Minolta 500mm F/8 Auto Focus Mirror Lens Review
ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: 8,424
Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
xiii
Well, I finally found a clean Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8 at a price I was willing to pay (about $170, with clean glass and a lightly scuffed paint job). Every bit the world'southward only autofocus mirror lens congenital for consumer cameras, it's interesting; as a relatively pocket-size 500mm AF lens, it'southward sort-of the obvious competitor for the new Canon RF 600mm f/xi IS STM that everybody is then excited about... and that's a lot of how I'll review it hither.... Of class, I'yard using it on my Sony A7RII, so it'south an adapted lens driven by an LA-EA4.
Start off, it'due south a really nice lens. Information technology's officially 665g and 118mm long, which makes information technology comparable to manual 500mm f/8 mirror lenses. It reminds me a lot of my Beercan zoom in styling, just the plain blackness cylinder wait works better for it than for the Beercan, and the hard rubber hood adds some class. This lens has been around since the late 1980s, so there are many reviews, including the Minolta and the Sony versions reviewed at Dyxum. Mine is the Minolta version, but they're essentially identical A-mount optics using spiral-driven AF.
Let's start with the AF. Focusing is quite fast, and usually doesn't hunt... although when it hunts, information technology hunts. Again, a lot like the Beercan. I tried using it with a one.4X teleconverter and the EXIF recorded 700mm, but AF worked mayhap i in 20 tries... so forget near teleconverters. Information technology'due south really just the eye spot for AF, but that's ok; the only bad-mannered thing is that it'south counting on the torso IBIS for stabilization, and information technology can be difficult to hold it steady plenty to become the focus spot on precisely the thing y'all desire in a complex scene. The central issue is that you lot can't stop-downward a mirror lens, so depth of field is e'er tiny and focus is very touchy, but the AF here quickly nails it. My other way to AF a mirror lens is the TechArt LM-EA7, which works well with my Bower (Samyang) 500mm f/6.3 DX to tweak manual focus, but the 4mm travel of the LM-EA7 is nowhere virtually plenty for total AF. I'd say the LM-EA7 perfects focus a niggling slower than the Minolta lens on an LA-EA4 does full AF, but they're comparably usable.
The epitome quality of thie Minolta is better than average for a 500mm mirror lens, simply not actually crisp at the A7RII's 42MP... I'd say you're really non getting more than than 24MP from it. Nonetheless, that's near all you'd really go at the higher ISOs ordinarily demanded by typical handheld use of an 500mm f/8 lens. All the following are out-of-camera JPEGs, unprocessed except scaling to 1500x1000. Permit'southward commencement with i of my standard test shots:
Well, that looks quite expert... and existence shot at 1/60s handheld, it's a pretty good proof that IBIS tin handle this. The only negative thing I can say is that this lens seems to have meaning pincushion distortion. That's non a problem mirror lenses commonly have, although it is petty to correct.
Not heady, not pixel-abrupt, but groovy. The nissen bokeh (double-line artifacts) are pretty obvious in some of the out-of-focus weeds, but still non bad overall. How about a close-up with lots of bright, specular, highlights?
Well, there are the donuts! Not really as harsh equally the donuts from many mirror lenses.... Let's attempt some other close discipline, simply with a adequately plan background:
Actually not obvious this was with a mirro lens. Let's go a fleck farther abroad from a subject to run into a background less out of focus:
Very "Minolta colour" in this shot. Out of focus (OOF) has a heavy textural design, simply donuts aren't really obvious. Hither's one just for the OOF texture:
Really bang-up OOF texture; donuts are but obvious in a few spots.
Let's meet how it handles flare:
What flare? Just hard to become a skillful exposure at f/8 looking at the Sunday. Unfortunately, my lens simply came with the clear filter, not the ND filter....
Finally, hither are a couple of radio towers miles away:
Pretty good. Things are a bear on smeary in the corners, but near of what looks like smear here is actually that the closer copse are non inside DoF. I also tried taking a shot of a plane flying overhead, and it easily tracked and produced a sharp enough image to see it was a Delta jet....
