For a quick break, I just shot these with the 200/4 FDn on my 24mp NEX-7. Terrible light, and breezy, but adequate for a quick test.
First full frame, then 100% crops @ f/4, f/4.8, and f/5.6.
The summary: decent wide open, though half a stop down has improved contrast and sharpness, and tames a bit of bloominess, at essentially no cost in shutter speed. Virtually all older lenses (and most newer ones) have essentially the same light transmission half a stop down as wide open, with better image quality. F/5.6 is better still, which is where I'll probably use this most of the time. F/8 is a little sharper still -- probably the best stop.
Pocket size, $30, and uses the same adapter as my FDn 50/1.4 and 100/2. Looks great on the most demanding APS sensor ever made. Fuhggedaboutit.
And a torture test, brighly backlit, with a glaring overcast sky, which reveals the purple/green LoCA that is to be expected. First full frame, then f/5.6 and f/8 crops.
I really like my Contax N 70-200/3.5-4.5 zoom lens which is nice and light with AF for canon when converted by Conurus. Go ahead and compare its MTF's with C/Y 80-200.
I find the Zuiko 200/5 to be a very similar performer to the 200/4 but much smaller and lighter, probably only beaten for small size and weight by the Rokkor RF 250/5.6, (see here: http://oldlenses.blogspot.com/2012/03/minolta-rf-rokkor-x-250mm-f56-second.html )
I imagine that the Zuiko 200/5 gives better results though.
wayne seltzer wrote:
I really like my Contax N 70-200/3.5-4.5 zoom lens which is nice and light with AF for canon when converted by Conurus. Go ahead and compare its MTF's with C/Y 80-200.
The OP wants a lens for NEX, so Contax N is pretty much out, I'd say.
AhamB wrote:
The OP wants a lens for NEX, so Contax N is pretty much out, I'd say.
Well one of those auto aperture E-mount --> EF would work. Pretty expensive solution though.
Well that's a relief! I will have to remember not to upload the small 1200 pixel wide files I use on Flickr! These are 2,500 pixels wide, (via Photo Bucket). I wonder if they would look even better at full 5,600pixels or is there a limit?
1200 is still wider than what we see here, but I guess the resizing from 1200-->1000 introduces a lot of softness. Possibly using original sizes with multples of 1024 will give the sharpes results. Or you can use 1024 pix straight away, so no resizing here is necessary.
Again, beautiful images - make me want that 200/5!
Smiert Spionam wrote:
What zoom is better optically than a $30 Canon FDn or $100 Nikon AIS 200/4?
Obviously, a 300mm is longer, but also obviously, they're bigger, and more expensive. For me, 200mm works well as a compact tag-along -- if I'm at 300mm or beyond, I'll probably want a tripod.
I'll put several of my Tokina AT-X slash AT-X Pro or Tamron SP zooms up against any non L Canon nFD prime under the same FL and Aperture and there won't be a clear winner. Or either will pull ahead slightly in only one aspect or another. And really, while I appreciate the sentiment you'll not find a non-stolen or non-wrecked Canon nFD prime in the 150 to 250mm range for $30.
Thanks. 5DII. I have a Zuiko 200/5 on ebay, (timstable), right now.
When I was buying, two came along together so I got both in case one was better, but actually both the same, so now selling one. The one I'm selling happens to be the one I used to take the shots posted above.
Bifurcator wrote:
I'll put several of my Tokina AT-X slash AT-X Pro or Tamron SP zooms up against any non L Canon nFD prime under the same FL and Aperture and there won't be a clear winner. Or either will pull ahead slightly in only one aspect or another. And really, while I appreciate the sentiment you'll not find a non-stolen or non-wrecked Canon nFD prime in the 150 to 250mm range for $30.
I'm mistaken -- it wasn't $30. I paid $27, but now $25 will get you a 200/4 from the most reliable used equipment dealer in the US.
There are plenty of good, inexpensive options for lightweight teles, and it's hard to go wrong. The higher end Tokina and Tamron stuff can be quite good. No argument there. That doesn't change the fact that at 200mm, it's awfully tough to beat the value and compact size of a Canon FDn.
This "my lens is better than your lens" bluster is irritating when it's about state of the art, elite glass; here, it's just comical. There are many good, cheap ways to fill this particular focal length. Shoot what you like.
