Minolta's best

Tedat · Joined: 08 Nov 2011 Posts: 800 Location: Berlin/Germany

here you will find specs for every Minolta AF/Sony (incl. Zeiss ZA) lens:

http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/lenses.php

You can't make anything wrong with most of them (especially the first generation with metal focus ring), another real gem is the tiny Minolta AF 4.5/100-200 which most times can be found really cheap.

But stay away from any "Power Zoom" or "xi" lenses.. also those with the build in lens cap (35-80 & 80-200) or lenses which was avaible in black and silver.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Yes, those built-in lens cap lenses are awful, sadly I own both of them. Not all the Xi lenses should be avoided, some are very good like the AF 35-200 xi F4.5-5.6, AF 28-80 xi F4-5.6, AF 100-300 xi F4.5-5.6 and AF 28-105 xi F3.5-4.5.

vlousada · Joined: 11 Dec 2010 Posts: 345 Location: Portugal

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

These two lenses both work perfectly and have excellent IQ, best of all they cost me less than 25ukp for the pair. You simply can't match this level of quality at anything like this price with either Canon or Nikon. I have the Nikon AF 28-85, it's probably as good as the Minolta 28-85 but cost 4x as much on ebay, doesn't feel as well built either. I also have a Canon 24-85 and it's a decent ens but can't mach the Minolta and is flimsy feeling by comparison. It cost 6x as much and I got it cheap. In an informal shootout between the Minolta 35-105 and a Canon L 24-105 last week using an EOS 7D and a Sony A55 the Minolta was much better in sharpness, distortion, colours, every aspect apart from flare and even then, the Canon was barely better.

Phenix jc · Joined: 19 Dec 2009 Posts: 398 Location: France

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 942 Location: Poland

My first tries with Rokkor lenses impressed me a lot.So I decided to buy some more.
Mechanical and optical results are top and prices are still acceptable.
Focusing is easy and precise . If I compare to my Takumars, it is not as smooth but I wonder if it's not preferable.

I was in France last week end and added two lenses to my collection:
MC 135/2.8 PF
There are so many versions of 135mm 2.8 that it is difficult to make a decision . This one seems quiet good though I read the 4/4 versions are supposed to be the best.

MC 300/5,6
This lens is really compact and fits my A7 quiet well.

If anybody has some experience with those two lenses on FF , a feed back is welcome.

Mir · Expire: 2017-09-30

So, thanks to you all, i've gathered :

MD W.ROKKOR-X 2.8/24
MD W.ROKKOR 2/28
MC W.ROKKOR-SI 2.5/28
MC W.ROKKOR-HH 1.8/35
MD 3.5/35-70 Macro
MC ROKKOR-X-PG 1.4/50
MC ROKKOR-X 1.2/58
MD MACRO ROKKOR-X 3.5/100

I'm still hoping to eventually get an MD 2.8/20, an MD 2.8/200 and one of them 85mm...
Unless advised otherwise...

Tervueren · Expire: 2014-11-08

That's some nice Minolta glass there Mir, I've been looking for the MD 200 for quite a while myself but I guess those that own them are keeping them and those selling are to much money for my pocket lol, I used to have the af version and that was a very good lens.

clockwork247 · Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 79

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary

That's a nice collection you've started Mir, congrats.

Ivan Lee · Posted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 2:00 pm Post subject:

Am I the only one that thinks that the 24mm MD is better than the 24mm MC version? I had both at the same time and did a comparison test between the two... the MD version is a bit less wide but sharper wide open, rendering looks the same.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Well, I doubt any people will have owned both and if they have, they will have directly compared them in such detail.

I have Konica Hexanon 2.8/24, Nikon Nikkor AI 2.8/24, Yashica ML 2.8/24 and Minolta AF 2.824.

They are all different but all are, imho excellent so I don't care much about the indiosyncracies of their characters as the important thing is the overall impression of the images they make and all of them make images that please me greatly.

P.S. What does wide open sharpness matter with a 24mm lens? Which such lenses, 2.8 is for focussing, you shoot them stopped down in almost all cases, that is how they were designed.

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 942 Location: Poland

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

I love to take snaps in streets at night(low light photography). Fast wide angle(~28mm) which is sharp at wide open can reduce the ISO and maintain a not-so-slow speed in low light.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Thanks for the info Michael.