Overall, this lens makes very clean, reasonably precipitous, images. I think my Samyang might exist slightly sharper under platonic circumstances, only this Minolta lens just works. I had virtually no missed shots -- which doesn't happen with the Samyang even on the LM-EA7. In sum, these might not be quite as crisp as some of the shots from the new Catechism 600mm f/xi, just I think information technology'southward more than than competitive except in that AF hither really depends on the centre PDAF spot. Nonetheless, a keen showing for an old lens that's typically under $400... and even better given I paid just $170.
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R Two Sony a6500 Catechism EOS 5D Mark IV +30 more
fferreres • Veteran Member • Posts: 7,221
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
ProfHankD wrote:
Well, I finally found a clean Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/viii at a price I was willing to pay (almost $170, with clean glass and a lightly scuffed pigment job). As the world'south only autofocus mirror lens built for consumer cameras, it'southward interesting; every bit a relatively small 500mm AF lens, it'south sort-of the obvious competitor for the new Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM that everybody is so excited virtually... and that's a lot of how I'll review it here.... Of course, I'm using it on my Sony A7RII, then it'southward an adapted lens driven past an LA-EA4.
First off, it'southward a actually prissy lens. Information technology's officially 665g and 118mm long, which makes it comparable to manual 500mm f/8 mirror lenses. It reminds me a lot of my Beercan zoom in styling, but the plain black cylinder await works meliorate for it than for the Beercan, and the hard rubber hood adds some form. This lens has been around since the late 1980s, so in that location are many reviews, including the Minolta and the Sony versions reviewed at Dyxum. Mine is the Minolta version, but they're essentially identical A-mountain optics using spiral-driven AF.
Let'due south starting time with the AF. Focusing is quite fast, and usually doesn't chase... although when it hunts, it hunts. Again, a lot like the Beercan. I tried using it with a 1.4X teleconverter and the EXIF recorded 700mm, just AF worked perhaps 1 in 20 tries... so forget about teleconverters. It's really just the middle spot for AF, but that's ok; the simply bad-mannered thing is that it's counting on the body IBIS for stabilization, and it tin can be hard to concord it steady enough to become the focus spot on precisely the matter you desire in a complex scene. The key outcome is that you tin can't terminate-down a mirror lens, so depth of field is always tiny and focus is very touchy, but the AF here quickly nails information technology. My other fashion to AF a mirror lens is the TechArt LM-EA7, which works well with my Bower (Samyang) 500mm f/six.3 DX to tweak manual focus, simply the 4mm travel of the LM-EA7 is nowhere near enough for full AF. I'd say the LM-EA7 perfects focus a fiddling slower than the Minolta lens on an LA-EA4 does full AF, merely they're comparably usable.
The image quality of thie Minolta is better than boilerplate for a 500mm mirror lens, but not really crisp at the A7RII'southward 42MP... I'd say you're really non getting more than than 24MP from it. Nonetheless, that's about all y'all'd really get at the higher ISOs commonly demanded by typical handheld use of an 500mm f/eight lens. All the following are out-of-photographic camera JPEGs, unprocessed except scaling to 1500x1000. Let's start with one of my standard test shots:
Well, that looks quite skillful... and existence shot at one/60s handheld, it's a pretty good proof that IBIS can handle this. The but negative thing I can say is that this lens seems to have significant pincushion distortion. That's non a trouble mirror lenses usually take, although it is trivial to correct.
Non heady, not pixel-sharp, but not bad. The nissen bokeh (double-line artifacts) are pretty obvious in some of the out-of-focus weeds, simply nevertheless not bad overall. How about a close-up with lots of vivid, specular, highlights?
Well, there are the donuts! Non really every bit harsh as the donuts from many mirror lenses.... Permit's try another close subject, but with a fairly plan background:
Really not obvious this was with a mirro lens. Allow'southward go a bit further away from a subject area to see a groundwork less out of focus:
Very "Minolta color" in this shot. Out of focus (OOF) has a heavy textural design, but donuts aren't really obvious. Here's one simply for the OOF texture:
Actually swell OOF texture; donuts are just obvious in a few spots.
Let's encounter how it handles flare:
What flare? Just difficult to go a good exposure at f/eight looking at the Sun. Unfortunately, my lens just came with the clear filter, not the ND filter....
Finally, here are a couple of radio towers miles away:
Pretty good. Things are a touch smeary in the corners, merely most of what looks similar smear hither is actually that the closer trees are not within DoF. I likewise tried taking a shot of a plane flying overhead, and it easily tracked and produced a abrupt enough epitome to see it was a Delta jet....
