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

Minolta MD (plain MD) 35mm f1.8 and earlier versions
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:20 pm    Post subject: Minolta MD (plain MD) 35mm f1.8 and earlier versions Reply with quote
Hi all,

I've already read and seen some reviews and topics about this lens Minolta MD (plain MD) 35mm f1.8, but I would like to know if the price difference with the earlier versions (ROKKOR, MC...) is justified ?
is it due to its rarity ? is there anyone who has/had multiple versions of this lens to give a feedback regarding sharpness and overall quality? Thanks.

Last edited by Nouh on Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:18 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unless you are pixel obsessed the main difference are
- MD 35 1.8 very compact, better coating (?) probably more vignetting at 1.8 (usual compromise) focusing less smooth Alu on alu
- Former model very big and heavy, focusing smoother and rock solid


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Minolta MD 35mm f1.8 and earlier versions Reply with quote
Nouh wrote:
Hi all,

I've already read and seen some reviews and topics about this lens, but I would like to know if the price difference with the earlier versions (ROKKOR, MC...) is justified ?
is it due to its rarity ? is there anyone who has/had multiple versions of this lens to give a feedback regarding sharpness and overall quality? Thanks.


I only have the MC Rokkor, the later version, can't compare, but the lens feels very solid.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I own the latest MC W.Rokkor-HH (MC-X, rubber grip) and I owned the earlier MD W.Rokkor (MD-II, white/green lettering). The MD is of course much lighter and more compact. It offers slightly higher contrast and visibly less CA than the MC. It also focuses a bit less silky, but still nice enough.

But - there's always a but - at least my copy of the MD got a "ring of unsharpness" about 2/3 into the image corners on full frame. The center was plenty sharp, the corners were OK past f/4, but even at f/8, there was a ring-formed area inbetween which was less sharp than the corners. It p***** me off so hard, that I sold the MD. The MC does not have any such problem, but due to the lower (micro-)contrast images seem sligthly less crisp/sharp, especially wide open. The way I see it, actual resolution is fractionally higher on the MC, but the lens needs a bit of post processing to achieve the same perceived sharpness the MD offers out of the box.

I haven't given up on the MD, though and am currently looking for a late MD (MD-III or "plain MD", white/orange lettering) to test. I hope that it was just my copy of the MD that had the weird ring-problem, but I don't know, yet.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
VLR wrote:

I haven't given up on the MD, though and am currently looking for a late MD (MD-III or "plain MD", white/orange lettering) to test. I hope that it was just my copy of the MD that had the weird ring-problem, but I don't know, yet.


That's the same model that I am talking about. Hard to find or too much expensive.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nouh wrote:
That's the same model that I am talking about. Hard to find or too much expensive.


I may have overlooked/misunderstood that in your original post. According to artaphot.ch, all MD versions are using identical optics. Therefore, my reservations also apply to the plain MD. I'm just looking for that version because I expect it to have the best coatings and I hope that the MD-II I sold was just a bad copy.

I think the plain MD is mostly more expensive because it's rare and often in very good condition (because the lenses are "younger").


PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have the MD II version and at first I was a bit diapointed with it, mounting it on a crop sensor camera with a plain adapter. But when paired with a lens turbo it somehow produces visibly better results. But in any case I still think it's overpriced for what it does. The 35/2.8 much better value at one third the price.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
I have the MD II version and at first I was a bit diapointed with it, mounting it on a crop sensor camera with a plain adapter. But when paired with a lens turbo it somehow produces visibly better results. But in any case I still think it's overpriced for what it does. The 35/2.8 much better value at one third the price.


I don't know if there would be a difference, but as you might already know, it's a lens for a FF camera (which I am using).
Indeed, maybe for the same price I could get a used modern 35mm f1.x lens.

I'll take the slower model [f2.8] in consideration or canon FD.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
VLR wrote:
I own the latest MC W.Rokkor-HH (MC-X, rubber grip) and I owned the earlier MD W.Rokkor (MD-II, white/green lettering). The MD is of course much lighter and more compact. It offers slightly higher contrast and visibly less CA than the MC. It also focuses a bit less silky, but still nice enough.


Maybe three years ago i compared the MC-X 1.8/35mm with the MD-III 1.8/35mm on 24 MP FF, finding remarkably little (if any) differences betwee them. In the mean time i go an MD-II as well, and i might re-test these three.

VLR wrote:
But - there's always a but - at least my copy of the MD got a "ring of unsharpness" about 2/3 into the image corners on full frame. The center was plenty sharp, the corners were OK past f/4, but even at f/8, there was a ring-formed area inbetween which was less sharp than the corners.

That's quite common behaviour among many wideangle lenses (even the Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35mm, for instance!). Many of the vintage Minolta wideangles have that problem, but it is as common among Hexanons, Nikkors and Canon (n)FD lenses.

Stephan
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1