Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

How good is the Minolta MD APO Rokkor 400/5.6
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 1:00 pm    Post subject: How good is the Minolta MD APO Rokkor 400/5.6 Reply with quote

How good is this rare lens, compared to other classics or some modern variants? I've had a hard time finding relevant information about this lens and how it performs on modern digital bodies. I had a discussion with one owner who said that he couldn't get as sharp pictures with it as he did with his Zuiko 300/4.5 but he said that the Zuiko had much more CA. I'm not sure but I suspect that the lack of sharpness is because of bad technique. 400mm is significantly longer than 300mm and the Rokkor is slower as well, requiring a very steady tripod, and preferably a remote release and mirror lock up (unless used on a mirrorless camera like the NEX).

Finally, how much would a mint copy fetch today? Thanks!


PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

O never use the apo 400. But I can tell you that the OM 300 is not better than the MD IF f/4,5. Said that after watched some pics of 40 x 50 cm. Time ago. Yes, I know, it' relative, but almost always it is.

I hope tbat should help.

Rino


PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no idea about the price but in my book APO designation cost money.
If you get it for cheap, go for it.


Edit : found a link

http://kevincameras.com/gallery/v/minolta/400_56/

But, that guy is well known for driving up prices. The real price should be in $800-$900 range.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Got one with the 2xTC in mint condition. Will be interesting to see how it performs. Waiting for some decent light Smile


PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:59 am    Post subject: Re: How good is the Minolta MD APO Rokkor 400/5.6 Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
How good is this rare lens, compared to other classics or some modern variants? I've had a hard time finding relevant information about this lens and how it performs on modern digital bodies. I had a discussion with one owner who said that he couldn't get as sharp pictures with it as he did with his Zuiko 300/4.5 but he said that the Zuiko had much more CA. I'm not sure but I suspect that the lack of sharpness is because of bad technique. 400mm is significantly longer than 300mm and the Rokkor is slower as well, requiring a very steady tripod, and preferably a remote release and mirror lock up (unless used on a mirrorless camera like the NEX).

Finally, how much would a mint copy fetch today? Thanks!


It seems to me this should be a very fine lens.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am unable to find any decent sample pictures taken with this lens. Is it just me and my poor search engine skills? Is this lens really that rare, seems like it anyway.

I will post samples myself soon but I don't have an adapter yet Embarassed


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
I am unable to find any decent sample pictures taken with this lens. Is it just me and my poor search engine skills? Is this lens really that rare, seems like it anyway.

I will post samples myself soon but I don't have an adapter yet Embarassed


I doubt that many were made. It must have been expensive.

here is one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Minolta-MD-400mm-f-5-6-APO-Tele-Rokkor-X-Lens-/110763190467


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've heard that it cost over 1500 USD back in 1977, so yes it was very expensive.

I found the following data sheet on http://www.flickr.com/photos/42559244@N06/sets/72157623537958859/

Since this is a scan of a commercial brochure, I feel it is ok to borrow it (as I did provide a reference). Thanks to flickr member "rokkor777" for the original scanning and posting!



Last edited by Pontus on Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:01 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
I've heard that it cost over 1500 USD back in 1977, so yes it was very expensive.

I found the following data sheet on http://www.flickr.com/photos/42559244@N06/sets/72157623537958859/

Since this is a scan of a commercial brochure, I feel it is ok to borrow it (as I did provide a reference). Thanks to flickr member "rokkor777" for scanning posting!



Looks like a great lens.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also found the following 1970'2 info booklet on http://www.flickr.com/photos/byjr/with/6674973157/#photo_6674973157

Again, since this is a scan of a 1970'2 info booklet, I feel it is ok to borrow it (as I did provide a reference). Thanks to flickr member "chippy1920" for the original scanning and posting!



PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If a company as trusted as Minolta calls it an APO in the 70's it should be excellent. What body are you going to adapt it to?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not going to alter the lens at all. I'm going to use it on my Sony NEX-5N with an adapter. I don't think I will be able to use the lens with the 2x TC, 1200mm is a bit too much for me.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
I'm not going to alter the lens at all. I'm going to use it on my Sony NEX-5N with an adapter. I don't think I will be able to use the lens with the 2x TC, 1200mm is a bit too much for me.

Is the Nex-5n an aps-c body that can adapt virtually any mf lens?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's correct. All the lenses I own can be used with any NEX with simple adapters. Some NEX models (like the 7) don't work well with wide lenses and especially rangefinder lenses though, there is a colour shift in the corners. The Sony NEX-5 is fine with most lenses though (there are exceptions).


PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got an article from a friendly guy who doesn't mind me sharing:





PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting article, have you taken possesion of the lens yet?


PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hifisapi wrote:
Interesting article, have you taken possesion of the lens yet?


Yes, I have the lens and it is a beauty. I haven't tried it yet, I'll have to wait for spring and better light.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.flickr.com/photos/58521449@N00/sets/72157636827954133/


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58521449@N00/sets/72157636827954133/


Album no longer exists. Can you update?