Overall, this lens makes very clean, reasonably sharp, images. I recollect my Samyang might exist slightly sharper under platonic circumstances, but this Minolta lens only works. I had near no missed shots -- which doesn't happen with the Samyang even on the LM-EA7. In sum, these might not be quite as crisp as some of the shots from the new Canon 600mm f/xi, simply I retrieve it's more than competitive except in that AF hither really depends on the center PDAF spot. Still, a great showing for an erstwhile lens that'south typically nether $400... and even meliorate given I paid just $170.
Hank, this is all very cool. I actually have no idea what the weight it, and I am glad you foundone for a reasonable price. I actually don't have a unmarried les over 300mm due to how impractical annihilation else would be, so I but stay out...we'll, really my Artar is the longest FL I have now that I retrieve about information technology.
But I am also NOT HAPPY yous accept time to play and go distracted with this, instead of doing a general 4x5 $100 camera back (not camera) ;-P ;;;;-P
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Fellow member • Posts: viii,424
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
1
fferreres wrote:
Hank, this is all very cool. I actually take no idea what the weight it, and I am glad yous foundone for a reasonable price. I actually don't have a unmarried les over 300mm due to how impractical anything else would be, so I just stay out...we'll, actually my Artar is the longest FL I take at present that I think about information technology.
Simply I am also Non HAPPY yous have time to play and get distracted with this, instead of doing a general 4x5 $100 camera dorsum (non camera) ;-P ;;;;-P
Well, Lafodis160 is on schedule....
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R 2 Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Marking Four +30 more than
East Dinkla • Senior Member • Posts: ii,450
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
1
A nice review. Takes away some of the prejudices on mirror lenses.
Ane comment; the second AF mirror lens for consumer cameras is the Minolta Vectis one. The Monster adapter for it has returned to the market information technology seems. Images in this thread are overnice too: http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-400mm-vectis-reflex-t74925.html
I once thought the Techart adapter might requite that Vectis mirror lens AF in adaptation but at the end of the thread is data that focusing has to be done with the front role of that lens.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
No photographer's gear list is consummate without the printer mentioned !
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/eight
2
It's a fun lens.
I bought 1 (Ebay from Japan) earlier this yr for a similar toll ($168)
Mine did non accept a lens cap, and I was advised that the stock lens hood was a bit shallow and a longer spiral in hood would assistance amend contrast, so I bought this off ebay - an 84mm spiral in hood with pinch cap:
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/82mm-Metal-coiffure-in-Lens-Hood-for-DSLR-Canon-Nikon-Sony-Olympus-Telephoto-Cap/362919721535?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649
On my A99, it'due south a bang-up daytime long lens, super lightweight. The single AF point is a bit limiting though.
I have an A7iii arriving presently, and take just received a Monster Adapter modification board which volition convert my LA-EA4 into an "EA4r", which will let me remove the SLT mirror and enable all of the the on camera AF points.
The Monster Adapter early firmware 01 and 02 did not look that fast to focus, simply some users report it at present to be fast enough for seagulls, and the soon to be released version 04 firmware is plain about speed (and seems to hold it's own confronting the LA-EA5).
Looking forwards to finding out.
Likewise looking forward to having a play with a TechArt Pro LM-EA7, and digging out a few dusty mf lenses).
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: eight,424
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/eight
E Dinkla wrote:
A dainty review. Takes abroad some of the prejudices on mirror lenses.
Thanks.
The one thing I forgot to mention is that close focus is simply ok @ thirteen anxiety. While that's really fine for a 500mm, I am spoiled past the fact that the Samyang can become into the macro range, especially using a tube or two. I haven't tried tubes on the Minolta, but I don't own any A-mount tubes that are AF capable and, honestly, they're not cheaply bachelor. I suppose that with an LAEA5 on a newer Sony it might be possible to stick Due east-mount tubes behind the LA-EA5, only that trick will not piece of work using the PDAF unit of measurement in the LA-EA4.
