View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Fri May 08, 2020 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Is this great lens comparable with the first MC version? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uddhava
Joined: 22 Aug 2012 Posts: 3074 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-06-21
|
Posted: Fri May 08, 2020 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uddhava wrote:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Fri May 08, 2020 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
papasito wrote: |
Is this great lens comparable with the first MC version? |
There are basically 3 different versions:
The first MC II version up to MC-X was 6/5,
the second one from MC-X up to MD II 5/5 constructions with 55 mm filter thread and
the third and last MD III 5/5 reduced the filter thread to 49 mm.
The newer 5/5 version is said to be the better one. However, it is not clear whether there is any performance difference betw. the 2nd and the 3rd version.
My example picture is shot with the 2nd version (MD II with 55 mm filter thread, introduced 1978). _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Sat May 09, 2020 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
tb_a wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
Is this great lens comparable with the first MC version? |
There are basically 3 different versions:
The first MC II version up to MC-X was 6/5,
the second one from MC-X up to MD II 5/5 constructions with 55 mm filter thread and
the third and last MD III 5/5 reduced the filter thread to 49 mm.
The newer 5/5 version is said to be the better one. However, it is not clear whether there is any performance difference betw. the 2nd and the 3rd version.
My example picture is shot with the 2nd version (MD II with 55 mm filter thread, introduced 1978). |
In my short experience with MC/MD Minolta lenses, I can say that the elements of the MC III 24/2,8 and 50/1,4 don't be interchangeable with the MD I version although have the same scheme.The elements of the MD I lenses are smaller than the MC III ones. So, the differences among them don't be only the coated.
They are different lenses.
Perhaps your MD II 100/2,5 is not the same lens than the MDIII one |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sergun
Joined: 01 Jun 2017 Posts: 283 Location: наша раша
|
Posted: Sat May 09, 2020 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
sergun wrote:
I had a version of MC-II and MD-II. Although it was at different times and with different cameras ,I liked the MC-II better _________________ https://www.flickr.com/photos/105161078@N06/
https://fotoload.ru/fotosets/6661/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sat May 09, 2020 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
sergun wrote: |
I had a version of MC-II and MD-II. Although it was at different times and with different cameras ,I liked the MC-II better |
Well, that's certainly a matter of taste. Each lens construction model delivers a different characteristic. The older MC II is known to have weaker corners which may not be any issue at all when used for portrait photography.
I always prefer lenses which deliver both: Excellent corner to corner sharpness AND nice/smooth bokeh. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
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
|