!
Even on full frame at 42mp, it's beautiful. Compared to the latest SSM expensive lenses it's perhaps slightly slower and a lot louder, but the margins are way smaller than you would expect. I'm hoping to move to a Sony SSM II lens now just to take advantage of the hybrid focus, but I'm not expecting an increase in image quality at all, as this one is that good.
Fantastic lens!
I did put the weight in the spec, it's not light is it! But it's a bit lighter than most 70-200mm's some are near 1.5KG, this is also more compact. I never used the SSM 70-200mm G Minolta or Sony, evidently it can't hold a candle to this for some reason (perhaps the slightly shorter range helps). Lot of first Gen versions were not as good as newer ones.
Let's look at it like this cost of 70-200mm G F4 used, is higher than this (by quite a bit), cost of the 70-200mm F2.8 GM way way more, and even the new Tamron 70-180mm not exactly bargain priced in comparison. Are they better optically these lenses? I've used the GM and I it's a sweet lens, I couldn't say it's optically better though ;-D
Seems to hold up even on high res bodies nicely, I don't have 42mp but I know a few who say it handles it easily.
Thanks for dropping in, I was considering the 200mm APO F2.8, but this is so good at 200mm I think I made the right choice!
Mine has almost no paint including the hood. There is a nice stainless steel finish under the paint, clearly these things have been designed to last lifetimes.
Great job on the review. Thank you going so in-depth with the bokeh, that was the best bokeh review I have ever seen and I appreciate the time and effort you put into that.
I try to show things others might not spend the time on, the lens doesn't disappoint in that area no question on that. Thanks for dropping by!
It really is ridiculous for a lens of this age can still outperform most modern AF offerings. So well that their price is between $800-1200 US. Minolta colour, Bokeh and sharpness , highly desirable.
Minolta nailed it with this lens, whoever was working on the design they did their homework. Many new lenses can't match it, the rendering is super smooth shoot at F2.8 and not worry about it. Surprised me just how good it was. GMaster might have the sealing and nano coatings and AF motors, but it's not up to this lens for optical performance and I've used that lens enough to see that. Prices vary you can find good copies at reasonable cost, avoid high prices unless they give a warranty
the funniest part is how it still delivers as expected on cameraa with two more connection pins
I suppose this is written a year ago but those lenses from an Australian point of view are much less than 800 to 1200 usd in fact on average 700 AUD
@@aural_supremacy prices are going down, you are right, Japan prices on EBay seem to be the benchmark for “Quality” lenses. If you compare the resolution out of the Minolta v Sony it’s a better deal than looking at newer Sony focal ranges at far cheaper price point.
Minolta lenses “Still” have so much to offer, even Sony’s version of many Minolta lenses don’t quite rate as high as the originals, just check Dyxum.com for comparison. One could buy 6 best performing Minolta lenses and have superior glass for an extremely affordable alternative. The great part about these high quality G glass is they hold their value.
Agree even some of the more affordable ones still offer excellent performance at a crazy silly low price. I've done videos on many, I have more to do. I have stuck with my Minolta lenses, and even though A Mount has been neglected and basically left to fade away - I have no plans to re-buy lenses on native MILC system, the cost alone is astronomical. The 70-200mm G SSM was never able to match this particular lens, older or not this is the one to go for. Or grab a beercan if the F4 is good enough also use that quite a lot and the other one shown 100-200mm F4.5 deserves more respect than it gets. Thanks for dropping in
Mr Baz Reviews I was looking at the Sony 70-200f2.8, the Minolta 70-200 f2.8, the Sigma equivalent (with the massive lens extension) but this Minolta really is the pick of the little, price v performance, it’s a hands down number.
@@leemccurtayne9489 I wouldn't bother with the SSM 70-200mm unless it was crazy cheap. If the SSM fails you'll have a job finding the parts. Sony doesn't even seem to have spare parts on many lenses still being sold on A mount. The only one I'd consider is the 70-400mm G which is a bit different. Optics on this difficult to find fault shoot at F2.8 across the range and get great results.
Hey there,
Very cool reviews.
Reminds me of kurtmunger but this time on youtube.
Nice job really :)
This lens is awesome. I agree when you say that these Minolta tele lenses present a smoother OOF transitions and better rendering than some new E-mount sibblings lenses.