I annotate; the second AF mirror lens for consumer cameras is the Minolta Vectis one. The Monster adapter for it has returned to the market information technology seems. Images in this thread are nice too: http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-400mm-vectis-reflex-t74925.html
Expert point! I had forgotten about the improved "baby" Vectis version of this lens. Very similar except 400mm APS, champagne rather than blackness, and I believe it has the focus motor in the lens rather than body screw drive. Having a small 400mm on an APS body really should accept been a game changer, and information technology does look like a decent fraction of Vectis users did purchase that lens, but not a lot of Vectis cameras were sold in total....
I once thought the Techart adapter might give that Vectis mirror lens AF in adaptation but at the stop of the thread is data that focusing has to exist washed with the forepart office of that lens.
Mirror lenses can exist very funky that way. For instance, the Samyang can have a pretty thick extension tube behind information technology before it loses the power to focus to infinity. For just 4mm move max, information technology probably wouldn't matter if it's focusing by moving the wrong part... but that's assuming the lens is approximately focused the right mode, which isn't actually feasible if it is focus by wire.
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R Ii Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Marker IV +xxx more than
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: eight,424
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/eight
markintosh13 wrote:
Information technology's a fun lens.
I bought 1 (Ebay from Japan) earlier this twelvemonth for a similar cost ($168)
Realistically, I think this lens is worth $200-$300 in good condition... but it really does seem to mostly sell in the $300+ range.
I have an A7iii arriving soon, and have simply received a Monster Adapter modification lath which volition convert my LA-EA4 into an "EA4r", which will let me remove the SLT mirror and enable all of the the on camera AF points.
The Monster Adapter early on firmware 01 and 02 did not expect that fast to focus, but some users written report it now to be fast enough for seagulls, and the soon to be released version 04 firmware is plainly nearly speed (and seems to agree information technology's own against the LA-EA5).
Looking forward to finding out.
Likewise looking forrard to having a play with a TechArt Pro LM-EA7, and excavation out a few dusty mf lenses).
That should be interesting.
In my opinion, the focus speed and accuracy on the unmodified LA-EA4 are really good for a long lens. The spiral drive really kicks things to where they demand to go. The catch is that ane pocket-sized AF point is really difficult to go along on your subject field....
The Monster mod might be worthwhile for me as well. It might even work nicely with E-mount tubes or with a 1.4X A-mount teleconverter.... Catch is, is information technology bachelor? 1 place I saw it listed as no longer bachelor...?
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R Two Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +30 more than
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
ProfHankD wrote:
In my stance, the focus speed and accuracy on the unmodified LA-EA4 are actually good for a long lens. The spiral drive really kicks things to where they need to go. The catch is that one pocket-sized AF point is really hard to keep on your subject....
The range limiter function on my A99 is REALLY useful. I will miss that on the A7iii + LA-EA4r combo I suspect, though more AF points volition be really welcome.
The Monster modern might be worthwhile for me also. It might even work nicely with E-mount tubes or with a 1.4X A-mount teleconverter.... Take hold of is, is it available? One place I saw it listed as no longer bachelor...?
I bought mine from ebay, took near 10 days to arrive from Red china
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/MonsterAdapter-LA-EA4r-Upgrade-kit/224267929385
Sounds like Gary Friedman is reconsidering existence a distributor (but is currently busy with a cantankerous-country move), which might reduce both the toll and import duties.
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: 8,424
Sun through clouds with ND filter
A little correction: My copy DOES have the ND filter!
The lovely little leather front embrace has a storage pocket for the filter not in utilize, and at that place it was! The seller evidently had not noticed either....
Anyway, it'south non a very bright day out, but here'south straight at the Sun through the clouds:
The Sun is overnice and sharp nearly 2/3 manner upward the eye of the frame. No flare.
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R II Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Mark 4 +30 more
bmoag • Veteran Member • Posts: three,131
Re: Sun through clouds with ND filter
I've owned a manual focus Minolta 500 mirror lens for many years. Filters too. Bought used toward the end of the film era.
I think I used it twice with flick, could not get the hang of information technology. Sat in its example on a closet shelf for a very long time.
But at present with a dumber than FTZ adapter and zebras on a Z6 I can utilise the thing hand-held, patently loftier ISOs and shutters. Performs as the OP describes, sometimes amazing results with or without the donuts.
My point existence: with a skilful EVF and zebras I don't see the need for autofocus with this kind of lens and mounted on a tripod why bother with car-focus? Besides the OP describes lots of hunting with AF so what is information technology doing for y'all anyway?
