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's best
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

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.

Low light photography such as astrophotography.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ivan Lee wrote:
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.


There are 2 MD versions. One is optically identical to the MC. This lens is also sold as Leitz R Elmarit.
The second MD version is different and it has a 49mm filter thread.

I have a MC which is not really sharp in the corners on a FF sensor ( Sony A7). The rendition is nevertheless very nice.
It might be mine which has a problem. Note that this lens turns when you focus.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

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.

Low light photography such as astrophotography.


That's a pretty specialised application and I doubt the lens designers had such a use in mind.


I wonder, did any makers specifically market any lenses for astrophotography?


PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

I wonder, did any makers specifically market any lenses for astrophotography?


Probably not, but there are dual-purpose lenses out there. The Celestron C90 and Meade 1000mm come to mind. They are small telescopes that are often also configured as lenses and/or spotting scopes. Both these optics work very well as lenses. If you do a search on eBay for either optic, you'll see what I mean.

There are also numerous telescopes that can be retrofitted as lenses with camera adapters, so it's more a case of telescopes being marketed as lenses than the other way around.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2015 4:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2015 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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>


PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2015 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:


I have bought some of Minolta lenses, (200/2.8 and 500 reflex).

Great find !


calvin83 wrote:
I think they should be a good companion to my Topcon lenses.

+1


PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2015 3:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
The underrated Rokkor 45/2 wonderful and cheap
MC W.Rokkor-HH 35/1.8 heavy but fast and pretty sharp


The 35 mm f/1.8 is actually just as sharp as th MC PG 50 mm f/1.4. Nice lens. Heavy vignetting, though - even on APS-C !


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't remember my alpha converted HH 1.8 ever suffering any vignetting either on my A900 or A77


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
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.


Interesting. Since 6400k is equivalent to bright sun, to me, this means that Europeans prefer the warmth of early morning/late afternoon lighting, whereas the Japanese (and other Asians) prefer something closer to mid-day.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tervueren wrote:
Don't remember my alpha converted HH 1.8 ever suffering any vignetting either on my A900 or A77


Not if stopped down to f/2.8 or further. True. But heavy wide open, at least on my copy: MC W.Rokkor-HH 35 mm f/1.8 review


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

VLR wrote:
Tervueren wrote:
Don't remember my alpha converted HH 1.8 ever suffering any vignetting either on my A900 or A77


Not if stopped down to f/2.8 or further. True. But heavy wide open, at least on my copy: MC W.Rokkor-HH 35 mm f/1.8 review

That's the problem with reviews of older lenses, product variation especially with older glass as we are not aware of previous use/misuse although I've yet to find a really bad Minolta lens, I would like to say that yours had a problem but it might just as well be that mine was better or endured a kinder life lol, incidentally mine was ok wide open Smile


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tervueren wrote:
That's the problem with reviews of older lenses, product variation especially with older glass as we are not aware of previous use/misuse although I've yet to find a really bad Minolta lens, I would like to say that yours had a problem but it might just as well be that mine was better or endured a kinder life lol, incidentally mine was ok wide open Smile


Yeah. If you look at the picture of mine, you can certainly conclude that it barely survived the years Wink


PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2015 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The lenses i like most in the Minolta SR System (see also http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive):
* MC 2.8/21mm
* MC 2.5/28mm (radioactive)
* MC 1.8/35mm
* MC 1.2/58mm
* MD 1.7/85mm (or MD 2/85mm, if u prefer high micro contrast at f2)
* MD 2.5/100mm (5L)
* MC/MD 4/200mm (early MD only)

Minolta AF system (see also http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sony-af/objektive)
* AF 2.8/20mm
* AF 1.4/50mm
* AF 1.4/85mm G
* AF 2/100mm
* AF 2.8/200mm G HS
* AF 2.8/300mm G SSM
* AF 2.8/70-200mm G SSM

Greez, Stephan


PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
The lenses i like most in the Minolta SR System (see also http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive):
* MC 2.8/21mm
* MC 2.5/28mm (radioactive)
* MC 1.8/35mm
* MC 1.2/58mm
* MD 1.7/85mm (or MD 2/85mm, if u prefer high micro contrast at f2)
* MD 2.5/100mm (5L)
* MC/MD 4/200mm (early MD only)

Is there any reason other than the smoother focus rings to prefer the MC versions?
I've been trying to find the lightest versions (usually the MD-IIs), here's what I've got:
    MD 24/2.8 (MD-II version)
    MC 28/2.5 (MC-X version)
    MC 35/1.8 (MC-X version)
    MD 35/1.8 (MD-II version)
    MC 50/1.4 (MC-X version)
    MC 58/1.2 (MC-X version)
    MD 85/2.0 (MD-II version)
    MD 100/2.5 (MD-III version)
    MD 135/3.5 (MD-II verion)
    MD 200/4.0 (MD-I version)
    MD 200/2.8 (MD-II version)
    MD 300-S

I'll be selling these:
    MC 35/1.8
    MD 100/2.5
    MD 200/4


I guess it's time to get an A7...


PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2015 6:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boris_Akunin wrote:


I guess it's time to get an A7...


Indeed.... i feel the same! Just too many Minolta and Konica which mostly get used on film right now.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apart from the "usual" assortment of Minolta MC/MD lenses, plus these I've mentioned before:

Minolta MD 85mm F2

Minolta MD 100mm F4 Macro

I've recently acquired an MD 16mm F2.8 fisheye

Very, very nice on a Sony A7. I will post some shots.....