Nighttime photography is something I like too, but I've never done it without a tripod. For me, the most important aspect of a lens when it comes to suitability for nighttime use is how the lens handles flare from light sources such as street lamps. One example of this is my Sigma 21-35 AF, an excellent lens, but inferior for nighttime shots to my Tokina 20-35 AF. The Sigma has a very large very curved front element whereas the Tokina has a small, much flatter one and the Tokina has much less flare as a result. Both lenses, having modern multicoatings, usually work better than a legacy 28mm prime, but I put that down to the older coatings. In England, we still use the old style low pressure sodium street lights in many places and these put out a narrowband orange light. This means you often get an overall orange glare to images. I believe that in Asia, most streetlights are a metal halide type that gives out a much broader spectrum of light, so conditions are a bit different.

Anyways, more than one way to skin a cat and I do understand using a prime at a large aperture, but would always prefer to close a lens at least one stop.

Spokklocka · Joined: 14 Jan 2015 Posts: 50

I quite like the MD 300 4,5. It's OK wide open and rather good at f/5,6 and it doesn't restrict you to the parking lot.

The 50 1,2 is nicer without a lens turbo than the MC 58 1,4 (later version) but with a lens turbo I prefer the latter.

Recently acquired the MD Rokkor (not last version) 28 2 and it has a bit of distortion and mushy corners at f/2 but barrel can be somewhat corrected and the thing appears rather sharp across the frame from f/8. Wide open the bokeh appears rather wild, must experiment with it further.

Rick1779 · Expire: 2014-06-06

The underrated Rokkor 45/2 wonderful and cheap
MC W.Rokkor-HH 35/1.8 heavy but fast and pretty sharp

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

Ian, here in Houston, we have a mixture of night lighting. On the freeways, I believe the sodium vapor lighting is used -- very tall light stands with a noticable orange cast to the light. Most street lights, however, are mercury vapor -- with a notable bluish-purple cast to them. I don't really pay them much heed if I'm taking night shots. The different colors can make for an interesting look, anyway.

I guess that, now that I own a nice Minolta film camera (a very clean XD-11 [XD-7 in Europe, XD in Japan]) and a NEX that I can get a Minolta MC/MD adapter for it, I should be on the lookout for some premium manual focus Minolta glass. Maybe its prices are not all that high yet.

My Minolta glass collection is very modest. I have an old 50mm f/1.7 MC that I've been using as a loupe for years, plus I have a 135/3.5 MD with a pitted rear element, and a pair of very clean MD 50's: one's an MD 50mm f/1.7 mm and the other is a 50mm f/2 -- I wonder how close that latter is to the Leitz 50/2 Summicron. It's a nice lens, for sure, even if it is a touch on the slow side. I wouldn't mind adding some more exotic stuff to my Minolta collection. But just so I had a variety of glass to use with my XD-11, I bought a Tamron Adaptall-2 mount for Minolta, so now I can use my Tamron collection with it, and I have Tamrons ranging from 17mm to 500mm.

I have an old set of the Joseph Cooper manuals on Minolta (I have the Nikon set too), and one of the nice things about that set is that it shows the lens diagrams for every Minolta lens that was in production back then. This is a fairly old set, so all the lenses shown in these manuals are MC, but that's okay, I reckon. I suspect a lot of the early Rokkor X MD lenses have the same formulas as the MC ones.

As I was composing this note, I began scanning MF Minolta listings on eBay and some of the prime stuff has some pretty high prices. Quite a few 58mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-X lenses in the $50-55 range. That seems like a decent price. How is the MC 58/1.4? Saw several 1.2s but they're all up there in price. Same with the ultra wides. <sigh>

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

Most street here lamps are sodium vapor and we have many different color lights from the banner of different shops. Usually, I will covert the photo to B&W and adjust each color in B&W mix at Lightroom if there is a strong color cast.

By the way, I have bought some of Minolta lenses(MC 24/2.8, MD 35/1.8, 50/1.4, 200/2.8 and 500 reflex). I think they should be a good companion to my Topcon lenses.

Mir · Expire: 2017-09-30

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Apparently, Asian tastes differ as to colour rendition, particularly in Japan. In Europe, light bulbs tend to be of the warm spectrum, 3400-4200K. However, in Asia, they prefer cooler ones in the 5600-6400K range. I read this a while back when researching lighting types for a job I had at the time.

Anyways, it's a factoid, for what it's worth.

VLR · Joined: 05 Mar 2015 Posts: 86