Nikon Z6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Nikon D3300 Nikon D70
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: 8,424
Re: Sun through clouds with ND filter
bmoag wrote:
I've owned a manual focus Minolta 500 mirror lens for many years. Filters besides. Bought used toward the end of the moving picture era.
I think I used information technology twice with film, could not get the hang of information technology. Sat in its case on a cupboard shelf for a very long fourth dimension.
But at present with a dumber than FTZ adapter and zebras on a Z6 I can utilize the thing manus-held, evidently loftier ISOs and shutters. Performs every bit the OP describes, sometimes amazing results with or without the donuts.
Peaking helps, but DoF is so thin that it'south actually hard to nail focus. That said, it's pretty quick and easy to get it close enough to await expert at "instagram resolution." The TechArt LM-EA7 is actually useful in converting "close" to "perfect" for manual focus of long lenses, but it'south slower than the 500mm AF Reflex lens on an LA-EA4.
My point being: with a skilful EVF and zebras I don't see the demand for autofocus with this kind of lens and mounted on a tripod why carp with auto-focus? Also the OP describes lots of hunting with AF so what is it doing for yous anyway?
Non quite. With a 1.4X teleconverter it really doesn't piece of work. By itself, information technology very rarely hunts... but when it does hunt, it really hunts. Presumably, this is considering it has only ane phase detector that works at f/eight -- then non having that point at something reasonable means it has nada to determine focus with.... It really does deliver a VERY HIGH hit rate, I'd say upward of 95% are perfectly in focus while shooting manus held.
My suspicion is that an LA-EA5 (or modified LA-EA4r) would do MUCH better because it could use the principal sensor PDAF, which means hundreds of usable phase detectors.
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R II Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Mark Four +xxx more
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
1
In my experience, Minolta AF500/viii Reflex didn't work well with LA-EA4. The focus precision on these lenses is critical for the sharpness and I got too many unreliable focus shifts (AF micro-adjust didn't help).
That might be because of the f/eight aperture and relatively little light for AF sensors to work with.
When manually focused using tripod and magnification I was able to get rather sharp images, especially to a higher place 7+k (sharper in comparison to some cheaper third-party lenses such as Tokina 500/eight RMC).
Donuts in the bokeh are closely related to the background structure, distances betwixt focus airplane and groundwork, and light itself. When focused toward a minimum focus altitude, with a groundwork reasonably distant, donuts are barely visible. With the decreasing magnification, Homer Simpson'south dream bokeh can be of course revealed.
If anything, this Minolta has slightly lower contrast than my favorite mirror lens Rokkor 250/v.vi and this can pb to the impression that donuts are not that prominent.
As you can see above the flare resistance is non the greatest in terms of dissimilarity preservation simply the flaring is soft and spread into the veil, which might find some artistic use.
The epitome below is only an informal comparing for my own curiosity and also many variables are involved. What it tells me is that neither of these lenses has a sharpness problem for my photography.
What does limit me is the minimum focus distance for both Minolta lenses and especially for AF 500/8. I tin imagine that designing a separator lens for the AF in a broader range would be a challenge, and in order to improve performance, Minolta probably decided to optimize it for the more than distant focus plane.
It makes sense though, who on world at that fourth dimension would consider using 500mm or even 250mm for portrait or macro? The longest macro lens in a consumer offer was Canon 180/3.5 and 200mm for the portrait was already an extreme.
How does information technology perform with LA-EA5 and A7RM4:
The Focus expanse can be only fix to center and while in that location are more than AF points than in LA-EA4, this can be limiting when betwixt the camera and focus bailiwick are other things. i.e. Tree branches, grass etc. I have to search for my subject by moving the photographic camera effectually until i of the AF points doesn't recognize my intention and so I can recompose. With the single point in LA-EA4 that is much smaller than the center AF area, this is an easier task.
The focus speed is about the aforementioned but the focus locking is more decisive with LA-EA5.
Every bit it gets darker, LA-EA4 is starting to hunt earlier than LA-EA5 (logically, since in that location is a low-cal loss through the translucent mirror).
For me, the cardinal departure is the focus precision, where LA-EA5 is in a dissimilar league in comparison to my sample of LA-EA4. I am talking most microfocus shifts, non the big AF misses, just equally noted above, these trivial focus shifts can result in big sharpness differences.
