one of my favourite TELE ZOOM., light , sharp, great feel and size perfect for the bag or to carry the whole day on the camera, this zoom ii a better than expected in many way, especially for that size and weight. I have the beer can75 300 , the apo 100 300 and this one, that is the favourite.
I have this lens (2001 silver) and love it on my a55v. The macros it does are fantastic. Do you think there’d be any advantage to trying to get an ‘86 version?
You're welcome! I love this lens, great value (having tried many others, this one beats them all, even the Nikkors, in terms of beautiful color rendition).
@@RattusYu Is there any difference with Sony model over Minolta ones? Or Sony just repacked with their own branding? I almost bought the second model, but decided to see the first how the images look, and find out there are more iterations of the same lens. I am not sure if the Sony model would work with Minolta AF cameras I have, so probably I think 1999/2001 model is the best choice for my Minolta and Sony cameras.
Hey maybe you can help me, because I'm really confused. I'm looking into buying a telephoto for my sony a77 (Aps-c, A-mount - same as Minolta AF mount), but i can't afford a new or modern one. Also, I used to have a cheap tamron 18-200 3.5-5.6 and i hated it. Yes, wide range of focals, but it was really crappy and cheaply made. Well the thing is, everywhere I look it says that an aps-c lens, 50mm for example, is equivalent to a 1.5x50mm=80mm if it where a full frame lens which would get you the same field of view. Now, when looking at these kinds of lenses like the one in your video, they are all full frame lenses, so aren't they equivalent to a smaller focal in an aps-c sensor? Why do you state at the beginning that it would be the equivalent of a longer focal on an aps-c? I am so confused! Thanks in advance
Hello, this would be 75mm to 300mm when used with full frame cameras. When used on apsc bodies, the crop factor of 1.5x, 1.6x (Canon), or 2x (micro four third) would apply. For example, when used on micro four third bodies, the small sensor only uses part of the image, and it would be equivalent to 150mm to 600mm instead.
one of my favourite TELE ZOOM., light , sharp, great feel and size perfect for the bag or to carry the whole day on the camera, this zoom ii a better than expected in many way, especially for that size and weight. I have the beer can75 300 , the apo 100 300 and this one, that is the favourite.
I have this lens (2001 silver) and love it on my a55v. The macros it does are fantastic.
Do you think there’d be any advantage to trying to get an ‘86 version?
Hello i think optically any version is superb
Okay Thankyou. I won’t bother trying to get an older one then
thank you for your work !
You're welcome! I love this lens, great value (having tried many others, this one beats them all, even the Nikkors, in terms of beautiful color rendition).
Nice thanks for the info.
Is the sony's last model made for ff sensor or apsc?
Hello it was made for full frame sensor. It's super sharp even used on APS-C. Tthere is only a tiny bit softness at 300mm.
@@RattusYu Is there any difference with Sony model over Minolta ones? Or Sony just repacked with their own branding? I almost bought the second model, but decided to see the first how the images look, and find out there are more iterations of the same lens. I am not sure if the Sony model would work with Minolta AF cameras I have, so probably I think 1999/2001 model is the best choice for my Minolta and Sony cameras.
hello is this compatable with newer gen camera's ?
(Canon EOS M10)
Hello it can be adapted with an adapter. But it will be manual focus and manual exposure only.
Great video
Thank you Bruce! =)
Hey maybe you can help me, because I'm really confused. I'm looking into buying a telephoto for my sony a77 (Aps-c, A-mount - same as Minolta AF mount), but i can't afford a new or modern one. Also, I used to have a cheap tamron 18-200 3.5-5.6 and i hated it. Yes, wide range of focals, but it was really crappy and cheaply made. Well the thing is, everywhere I look it says that an aps-c lens, 50mm for example, is equivalent to a 1.5x50mm=80mm if it where a full frame lens which would get you the same field of view. Now, when looking at these kinds of lenses like the one in your video, they are all full frame lenses, so aren't they equivalent to a smaller focal in an aps-c sensor? Why do you state at the beginning that it would be the equivalent of a longer focal on an aps-c? I am so confused! Thanks in advance
Hello, this would be 75mm to 300mm when used with full frame cameras. When used on apsc bodies, the crop factor of 1.5x, 1.6x (Canon), or 2x (micro four third) would apply. For example, when used on micro four third bodies, the small sensor only uses part of the image, and it would be equivalent to 150mm to 600mm instead.
look for minolta zoom apo second hand . they are great for sony a77 , the factor magnification is not a issue on 1.5x , it does great above 200-300mm
can I use it with Olympus O-MD 10 ?
what adapter I have to add?
thanks....:)
Hello, use Minolta AF to M4/3 adapter (be careful, not the older 'Minolta SR' mount)
@@RattusYu oooh...ok...thank you very much :)
Do you think that this is also compatble with Fujifilm X-A3?
Hello Red! You need a Minolta AF to Fuji-X adapter. It will work.
How much is this?
Hello, this you could get PhP 3000 in good condition if you were in the Philippines.
Hello minolta lens is adaptor to canon please answer me
Hello! You cannot use Minolta AF mount on Canon DSLR. But there are adapters for Canon mirrorless (EOS-M).