Sorry to resurrect this, but has anyone tried using this lens on the techart pro autofocus adapter as it seems a bit heavy? The question is whether they work correctly.
It seems relatively easy to make ones that fit. how are you using your Contax lenses?Īll adapter rings are not created equally. 35 Summicron resolves better than the distagon at f2.0! However, the disagon is better at MFD. 50/1.7, 35/1.4 are not very impressive to me. The only contax lens I like the is the F-Distagon 16/2.8. I like that it is a twist zoom, I had the Vario Sonnar and the Canon 70-200/4L but I was never too fond of the push-pull zoom action on the Vario Sonnar. Kyocera were producing the Contax Vario Sonnar 80-200/4 as well, weren't they? The older Minolta based design is not much to write home about What Telyt wrote is what I've heard and read as well that the 80-200/4 is a Leica design and outsorced to Kyocera for production. Sorry to dig up this thread, but which Canon tripod mount ring works with this lens? A or B? Having used one of the Minolta/Leitz zooms (75-200mm f/4.5) and the 80-200mm f/4, I can say that there's a world of difference, optically and mechanically. The 80-200 f/4 is much newer, a Leica design made for Leica by Kyocera. The 80-200mm f/4.5 from 1976 is a Minolta design, made by Minolta for Leitz (with an astounding 75% reject rate). The first Leica R cameras that came after the Leicaflexes were also a Minolta design. I believe the Leica 80-200 f/4 is in actuality a Minolta optical design and was made by Minolta for Leica. Fortunately, the 105-280 performs even slightly better than the 4/80-200 (but is twice as heavy and, if you don't find a bargain (like me ), darn expensive). With regard to the performance of the 4/80-200, I did not acquire the 105-280 because the 4/80-200 wouldn't be already a fantastic lens but just because of the extended long end. I just did not compare the two because the 105-280's range of focal length is quite different and, usually, it is not considered as an alternative for the 4/80-200.
0 kommentar(er)