With LA-EA5 (A7RM4) this lens tin be used in a AF-C mode and in adept light it will track moving subjects. However, the focusing motor is very loud and y'all might attract the animate being's attention so be enlightened of it, before taking information technology to the North Pole trek. Already mentioned just the center AF expanse will pose obvious obstacles to wildlife photography on the ground level. In other words, if yous'll accept it to the ZOO (outside) or shooting the birds at noon in California against the blue sky, y'all might exist really pleased with the keeper's charge per unit (tracking with LA-EA5). Otherwise, don't bother with the AF-C mode.
Sony a7R 3 Sony a7R Sony a7R II Sony a7R IV Sony Atomic number 26 16-35mm F2.8 +3 more than
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: 8,424
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
verybiglebowski wrote:
In my feel, Minolta AF500/8 Reflex didn't piece of work well with LA-EA4. The focus precision on these lenses is critical for the sharpness and I got too many unreliable focus shifts (AF micro-adapt didn't assist).
Hmm. Definitely Non what I see.
That might exist because of the f/8 discontinuity and relatively little light for AF sensors to piece of work with.
Information technology does get iffy in poor lighting.
... For me, the key divergence is the focus precision, where LA-EA5 is in a unlike league in comparison to my sample of LA-EA4. I am talking about microfocus shifts, not the big AF misses, but every bit noted to a higher place, these little focus shifts can issue in big sharpness differences.
I had no indication of subtle misses.
Ane possibility is that the single AF betoken is not quite hitting where you lot want. The 500mm f/eight is super touchy about that.
Another possible reason is that I did not accept to set the AF microadjustment; my LA-EA4 happens to be correct without aligning. The issue is that, when applying a microadjustment correction, the correction isn't actually abiding for different focus distances. Thus, if yous happened to need to apply microadjustment, given the shallow DoF of the 500mm, I wouldn't be surprised if the microadjustment being calibrated at a significantly different altitude fabricated things incorrect plenty to show....
With LA-EA5 (A7RM4) this lens tin can be used in a AF-C mode and in good light it will runway moving subjects. However, the focusing motor is very loud and you lot might attract the animal'southward attention so be aware of it, earlier taking information technology to the N Pole expedition. Already mentioned only the heart AF area volition pose obvious obstacles to wildlife photography on the ground level. In other words, if you'll take information technology to the ZOO (outside) or shooting the birds at noon in California against the bluish sky, you might exist actually pleased with the keeper's charge per unit (tracking with LA-EA5). Otherwise, don't carp with the AF-C style.
To be completely technical, I call back the motor is virtually silent: it's the screw drive coupling and what it is moving within the lens that make the racket. In fact, I fifty-fifty feel the focus kick through the body of this 500mm f/eight -- much as I feel it in my Beercan. Fortunately, any induced vibration dies out speedily and/or is compensated by IBIS. There are a few exceptions, only most screw drive lenses would NOT be advisable for video with a mic on or very near the camera.
Olympus TG-860 Catechism PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R II Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +30 more
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
ProfHankD wrote:
verybiglebowski wrote:
In my feel, Minolta AF500/8 Reflex didn't work well with LA-EA4. The focus precision on these lenses is critical for the sharpness and I got too many unreliable focus shifts (AF micro-adjust didn't help).
Hmm. Definitely NOT what I come across.
As I pointed out, it could be my sample of LA-EA4 (I tried 3 of these in the past). It could too be that I tried AF mostly most to the mfd. I focused to infinity than dorsum to 4-5m. In ten efforts but 1-2 shots will exist focused well. The rest was more or less off.
That might be considering of the f/8 aperture and relatively niggling low-cal for AF sensors to work with.
It does get iffy in poor lighting.
... For me, the primal divergence is the focus precision, where LA-EA5 is in a different league in comparison to my sample of LA-EA4. I am talking about microfocus shifts, not the big AF misses, but as noted above, these footling focus shifts can result in big sharpness differences.
I had no indication of subtle misses.
One possibility is that the single AF indicate is not quite hitting where you want. The 500mm f/8 is super touchy about that.
It'south more that at mfd the dof is very thin. The similar problem was with 135/1.8 and 85/ane.4 ZA with all 3 LA-EA4 adapters that I tried. Information technology tin still be the sample variation though, 3 samples are not plenty to make a conclusion.