My findings sometimes tie up with Kurt other times not so much depends on the lenses. He was one of the few who did reviews on Minolta's and I continue with that - still have more to do, and people still seem to have an interest in them
Yes the rendering on this lens is exceptional, some new modern lenses are not - the Tamron 70-180mm a good example of not so good, IMO they would have been better making an 80-200mm like this ;-D
thanks for dropping by,
I recently got the 50mm 1.4 and 100mm f2.8 macro from Minolta for my A7IV and have fallen in love. Definitely going to be looking into getting this as well soon. All of these still wonderful lenses for less than the cost of just one of my more modern lenses. It's crazy what a gold mine these lenses are!
If you have the adapter and right body (the new adapter only works for screw drive with a few cameras), then get stuck in, there are some excellent Minolta lenses. This is one of their best, it's not perfect (there is some CA at times), but it was way ahead of it's time, and is a bargain for the focal range.
I didn't find the 80mm start a big issue v a 70mm. It's the 200mm end I like
A classic lens this one, no question.
@@MrBazReviews Oh I wasn't aware of that, I still don't really know much about adapting. I have the A7IV and LA-EA5. Would this work?
I'm totally fine with some imperfections. If the difference is this much money I'm all for it. I have a 24-70 already and don't really see myself desperately needing 70-80. This would basically round out every focal length I would ever use!
@@ShibiChan That will work.
The LA-EA5 works for screw drive with:
A7IV, A7RIV, A7RV, and the A1 for full frame. For APS-C the only body is the A6600.
There is no video AF though with these screw drive lenses, with the adapter, which for me was a show stopper.
I was sad to let go almost all of my A Mount gear, this lens in particular I miss.
I wish Sony had more bodies supported or came out with the adapter 3-4 years ago, I might have stuck around.
Just bought myself one, it's very nice...👍
Enjoy it, I still use this lens I may do a follow up video on it
It is one of the bargains for a lens of this class. It is worth every penny
Enjoy it, I still use this lens I may do a follow up video on it
It is one of the bargains for a lens of this class. It is worth every penny
Great lens, I really love it - great review, too:)
I like it a lot I might do a follow up video on it as I've been using it more real world stuff (v testing)
I used a Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 G2 for a while on a Canon and the Minolta tore it up, big time - it wasn't even close at 200mm, this lens sings at F2.8. I'll keep using this for a long time to come
It's not perfect there is some CA at times - it just has a look I like a lot and it delivers wide open across the range
Great and useful review - thank you!
I can't help wondering whether this lens is worthwhile as far as sharpness and overall image quality are concerned, considering that I do own the beercan .. ?
And then there is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD - which one of these stands out .. ?
Depends if you need the F2.8 or not. The beercan is still very good, for an F4 lens
The Minolta owns the Tamron with ease, it is decent but not in the same league
@@MrBazReviews Actually I'm not in need of the f/2 .8 - f/4 is sufficient!
But does the beercan deliver equally sharp and pleasing images overall .. ?
@@kjellhmyhre2374 Copies vary I find mine pretty good wide open at 210mm good enough. The F2.8 is coming down in price it's nice, you'd notice the weight for low light shooting worth considering - otherwise I like the beercan very good contrast/rendering
@@MrBazReviews Thank you, once again.
@@MrBazReviews Thanks for great review, Mr. Baz! I also have Minolta 70-210 F4 beercan. And for me it's the best value for money portrait lens. I've used Minolta 85mm 1.4 also a lot, and I love it for better bokeh. But it's fixed and I can do triple more shoots with beercan than with the fix 85mm in the same photo shoot. So, how do you find the bokeh between three of them? I also thought about Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 Di SP. But it seems that I will better take one more spare beercan cause it costs 5 times cheaper). Or will take the Minolta AF 80-200mm F2.8 HS APO G for a little more price.
How is it for sport / action / fast moving object / wildlife? Would love to pair it with A7R ii or iii with the appropriate Adapter
It's a fast lens to focus, if you're using it with the LAEA4, it's competent but your AF point coverage is quite limited (even more limited than say an A99 body). You're also down to 2.5fps for continuous shooting, and there is no zone AF, which is quite useful for a lot of subjects.
There is nothing wrong with the lens performance it's plenty quick enough, you just have to work around those issues on the adapter.
Nice review, i think ill get the 300 f4 in the future from Minolta
It's also a well respected lens
I do have the F4 300 (with both teleconverters x1.4 and x2) and I can confirm that it is a very good top quality lens.
TIP: When buying any old lens, always check for oily aperture blades, if they look wet/shiny there is a good chance they might stick and give you over exposure, you can clean them, but its not an easy job, took me a couple of hours and I am experienced at repair.
