Minolta 75-300 D vs Sony 75-300 vs Sony 55-200

[torak]

Yes, but age may be a factor to some. I, for one, will pick Sony over Minolta anytime.

Wish Sony would release a beercan replacement.

age shouldnt be much of a factor as long as the previous owner takes good care of it.

And the 75-300's age is nothing compared to the beercan's age.

Minolta 75-300 D is made in the 2001, while the beercan is made in 1985...

if a 1985 beercan still works so well now, i dont see why a 2001 minolta 75-300 will be much worse in quality than the 2006 Sony 75-300 as they're both similar lens.

 

[digitalpimp]

age shouldnt be much of a factor as long as the previous owner takes good care of it.

And the 75-300's age is nothing compared to the beercan's age.

Minolta 75-300 D is made in the 2001, while the beercan is made in 1985...

if a 1985 beercan still works so well now, i dont see why a 2001 minolta 75-300 will be much worse in quality than the 2006 Sony 75-300 as they're both similar lens.

I fully agree with you. I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to pick a battered Sony over a pristine Minolta. That's just absurd. But given this scenario: two identical lenses on sale having 9/10 condition cosmetically and optically. Only difference is the other one is Sony and the other is Minolta. Of course, the Sony one would be a bit pricier. I'd choose Sony still. Why?

1. There MAY BE a chance the lens wasn't passed on as much as the old Minolta.
2. I don't have x-ray vision. Who knows what could be happening inside the lens barrel. Loose doohickies. Cracked whatchamacallits. Worn out thingamajigs. I don't know. Wear and tear can be a bitch. Again, there MAY BE a lesser chance for this in the Sony one since it's newer.
3. I can send the Sony one to SSC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but SSC doesn't do Minolta repairs and maintenance anymore. That itself is a big deal breaker for me.

Now, the beercan is a different story. No one would really care how old it is since it's the only one in the A-Mount line up so we don't really have a choice. But if Sony releases a beercan replacement and it's being sold in the BnS section together with the same condition Minolta beercan. I'd most definitely pick the Sony one.

As I have said, it MAY BE a factor to some. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[chanalb]

Viewed one today. Too bad it has a scratch on the front element.  i really liked it though. Good thing the seller returned my money after I have let him check and apologized for it.

The beercan is very much heavier than the 55-200. Weight is important cos it will really wear you down on a long day of shooting. Also for the 55-200, you can get F4 from 55-100. The pic are also sharp wide open throughout the entire range. No need to stop down. Since you have not bought the beercan, you should think about your shooting needs and reconsider the 55-200. IQ is not everything. As for me, I generally do not shoot above 55mm in low light so 55-200 is good enough for me for outdoor events and outings (like going zoo etc). While the IQ out of cam for 55-200 may not be as good as the beercan...you can always PP..;p

 

[arjrluap]

Thanks for the replies.
Yup! I got the 55-200 last night. I'm pretty surprised with the sharpness wide open and the f4 til 100mm plus the smooth AF considering this is a kit lens. The reason I picked this is because I'm having a hard time looking for the beercan in good condition plus the 55-200 has great reviews and has been compared closely with the beercan.

But who knows, maybe I'll crave for the sweet magenta of the beercan in the future.

 

[kinofi]

Thanks for the replies.
Yup! I got the 55-200 last night. I'm pretty surprised with the sharpness wide open and the f4 til 100mm plus the smooth AF considering this is a kit lens. The reason I picked this is because I'm having a hard time looking for the beercan in good condition plus the 55-200 has great reviews and has been compared closely with the beercan.

But who knows, maybe I'll crave for the sweet magenta of the beercan in the future.

Which camera are you using? How good is the AF especially at 200mm? Have u tested it at night?

 

[arjrluap]

Hi kinofi. I'm using the a33: Acceptable AF speed considering the price of this glass: struggles a bit at 200mm with certain scenes (more on this in the next couple of days after I abuse this thing), but performs well overall. What I like about it is its AF sound: better than 75-300 and the beercan especially when you are inclined to shooting video with this thing. F4 til 100 is a plus and 5.6 at the longest end is pretty good for a kit lens.

 

[raggi]

Hi kinofi. I'm using the a33: Acceptable AF speed considering the price of this glass: struggles a bit at 200mm with certain scenes (more on this in the next couple of days after I abuse this thing), but performs well overall. What I like about it is its AF sound: better than 75-300 and the beercan especially when you are inclined to shooting video with this thing. F4 til 100 is a plus and 5.6 at the longest end is pretty good for a kit lens.

congratz for your new 55-200 lens.
I am a newbie and want to know your point of view since I am looking for the tele lens also.
Have you do some comparison between 55-200 with minolta 100-200 or tamron 70-300 macro?
thanks before...

 

[kinofi]

Hi kinofi. I'm using the a33: Acceptable AF speed considering the price of this glass: struggles a bit at 200mm with certain scenes (more on this in the next couple of days after I abuse this thing), but performs well overall. What I like about it is its AF sound: better than 75-300 and the beercan especially when you are inclined to shooting video with this thing. F4 til 100 is a plus and 5.6 at the longest end is pretty good for a kit lens.

Oh thanks, do give a bit more update after u managed to test it out more. Is the focusing mechanism noisy? Because to my understanding the 75-300 Sony tele lens can be quite noisy and does quite abit of focus hunting at 300mm. I'm contemplating getting a second hand telephoto lens at this range or save up to buy the Tamron 70-300 USD.

 

[arjrluap]

Hi! I'm a newbie too! I haven't tried the tamron and minolta 100-200 but as far as I am concerned, this glass really performs well even at night (F4 til 100mm, AF fast, impressive sharpness from center to corners at a stop down considering the price I paid for this) though take note that at 200mm, u have to compensate that f5.6 to get the right exposure. AF noise is much better than the noisy 75-300 of Sony. In terms of weight, it is light unlike the beercan which is pretty heavy because of its metal body.

On the other hand: plastic mount, focus ring turns in AF, and some distortion at the long end of this zoom lens are its negative attributes but overall, the good ones outweigh the bad.

Honestly at first I am disappointed because I wasn't able to deal for an excellent-conditioned beercan, but after I used this glass, I think I still have made a good decision.

As I have said before, I still might look for the magentas of the beercan in the future but you can achieve somewhere near it with the 55-200 through PP. After all, you will still end up in PP for both these glasses.

 

[albertri]

congrats bro finally gotten your tele-zoom lens I think 200mm is just nice I have a couple of lens at this range and I find it good enough. specially for street shooting

 

[raggi]

Hi! I'm a newbie too! I haven't tried the tamron and minolta 100-200 but as far as I am concerned, this glass really performs well even at night (F4 til 100mm, AF fast, impressive sharpness from center to corners at a stop down considering the price I paid for this) though take note that at 200mm, u have to compensate that f5.6 to get the right exposure. AF noise is much better than the noisy 75-300 of Sony. In terms of weight, it is light unlike the beercan which is pretty heavy because of its metal body.

On the other hand: plastic mount, focus ring turns in AF, and some distortion at the long end of this zoom lens are its negative attributes but overall, the good ones outweigh the bad.

Honestly at first I am disappointed because I wasn't able to deal for an excellent-conditioned beercan, but after I used this glass, I think I still have made a good decision.

As I have said before, I still might look for the magentas of the beercan in the future but you can achieve somewhere near it with the 55-200 through PP. After all, you will still end up in PP for both these glasses.

great. thanks bro for your point of view. really appreciate it.