Another possible reason is that I did not have to set the AF microadjustment; my LA-EA4 happens to be right without aligning. The issue is that, when applying a microadjustment correction, the correction isn't really abiding for different focus distances. Thus, if you happened to need to apply microadjustment, given the shallow DoF of the 500mm, I wouldn't be surprised if the microadjustment being calibrated at a significantly dissimilar altitude made things wrong enough to show....
I tried with af micro adjustment subsequently the feel without information technology. I finally resigned and let these lenses on the shelf mostly. I simply couldn't relay on AF. With LA-EA5 I started using them again (85/one.iv, 135/1.8 and 35/1.4).
With LA-EA5 (A7RM4) this lens tin be used in a AF-C mode and in good light it will track moving subjects. Withal, the focusing motor is very loud and you might attract the animal's attending and then be aware of it, before taking it to the Northward Pole expedition. Already mentioned merely the centre AF surface area will pose obvious obstacles to wild fauna photography on the ground level. In other words, if y'all'll take it to the ZOO (outside) or shooting the birds at apex in California against the blue sky, you might be really pleased with the keeper's charge per unit (tracking with LA-EA5). Otherwise, don't bother with the AF-C style.
To be completely technical, I think the motor is virtually silent: it'southward the screw drive coupling and what it is moving inside the lens that make the racket. In fact, I even feel the focus kick through the body of this 500mm f/8 -- much equally I feel it in my Beercan. Fortunately, any induced vibration dies out quickly and/or is compensated past IBIS. There are a few exceptions, but most screw drive lenses would NOT exist advisable for video with a mic on or very near the camera.
Or most the animals in the wild.
Sony a7R III Sony a7R Sony a7R Ii Sony a7R IV Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +3 more
QuietOC • Veteran Fellow member • Posts: 5,709
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
i
verybiglebowski wrote:
What does limit me is the minimum focus altitude for both Minolta lenses and especially for AF 500/8. I can imagine that designing a separator lens for the AF in a broader range would be a challenge, and in club to better performance, Minolta probably decided to optimize it for the more distant focus plane.
Information technology makes sense though, who on globe at that time would consider using 500mm or even 250mm for portrait or macro? The longest macro lens in a consumer offer was Canon 180/3.5 and 200mm for the portrait was already an extreme.
Sigma. The Sigma 600mm F8 mirror does i:iii magnification. Sigma also fabricated 400mm F5.6 and 300mm F4 Tele Macros.
The current Kenko/Tokina 400mm F8 does 0.4X.
Pentax Q7 Sony a7R 4 NEX-5T Sony a77 II Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +97 more
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
QuietOC wrote:
verybiglebowski wrote:
What does limit me is the minimum focus distance for both Minolta lenses and peculiarly for AF 500/8. I can imagine that designing a separator lens for the AF in a broader range would be a challenge, and in society to improve performance, Minolta probably decided to optimize it for the more afar focus airplane.
It makes sense though, who on earth at that time would consider using 500mm or even 250mm for portrait or macro? The longest macro lens in a consumer offering was Canon 180/iii.5 and 200mm for the portrait was already an extreme.
Sigma. The Sigma 600mm F8 mirror does i:three magnification. Sigma also made 400mm F5.6 and 300mm F4 Tele Macros.
The current Kenko/Tokina 400mm F8 does 0.4X.
In that location were many lenses that would get to 1:3 - one:4 magnification, just it is debatable if that deserves the macro designation. I am not sure which Kenko/Tokina 400/8 you have in mind, the recent Tokina SZX 400/8 Reflex MF goes to 1:2.5x equally far every bit I know.
My betoken was, that Minolta designed their mirror tele-lenses optimizing them for longer distances. That's why the minimum focus distance is that long IMHO.
Sony a7R III Sony a7R Sony a7R II Sony a7R IV Sony FE sixteen-35mm F2.8 +3 more
QuietOC • Veteran Member • Posts: 5,709
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/8
Pentax Q7 Sony a7R IV NEX-5T Sony a77 2 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +97 more than
Re: Minolta AF Reflex 500mm f/viii
QuietOC wrote:
For Tokina/Kenko: https://yard.dpreview.com/products/tokina/lenses/tokina_400_8_reflex_mf
Yes, that's 1:2.5x. Nevertheless respectable, simply not actually macro.