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very slow.
Just as slow as the 200mm 2.8 with a double 300S which is much much cheaper, quite good but has CA.
You also get a fast 200 mm for much less money... but Have not seen anything with 400 mm. See it as a collector's item, but maybe wrong.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:56 pm    Post subject: Re: How good is the Minolta MD APO Rokkor 400/5.6 Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
How good is this rare lens, compared to other classics or some modern variants?
...
I had a discussion with one owner who said that he couldn't get as sharp pictures with it as he did with his Zuiko 300/4.5 but he said that the Zuiko had much more CA. I'm not sure but I suspect that the lack of sharpness is because of bad technique. 400mm is significantly longer than 300mm and the Rokkor is slower as well, requiring a very steady tripod, and preferably a remote release and mirror lock up ....

Finally, how much would a mint copy fetch today? Thanks!


Last year, I have run tests with a like-new Rokkor 5.6/400mm APO, comparing the lens to e. g. the Canon FD 4.5/400mm and the Canon 2.8/400mm L. The Rokkor, at f5.6, simply was not sharp, neither in the center nor at the corners. It looked like astigmatism (!) even in the center: sometimes the vertical lines were sharp, sometimes the horizontal lines (depending on focusing), but never both. Something like this, to my knowledge, can only happen if the lens is badly de-centered. The owner of the lens sent it to a former Minolta repair center, and they said the lens was OK ... but comparing it to a (much cheaper) FD 4.5/400mm its center performance was nowhere near as good as the Canon. Let alone the 400mm L which blew the Rokkor away.

The Rokkor became excellent at f11; then the entire field is reasonably sharp (24MP FF), and there are very little CAs (much lesss than the FD 4.5/400mm, and less than the 400mm L @ as well; the 400L has nearly no CAs at f2.8, though!).

I have heard from other owners of the Rokkor 400mm APO that they had similar problems with their lenses.

Up to now, the whole issue is a mystery to me.

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:58 pm    Post subject: Re: How good is the Minolta MD APO Rokkor 400/5.6 Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Pontus wrote:
How good is this rare lens, compared to other classics or some modern variants?
...
I had a discussion with one owner who said that he couldn't get as sharp pictures with it as he did with his Zuiko 300/4.5 but he said that the Zuiko had much more CA. I'm not sure but I suspect that the lack of sharpness is because of bad technique. 400mm is significantly longer than 300mm and the Rokkor is slower as well, requiring a very steady tripod, and preferably a remote release and mirror lock up ....

Finally, how much would a mint copy fetch today? Thanks!


Last year, I have run tests with a like-new Rokkor 5.6/400mm APO, comparing the lens to e. g. the Canon FD 4.5/400mm and the Canon new FD 2.8/400mm L. The Rokkor, at f5.6, simply was not sharp, neither in the center nor at the corners. It looked like astigmatism (!) even in the center: sometimes the vertical lines were sharp, sometimes the horizontal lines (depending on focusing), but never both. Something like this, to my knowledge, can only happen if the lens is badly de-centered. The owner of the lens sent it to a former Minolta repair center, and they said the lens was OK ... but comparing it to a (much cheaper) FD 4.5/400mm its center performance was nowhere near as good as the Canon. Let alone the 400mm L which blew the Rokkor away.

The Rokkor became excellent at f11; then the entire field is reasonably sharp (24MP FF), and there are very little CAs (much lesss than the FD 4.5/400mm, and less than the 400mm L @ as well; the 400L has nearly no CAs at f2.8, though!).

I have heard from other owners of the Rokkor 400mm APO that they had similar problems with their Rokkor 5.6/400mm APO lenses.

Up to now, the whole issue is a mystery to me.

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you, Stephan, for that report. Very helpful. I thought I had read good things about the lens, then saw high prices that would indicate the same. I'll stick with my Novoflexar.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I acquired an APO Tele Rokkor this year. Sadly, the rear group was heavily infested by fungus and someone tried to disassemble and repair it, but reversed one element on re-assembly. That being said, I cleaned it, got it all assembled in the right order and every part seems to be accounted for. The exterior looks pretty much pristine, too. No dents, not scratches. Nonetheless, images shot with the lens were - to put it mildly - disappointing. Double contours everywhere, impossible to focus. See this thread for some images.

After fiddling with the optics, I put a 0.1 mm spacer in between the rear group and the diaphragm which fixed the double lining and returned the lens to an acceptable performance. The bokeh is still nervous, though. I really don't know what could be wrong, as I see no parts where an optical adjustment could be made and it doesn't look like the lens was dropped or even slightly bumped in its life.

I know it's probably my copy, but overall I'm not impressed with this lens. On the plus side, it's very well corrected CA-wise and only shows some minor pink fringing in extreme backlit situations (tree branches against the bright sky). Minor means: I wouldn't even criticize modern lenses for this little bit of fringing.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For reference, a quick comparison of my (misaligned / flawed) copy of the lens with a contemporary 400 mm, using boring images of the moon. Let's start with the contender:


Vivitar 400 mm f/5.6, SR mount, 77 mm filter thread, serial 28XXXXX (Komine)

f/5.6


f/8


f/11



Not what I'm looking for in a 400 mm. Usable at f/11, rubbish otherwise. Now the titleholder:


Minolta APO Tele Rokkor 400 mm f/5.6

f/5.6


f/8


f/11



Considering that my Rokkor isn't perfect optically, results are still decent from f/8 onwards. The Vivitar actually looses every single match and only comes close to a tie at f/11. CAs are also way worse in the Vivitar in non-moon images. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna part with both lenses, though Smile