|
|
|
|||||||
| Konica-Minolta legacy The essentials of imaging. Forum for past Konica-Minolta cameras and equipment. |
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
26th January 2006
|
#1 |
|
Deregistered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sengkang
Posts: 1,691
|
Which 70-210mm?
Hi,
Just want to gather input/feedback on which lens to get.. 1. 70-210mm f4 or 2. 70-210mm f3.5-4.5 The + points for item 1: 1. Great optic.. sharp the negative side: slow focusing.. heavy heavy heavy.. (Actually I'm lazy to carry my 100mm f2.8 macro now... and this lens is heavier than the macro lens.. how to carry for normal street shooting??) The + points for item 2: 1. Some users feedback that the picture quality is as good as item 1.. (even though there is a website test that show f4 is far superior in term of sharpness.. ??) and it's lighter.. Focusing is faster than 1 as well.. Negative side.. not as good as item 1 in term of picture quality.. Currently I think both lens cost the same in resale market..  |
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 270 degree of Singapore
Posts: 6,700
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
you hasn't try 80-200mm f/2.8 or 300mm f/4 yet
 depends on you want quality of picture or convenients.
__________________
Sony Alpha 700 hobbyist |
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,595
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
not that heavy lar...
I will go for 70-210 f4 anytime... Proof me wrong, you go and buy the item #2 and then 6 months down the track, you will like to get the f4. Save yourself some trouble and just get the f4. 70-210 f4 is still much lighter than 28-135 f4-4.5 I walk around whole day with 28-135 f4-4.5 + 5600 hs anytime man... Hart |
|
|
| Sponsored Link |
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#4 | |
|
Deregistered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sengkang
Posts: 1,691
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Thanks.. decided to bid for the f4 as well.. Needs to pump some iron now..  when I decided to get the 28-135 f4-4.5 or heavier lens.. will pump more iron.. |
|
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#5 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,595
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Hart |
|
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#6 | |
|
Deregistered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sengkang
Posts: 1,691
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Thanks again and wish you a Happy Lunar New Year... |
|
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#7 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,595
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Not a problem... Happy Lunar New Year... Hart |
|
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#8 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Teddy Bear Land
Posts: 2,859
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
__________________
Take both its legs down first, then cuts its tail, next is shoot between its eyes:devil: |
|
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#9 |
|
Account Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Little Red Dot
Posts: 1,067
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
I find the KM 70-210 f4 is fast enough and have shot night soccer matches with it, handheld without flash.
Following are sequence shots of the Singapore Young Women's centreforward's scoring run in a match vs Beckenham Angels, Australia at the Jalan Besar Stadium on 17/12/05 at 7.04 p.m. All are single shot AF, not in burst mode, i.e. single shot refocused each time. All unprocessed except for resize for web upload.      I manage to get on the field sidelines, courtesy of arrangements with FAS by Photographers Network. Last edited by AncientMariner; 26th January 2006 at 10:35 PM. |
|
|
|
26th January 2006
|
#10 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 821
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Personally, I prefer the 70-210mm f4... Here are some samples shot in my early days of film with that lens...
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2326809 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2326808 The 70-210 f3.5-4.5, i didnt have much time to use it before I sold it off, hehe! Here is also a sample snap shot, with that lens, of a model I met on the street, so pardon the messy background. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2210214 |
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#11 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,206
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
|
|
|
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#12 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 821
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
|
|
|
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#13 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,595
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
I don't think anyone that own this lens will ever sell it... well, even if they do, they will by it back again later..
Hart |
|
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#14 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hougang
Posts: 150
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
 |
|
|
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#15 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 827
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
ah... f4, the cheap big gun of all minolta users (at least it should be!)
 |
|
|
|
29th January 2006
|
#16 |
|
Advertiser
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,051
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Hahaha...
The 70-210 f4......i sold the one i imported to DCA....and got myself another one.... The construction is  Hei...come on...talking about a 10yrs ++ old technology and build like a tank.. Its one fo those die-cast type lens.....with metal mount screwed directly to screw holes that is actually solidly part of the lens metal body. Only the zoom barrel is plastic....made by a two section casing that covers the main flex cable zoom position encoders... I think...users should start pushing raise the price of these metal bodied lens..... Imageing you are paying $300++ for a metal build-like-a-tank 70-210f4 with great optics and pay $500++ for a used 17-35 which is "lots-of-plastic".... I think if one looks at the overall lens ceonstruction...it should worth more... 
__________________
Visit my website.... http://www.md-sulhan.com |
|
|
|
30th January 2006
|
#17 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 821
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
|
|
|
|
|
30th January 2006
|
#18 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,595
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
hahaha... I think 70-210 f4 is underrated in most case...
for image quality it can be up against 70-210 f4 L canon... of course, the AF speed is no where to compare. But price wise... its a huge different... I think it definately worth more than $350.... hahahaa.. Hart |
|
|
|
31st January 2006
|
#19 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 827
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Hey, anyone remembers the 24-50mm f4 that was in the same series as the beer can. Yap, it was another of those cheap and sharp glass which I shot most of my film with...
Sadly, it more plasticky than its 70-210mm counterpart and now my focusing ring is jammed  Even more sadly, digital crop factor has reduced it to a useless 36-75mm  |
|
|
|
2nd February 2006
|
#20 |
|
Deregistered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sengkang
Posts: 1,691
|
Re: Which 70-210mm?
Hey, check on this..
Looks like 75-300mm f4.5-5.6D is sharper than 70-210mm f4.. http://koti.mbnet.fi/tidis/tammi06/210test.jpg Another case of cheap lens that actually produce great/sharp image.. like the 5D kit lens |
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