Sony a7R 3 Sony a7R Sony a7R Two Sony a7R Iv Sony Atomic number 26 xvi-35mm F2.8 +iii more than
I never establish the doughnuts very objectionable.
-- hide signature --
On a Planet of Eight Billion, We're In a Pretty Nice Bubble.
OP ProfHankD • Veteran Member • Posts: viii,424
Close focus
1
verybiglebowski wrote:
QuietOC wrote:
verybiglebowski wrote:
What does limit me is the minimum focus distance for both Minolta lenses and especially for AF 500/8. I can imagine that designing a separator lens for the AF in a broader range would be a challenge, and in order to improve performance, Minolta probably decided to optimize it for the more distant focus plane.
Information technology makes sense though, who on earth at that time would consider using 500mm or even 250mm for portrait or macro? The longest macro lens in a consumer offer was Canon 180/3.v and 200mm for the portrait was already an extreme.
Sigma. The Sigma 600mm F8 mirror does 1:3 magnification. Sigma also made 400mm F5.six and 300mm F4 Tele Macros.
The current Kenko/Tokina 400mm F8 does 0.4X.
There were many lenses that would go to 1:3 - one:4 magnification, but information technology is debatable if that deserves the macro designation. I am non sure which Kenko/Tokina 400/8 you have in mind, the recent Tokina SZX 400/8 Reflex MF goes to 1:2.5x as far as I know.
My point was, that Minolta designed their mirror tele-lenses optimizing them for longer distances. That's why the minimum focus altitude is that long IMHO.
No doubtfulness they were optimized for that, but I think the reasons are:
1. The 500mm f/8 AF Reflex actually focuses closer than well-nigh inexpensive lenses in its focal length range; it was probably intended primarily as a basic sports lens, and the single AF point works great if all you're doing is keeping the guy carry the ball centered....
2. Without a focus limiter, AF speed could have been injure by allowing closer focus.
iii. Making an f/eight mirror lens AF is a pretty good trick, very dependent on the ray bundles coming through the donut-shaped discontinuity; closer focus typically has the side effect of making the lens a petty slower, and it could easily be that closer focus would have interfered enough for AF to go unreliable.
BTW, according to the MTF chart at Dyxum, the 500mm f/8 AF Reflex is quite precipitous:
In fact, the prime lens in the 400-600mm that users rated sharpest at Dyxum is the Minolta AF 600mm F4 APO, a giant lens with an as giant cost (shut to 20X the Reflex), but the resolution chart actually says it's poorer wide open than the Reflex:
Olympus TG-860 Canon PowerShot SX530 Sony a7R II Sony a6500 Canon EOS 5D Mark 4 +30 more
Latest sample galleries
Latest in-depth reviews
One of our favourite things about Micro Iv Thirds is the variety of tiny, precipitous lenses. How does OM Organization's compact xl-150mm F4 Pro lens hold upward nether scrutiny?
The Nikon Z9 uses a stacked CMOS sensor to power its starting time pro-level mirrorless camera. With firmware 2.0 at present available, we've reviewed the fast-shooting stills and video camera designed to win-over Nikon's professional DSLR users.
The Monster Adapter LA-KE1 gives Pentaxians a way to employ many of their 1000-mountain lenses with full AF on Sony East-mountain mirrorless bodies. Mike Tomkins looks at how it performs.
Laowa has but announced a new 20mm shift lens, and we were able to put it through its paces in downtown Calgary.
Rotolight'south new NEO 3 and AEOS 2 lights may be more powerful than their predecessors, just they go 1 step further, providing millions of colorful lighting options via a touchscreen brandish.
Latest buying guides
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather condition-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several smashing cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the all-time.
If you're looking for the perfect drone for yourself, or to gift someone special, we've gone through all of the options and selected our favorites.
What's the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded upward all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Most mod cameras will shoot video to i degree or some other, but these are the ones we'd look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We've called cameras that can accept not bad photos and make it easy to get corking looking video, rather than being the ones you'd choose as a committed videographer.
Although a lot of people simply upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a pick of cameras that go far like shooting fish in a barrel to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
Source: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4539262
0 Response to "Minolta 500mm F/8 Auto Focus Mirror Lens Review"
Post a Comment