Old grease releases oil with age and thats how they become oily, its removed using Isopropyl.
It's more an issue on the older lenses the ones such as this I've not seen a problem, the beercan that can be as can the others though I've not had too many with it, couple of lenses from the 80's have had it
@@MrBazReviews Yes, I had it on a AF 50mm f1.4, mind you I did get it for £40)
@@engjds That's pretty cheap usually the F1.7 goes for that price. Most of the ones I've used are early 90's and don't seem to have a problem, a few are from the 80's.
Hello, I bought the 80-200 APO 2.8 new (more than 20 years ago), and kept it when I acquired my A99. I have always been very satisfied with the lens. I guess the sony 24 75 f2.8 will be a bit 'better' but when it comes to price/quality the old Minolta is unbeattable. Question: On the digital camera I sometimes notice some colour fringing in contrasty pictures. How do you correct for that? On the camera itself (if so, which setting) or post production?
Most software has CA removal lightroom and other editors some are one click some have a spot tool. I don't find the CA to be bad at all on this, quite mild. The 70-210mm was fairly notable, even so I like the look of images from that lens too
Yes, as Mr. Baz said, you can use Lightroom. Also you can use profiles in Lightroom to fix it automatically. But I've found it unnecessary , because the CAs are happen not too often. On my beercan it's usually no more than 5-10 shoots from 300. I suppose that on the APO the CAs are a little bit more rare
Very nice lens and great review! I would love to try one of these out with an a7r4 and the new la-ea5 adapter.
It should hold up on higher pixel cameras easily, shame the adapter is limited in body support so I'll sit it out myself see how it pans out
Spec sheet says it may not work on the EA5 because sony
@@hypercube33 When the LAEA5 came out I expected more firmware updates to support screw drive AF, but so far only the A7RIV and A6600 work with screw drive lenses on that adapter. I'm not sure what Sony will do down the road with it, but it's a lot less appealing with only 2 bodies working on screw drive lenses.
We'll have to see if they do more updated over time, otherwise it's of limited appeal IMO unless you've already got those cameras or intend to pick one up.
@@MrBazReviews What about the A7S III?
@@chinitopinoy1726 At the moment no not working with screw drive AF lenses.
The A1 does have support. So it's 3 cameras A1/A7RIV/A6600 only at this time.
The A7iii got a firmware update today but I don't believe anything happened on the adapter.
At this stage it seems support is not going to be very good for the LAEA5, so I wouldn't bother with it unless you have those bodies or plan to get it, or just use in lens motors.
The LAEA4 is the only one that works pretty much across the range of bodies, albeit with limitations (I have this adapter)
The other option is the monster adapter, I'm trying to get one to test if I can
I used my Minolta 80-200 mm recently, with Sony a7RIV. This lens is incredibly fast even with modern camera setup.
It's quite a fast lens, though not quite as much torque on the adapter it's still pretty good overall
are there any solution for the chipped paint? are there any vinyl stickers available for this lens?
I wouldn't put stickers on the paint it might be worse then leaving it.
Some touch up the marks with auto paint, you can get lenses re-painted by some companies
I know of no real solution unless you go with the black version which isn't as fast geared, but is the same optical design.
Hi! Tempted to get this lens. Any other home runs in the A mount world please? I got a a77ii and may consider getting into e mount later on. Thank you
I did videos on quite a few lenses. This is a great one overall, bar a bit of CA at times it's excellent performance.
The 100-200mm is tiny for a telephoto and costs almost nothing. Same for the 50mm 1.7, and the 100mm Macro is also a solid choice (and the 50mm Macro both are excellent)
That's just a few I find useful.
@@MrBazReviews Although I didn't ask this question, I want to thank you for your response to it, because it answers questions for me as well - since I didn't know about this lens before, but it will be interesting to use it (primarily) for portraits on my A700. Anyway, I want to note that I really appreciate your channel, how you handle topics and how you respond to queries. Thank you so much for your wonderful work.
@@HeuerAndy Thank you very much it's nice to get a comment like that. I made the video mostly as a test one because there was little information on this, or examples in a video. Same thing for many of the other Minolta lenses and a few bodies, mostly overlooked. But I see people still watching them and the 70-210mm F4 is still popular even today. Decades after the lens was discontinued! I like the 80-200mm a lot, this lens is a classic in many ways. And still very competitive with modern lenses. I might do a follow up with other photos and field use of this lens.
