Minolta MD 85/2 vs. Olympus OM 85/2 (vs. Canon FD 85/1.8)?

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Oly 85/2 and Minolta 85/2 are equivalently specced, almost the same size and weight (both small, Oly slightly smaller), and roughly the same price (pretty expensive). They seem to be about as direct competitors as you could have. I searched far and wide for a comparison between them, but found almost nothing. How do they compare in terms of optical quality and characteristics?

There's also the Canon 85/1.8 which is a bit larger/heavier, a bit faster, and about half the price. I would also be interested in comparisons between all three of these, or any two of them. (I found this test which shows the Canon sharpening up considerably by f/2.0, so I would be especially interested in how the three compare at f/2.)

I'm seriously thinking about buying one of these, but I have almost nothing to go on for choosing between them, so... please help me out!

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

85 is a gap in my lens collection, for me it's covered by a few 70-210ish zooms and the glorious Tamron 90 / 2.5. I love Rokkor's nearly as much as Zuiko's. I'm watching this space. Wink

kuuan · Expire: 2014-12-26

I can't compare, I only have a OM 2/85. However I want to draw your attention to the fact that there are two distinct versions of this lens with different optical formula. I have the early type with silver nose which had been specifically recommended to me for being a "Sonnar", it's good bokeh. However I did find it little sharp @f2, the later version is said to be sharper.

dnas · Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan

I have the Minolta MD 85mm F2 & the Canon FDn 85mm F1.8

I'll see if I can post some shots.

listera · Joined: 24 Oct 2013 Posts: 126 Location: Ankara

I used both OM (early version) and MD for short periods. OM was far from sharp wide open whereas Minolta was more than usable. Also OM was quite flare prone, MD was much better in that respect. Bokehwise and colorwise both were OK, and I would most probably prefer any of them to FD if color/bokeh was the main criterion.

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Thanks! I've also heard that bokeh with the FD is not so nice, though not about colors.

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Bump? :)

clockwork247 · Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 79

rokinon 85 1.4

The legacy 85mm are so expensive.... I had a minolta 85 1.7, wasn't too impressed with it's sharpness wide open, people tell me "you have to stop it down a little), well I didn't buy an f1.7 lens to stop it down... Bokeh wise, it's as many have state, it's pretty nice, I can never rate bokeh, but it was at mimimum above average if not excellent.

the rokinon is new for about 200 bucks or less. I had my nikon version with the focus confirm chip for 200 new, i'm sure it's even less used. wide open it's still sharp, someone did a comparison, and it's real close to the nikon 85 1.4G.

I have to say that the color isn't quite as punchy, but it's not bad. Sharper wide open than my nikon 50 1.8D, which is one of the sharpest lens in the 50mm budget lineup across many flat form (and I have to say that it out perform most if not all the legacy 50mm I have).

and if you're into bokeh, it's actually one of the better bokeh producer in the 85mm crowd. If there's 1 FL that I would buy off brand, it'd be this 85mm from rokinon.

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland

davev8app · Joined: 09 Dec 2010 Posts: 134 Location: UK

test for Rokinon 85mm f1.4 also badge as Bower, Samyang ...it is made by samyang

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/483-samyang_85_14_5d?start=2

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

I got all three.Rokkor 85/2 is imo the best.Very sharp,beautiful Minolta colours,smooth bokeh,capable of 3D rendering.Canon FD 85/1.8 has some veiling and CA wide open,but stopped down a bit is also very sharp.Canon colours though are not as bright and vivid as those of Minolta.My copy of Oly Zuiko 85/2.0 is older,single coated.Despite of this,the lens is sharp wide open,but sharpness is hidden behind veiling and some CA and that is the reason,I suppose,many people regard it soft.All three are very good lenses.

Canon nFD 85/1.8 at f1.8 + Sony A7:

Minolta Rokkor 85/2 at f2.0+Sony A7

Sadly I have no any Zuiko 85/2 samples at hand

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland

The rokkor's picture are really vivid . Perhaps too much for me.
Is it a good portrait lens ?

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE

I have both the Rokkor 85/2 and the latest version of Olympus Zuiko 85/2. The Rokkor is sharper wide open. In fact, I believe it's the next sharpest 85mm lens to the slower Sonnar *T 85/2.8 (C/Y mount). The Zuiko is not as sharp at f/2, although it has smoother bokeh at that aperture. Both are great portrait lenses, so it's up to you whether to take the sharper (and slightly harsher rendering) Rokkor or the smoother (but a bit less sharp) Zuiko.

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

Boris_Akunin · Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 392 Location: Bremen, Germany

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

I dont have any decent samples from my Pentax M 85/2.0 handy,but after some preliminary test shooting I found it to fringe a lot in blue wide open,having good sharpness and colours at the same time.Fringing is easliy removable in PP and mostly gone by f4,but that's a relative weakness to mention when talking about this lens.Stopped down to f4-5.6 it is very,very good.I tested two copies and left one for myself.Besides it's a nice to operate and compact lens.Minolta MD Rokkor 85/2.0 is sharper wide open with no CA to speak of,has better microcontrast and colour rendition.Superior lens in short.

Boris_Akunin · Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 392 Location: Bremen, Germany

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Thanks everyone! Seems like most people prefer the Minolta.

With regards to some of the other suggestions: the f/2.8 lenses are definitely also interesting, but as I already have an Oly 100/2.8, for flexibility I would rather go for a faster lens at 85mm. On the other hand, being small and lightweight is non-negotiable (otherwise I won't often take it with me), which rules out the f/1.4 lenses.

The only reason I didn't include the Pentax-M 85/2 is because I'd read in multiple places that it has very ugly bokeh. Otherwise, it's a third lens next to the Zuiko and the Rokkor with essentially identical specifications, size, weight, and price. But according to those sources and shapencolour as well, it's apparently not as good as the others.

One other (even more extravagantly priced) option which captured my imagination for a moment was the CZJ Pancolar 80/1.8, when it seemed like an auction might go for a much lower price, but of course it doubled in the last seconds like it sometimes does.

Would still be very interested in more comparison shots, especially at f/2, so feel free to keep them coming if you have any.

Oldhand · Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 9:58 pm Post subject:

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but the Super-Takumar 1.9/85 is rather good.
Here are two examples showing bokeh and sharpness.
OH

simbon4o · Joined: 19 Dec 2011 Posts: 390 Location: Bulgaria

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

I remember reading that the OM 85/2 was engineered to be soft with smooth bokeh wide open for portrait use, stopped down just a bit it sharpens up nicely.

padam · Joined: 09 Oct 2012 Posts: 175 Location: Hungary

Yes, the OM 85/2 draws smoother than the 100/2.8 maybe that is why it is also quite a bit less common especially the later versions.
And Samyang/Rokinon remains a great option for those who don't like to hunt and don't mind the extra size and weight Smile

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974