| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:40 am Post subject: Minolta MD Tele Rokkor-X 300mm f/5.6 |
 |
|
Oldhand wrote:
Why are these so cheap?
I can only use this on my Nikon D300 at present, but it would be able to be used on other types of camera I am sure.
With a glassless adapter, it cannot focus to infinity.
Its normal minimum focus range is 4.5metres. With the adapter, this shrinks to 3 metres.
Maximum focus range with adapter is 10 metres on the Nikon.
This range is very useful for me and fills the viewfinder nicely.
Here is a sample image:
-wide open at f/5.6
Compare to Nikkor AI 50mm f/2 exposed at f11:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
parabellumfoto
Joined: 06 Apr 2013
Posts: 413
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
parabellumfoto wrote:
Looks like a very nice lens OH.
Did you get it on EBay?
_________________
Minolta MC Rokkor f1.4 50mm
Minolta MD Zoom Macro 35-105mm f3.5-4.5
Nikon Nikkor 50mm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-S Auto 5cm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-Q Auto 135mm F2.8
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm F1.8G
http://www.parabellumfoto.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| parabellumfoto wrote: |
Looks like a very nice lens OH.
Did you get it on EBay? |
Yes.
It was up for seven days, and I was the only bidder.
OK it's not a fast lens, but it sure is sharp.
Cheers
OH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
parabellumfoto
Joined: 06 Apr 2013
Posts: 413
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
parabellumfoto wrote:
| Oldhand wrote: |
| parabellumfoto wrote: |
Looks like a very nice lens OH.
Did you get it on EBay? |
Yes.
It was up for seven days, and I was the only bidder.
OK it's not a fast lens, but it sure is sharp.
Cheers
OH |
Definitely not fast, but your comparison against the Nikkor 50mm f2 shows almost identical results. I recently put my Nikkor against my Minolta MD Macro Zoom and the Nikkor won hands down. Sharper and more importantly contrast was strong. The Minolta zoom looked flat in comparison.
_________________
Minolta MC Rokkor f1.4 50mm
Minolta MD Zoom Macro 35-105mm f3.5-4.5
Nikon Nikkor 50mm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-S Auto 5cm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-Q Auto 135mm F2.8
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm F1.8G
http://www.parabellumfoto.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3705
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
This would be either Tokina or Komine made.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| Pancolart wrote: |
| This would be either Tokina or Komine made. |
Thanks for that.
I was unaware that Minolta lenses were made by other parties.
Always imagined that Minolta made their own for some reason.
Cheers
OH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4745
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Why so cheap? I guess it was you who won this for $30 recently.
I think the reason it's cheap is that Rokkor dont have a magic name like Nikkor, Super Takumar, Hexanon et al. Also wides tend to be more expensive as thats mainly what people want.
regards quality its not too hard to make a 300mm prime lens, its a very simple formulation, so almost every decent brand of 300mm is capable of giving great results compared to sub 135's.
The particular model you have was made and badged for the US only between 1975 - 1977
I bet its heavy, a couple of pounds easily.
Enjoy.
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| philslizzy wrote: |
Why so cheap? I guess it was you who won this for $30 recently.
I think the reason it's cheap is that Rokkor dont have a magic name like Nikkor, Super Takumar, Hexanon et al. Also wides tend to be more expensive as thats mainly what people want.
regards quality its not too hard to make a 300mm prime lens, its a very simple formulation, so almost every decent brand of 300mm is capable of giving great results compared to sub 135's.
The particular model you have was made and badged for the US only between 1975 - 1977
I bet its heavy, a couple of pounds easily.
Enjoy. |
I guess it was you who won this for $30 recently.
Yes.
The particular model you have was made and badged for the US only between 1975 - 1977
... by Minolta? or as has been suggested, by Komine or Tokina?
I bet its heavy, a couple of pounds easily.
Heavy - not so much. 800grams or 1.7637 pounds.
Long though, yet easy to hold.
Thanks
OH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DR.JUAN
Joined: 08 Feb 2013
Posts: 661
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
DR.JUAN wrote:
Afaik, minolta made it own lenses, except those made with leica.
It's difficult to beleave that there are some people who don't know that minolta did excelent lenses, like the 1,2/58, 1,4/50, both mc version, almost all the 135 too, the 1,7/85, the 1,8/35, 2/28, the last version of the 1,7/50, the 20 mm one and the 2,8/24. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
****Why are these so cheap?****
Well the lens would be ok for sunny Australia, but for the UK without a tripod and say f8, would need a fast shutter speed/high ISO combo to be of much use......so that lets me out as a film user as my favourite films are 100 and 200 ISO. 
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WolverineX
Joined: 19 Apr 2009
Posts: 1693
Location: Zagreb , Croatia , Europe
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WolverineX wrote:
i have this lens and it's very good performer. and it's lightest 300mm lens i own.
why cheap? probably because of f5.6
i recently re-tested it on my E-M5:
http://forum.mflenses.com/testing-my-lenses-part-43-mc-tele-rokkor-300mm-5-6-t39155,highlight,%2Btesting+%2Blenses.html
all hand held, no tripod
_________________
my tools:Oly E-M5 + 45mm/1.8 + Oly E-520 + 12-60 + 14-42 + 70-300 + Sigma 105mm + FL-50R + EC20 + SRF-11 ring flash
http://forum.mflenses.com/wolverinex-testing-my-lenses-series-link-list-t39524.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tervueren
Joined: 18 May 2011
Posts: 1177
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-08
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tervueren wrote:
The 'X' was a designation for lenses destined for the North American market and like the MD lenses had supposedly more advanced coatings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DR.JUAN
Joined: 08 Feb 2013
Posts: 661
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DR.JUAN wrote:
I found some "X" rokkors with the coated identical to not "X" ones.
Almost all collectors think that the "X" lenses for US are market branded, no more than this. The better lenses? Perhaps for japanese market, not for US one |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tervueren
Joined: 18 May 2011
Posts: 1177
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-08
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tervueren wrote:
| DR.JUAN wrote: |
I found some "X" rokkors with the coated identical to not "X" ones.
|
I thought that was just what I said albeit in different words lol |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DR.JUAN
Joined: 08 Feb 2013
Posts: 661
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DR.JUAN wrote:
Ohh....my english is so bad, man.
For example, my mc 2,5/100 has the same -orcontrast very similar- coating as my mc "X"lenses lens. The coating in minolta lenses changed with the time (dos i'm not speacking about the celtic ones) by the time. Contemporary lenses the similar coating |
|
| 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
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
