View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 821
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:28 pm Post subject: Minolta MC Rokkor SI 28mm 2,5 |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
I keep storing this lens because it is not so good wide open at the corners and edges and it is quite heavy.
I happily use Canon FD 28 2,8 and Minolta MD 28 2,8 and 3,5 but I periodically come back to the Rokkor SI because I miss the extra crispness at about f5,6. At this setting I think nothing competes (at least in my equipment).
Let me know your thoughts.
[img]L'Arche de la Défense by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img] _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dejan
Joined: 05 Jan 2021 Posts: 138 Location: Belgrade, Serbia
|
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dejan wrote:
I wouldn't expect much from that lens at least when it's directly compared to some others (including the Canon FD 28mm F2.8 you've mentioned), but this image definitely looks crispy indeed. Nice work! It's all about the end result and how we like it rather than pixel peeping or what have you. At the moment I prefer using Zuiko 28mm F3.5 which is pretty sharp even wide open, but I'd normally stop it down anyway. I like the rendering it gives. I enjoy using SMC Pentax 28mm F2 too, but it's a bit larger and heavier, so I rather use it for wide angle close ups, ever since I got the Olympus. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2901 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Nice picture, looks very crispy indeed. I recently acquired this very lens and will try it out soon. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
Joined: 30 Nov 2016 Posts: 378
|
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
It has been UV light treated? _________________ Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 821
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Yes and very successfully. I have two of these lenses, one has been exposed three months to an Ikea Janso lamp, the other, three days to an UV led lamp with same result... UV led lights are so cheap I would recommend to buy one. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
Joined: 30 Nov 2016 Posts: 378
|
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
lumens pixel wrote: |
Yes and very successfully. I have two of these lenses, one has been exposed three months to an Ikea Janso lamp, the other, three days to an UV led lamp with same result... UV led lights are so cheap I would recommend to buy one. |
I have two, both former mosquito killer UV lamps with the right spectral output. The small fluorescent lamp one gets a bit too hot so I have to be careful, the LED one is fine but slower.
I wondered more whether edge definition could improve more with the treatment but as you already did it and still see some fall off ..........
Not that I notice it in the image. _________________ Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 821
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
There is some definition fall off towards the edge yes.
This lens works like the old ones (it is old indeed), sharp in the center, fuzzy outside unless you stop down. Modern lenses are designed for more even sharpness because this is what tests and markets are asking for. However I often noted that some old lenses stopped down have better average sharpness on the whole frame than some modern lenses.
And this what it is about with this lens. Accept f5,6 and you will be more than happy. If your subject is centered f4 and f4,5 will be perfect. F 2,5 only good in the center. Might nevertheless be useful in some cases.
In other words this lens is the worst compromise between weight, size and quality. Any MD 3,5 is better rounded. But none will reach the quality of the SI at middle aperture.
Choose your camp comrade. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RokkorDoctor
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 1251 Location: Kent, UK
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
lumens pixel wrote: |
Yes and very successfully. I have two of these lenses, one has been exposed three months to an Ikea Janso lamp, the other, three days to an UV led lamp with same result... UV led lights are so cheap I would recommend to buy one. |
It goes much quicker if you take the offending lens element out. The front cell comes out fairly easily, which in itself then comes apart fairly easily. It's been a while since I serviced these radioactive 28mm 2.5's, unfortunately my memory fails me as to which element in the front group is the radioactive one, but definitely NOT the front lens. I have a vague recollection it was the cemented doublet. No need to be worried about de-centering, all the lenses in the front group have been optically centre-edge-ground and fit the front cell mount precisely (common Minolta practice, very few Rokkors have centering set-screws in the cell mounts such as the early 100mm 2.5 and the 21mm 2.8
I thus managed to clear the element in a few days using a CFL UV terrarium lamp for reptiles (these animals need a daily amount UV exposure, which is in the desired wavelength). This was before UV led lights were cheap _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|