Though I use F mount mostly I have a few A mount things left.
@@MrBazReviews Thank you also for this reply and all the info. I appreciate it. Also, did you ever do a review on the black version of this lens? I'm not at all clear where the differences are aside from the faster autofocus.
@@HeuerAndy The optical design is the same on both, black and white bodies are metal, they went with the white paint on the HS one (the black paint holds up better over time so some say). They just geared it higher on the HS one, it's perhaps 30% faster, it's hard to measure, a rough guess.
Images should be identical from both lenses.
I'd also recommend the 100-200mm to go with it, costs almost nothing and the weight is super light. Surprisingly good lens too much smaller and lighter then the 70-210mm F4, I kept the 100-200mm as it's a great compact lens. This 80-200mm is a gem optically, when I get a chance I'll do a follow up video on it once I clear the review backlog (shooting report/samples)
Wondering whether to pick this one or the 200 f/2.8 APO. I have a kit of primes (28mm, 50mm and 100mm) already….. Price seems to be similar
Smaller, less weight than the 80-200mm. I prefer a zoom for this range, but it's down to taste. Both are excellent optically
@@MrBazReviews thank you!
Wow, very impressive!!
Great video
For a lens designed in the 90's the optics are almost perfect, only some slight CA to note. The performance surprised me, it is one of the best Minolta lenses made so many said, and I agree with that. The "look" I have not seen as good as this from any comparable lens.
Thanks for dropping in
:) me encantaría tener uno, gracias.
It's a nice lens I have another video I will make on the images I got with the lens
I'm a big fan of increasingly wider lenses, and this one is one good temptation
Lol wider yup I can see the appeal!
@@MrBazReviews bought one mint at eBay for 360 bucks, arrival due 1june, can't wait anymore
@@kingghidorah8106 It's a bargain for what it offers, optically it's excellent, some CA at times, but resolution is great.
@@MrBazReviews Aberration is very easy to correct in Lightroom, I have the Tamron 272E (one of the sharpest full open F2.8 lenses in existence) and the thing gives some CA as well but one click in Lightroom solves it. Can't wait to push the -3EV autofocus of the A77II and go full no Gucci with the lens🗿🗿 like a gentledawg asserting dominance with a legacy Minolta vs all the people who spend zillions on new generation gear
@@MrBazReviews 2 years with this lens, it's an absolute beast. I even dropped it from the height of my shoulder (around 6 feet) and it didn't suffer anything else other than a small dent on the focus ring that made the infinity focus tedious til a couple of months where it literally went back to normal.
This lens is literally self healing. I love it, and it gives very neat results wide open at night.
They should remake this lens with modern AF and mount.
Which mount E mount? They already have their GM and that's not nearly as sharp
Sony probably own the rights to the lens design when they bought out Minolta, but any traces of Minolta are long gone sadly in Sony (in my view)
They have on both A mount and E mount. This version however arguably has a better look and feel with the images it renders. Its why some including me prefer the screw drive G lenses and older Minolta lenses to the newer Sony and Zeiss equivalents.
@@KeithHeinrich The FE 70-200mm GM varies quite a bit on copies I've used, they do have a new version - yet it's very expensive.
General feeling was the older Minolta was mostly sharper (v the old one anyway), and had more pleasing out of focus areas.
Sort of depends what adapter you are using and body. It works OK with the LAEA4, with some limitations, I've not used the LAEA5 yet. I would find it quite hard to let this go, it's not a perfect lens there is some CA at times (never found it to be a big issue), it's incredibly good across the range, near edge to edge - not something many 70-200mm's can pull off
Screw drive doesn't both me, no motor to burn out, depends what bodies you use it with, works well on the A99
@@MrBazReviews agreed. I'm sticking with alpha mount (A700, A99) and have the most cosmetically challenged 80-200 HS on the planet. But does it take sensational images. And it was inexpensive too for the win.
Alpha mount lenses are now super affordable since the cameras are no longer made. I just need to find a good 17-35G at the right price for a full set.
@@KeithHeinrich I do toy with moving to another system, yet when I start looking around, it's hugely expensive with mirrorless systems. I've decided for now to stick around, the A99 is quite good overall I find it a strong all rounder, for general use and even action it's worked out quite well (with this lens)
I can't say I'm overly impressed with Sony's silent treatment of A mount users, hence I do sometimes ponder a move.
The 17-35mm I've not used, not the G one, so I'd be interested to hear what your thoughts are on that if you get one.