| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2015 7:10 pm Post subject: Testing Minolta MD (W.Rokkor) 35mm/2.8 |
 |
|
miran wrote:
I recently bought yet another cheap lens I don't need. 
Minolta MD W.Rokkor 35mm/2.8 is a solid lens, not special in any way (aperture, mfd) but good enough for most things. I like it. It's small, light, sharp from wide open and a very versatile lens on a crop camera I use. I going to put it on a film camera as well, should be very nice. Btw, I can't understand how it's possible that some lenses with similar specifications and lower mechanical and optical quality (like czj flektogons for example) can reach such insane prices on the used market while a lens like this can be had for 30€, give or take.
The only downsides are the not especially short MFD (~30cm), quite noticeable field curvature (a little softer corners when focused at the center or the frame) and it doesn't handle shooting into the sun very gracefully to say the least.
The lens:
 Minolta MD W.Rokkor 35mm/2.8 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
A few test shots (not straight out of camera, processed liberally but nothing extreme):
1. Portrait:
 NEX6_0002_6867 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
2. Landscape:
 NEX6_0002_6876 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
3. Abstract:
 NEX6_0002_6887 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
4. Closeup:
 NEX6_0002_6981 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
5. Mid distance bokeh:
 NEX6_0002_6944 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
6. Flare:
 NEX6_0002_6988 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
A few more in the flickr album: https://flic.kr/s/aHskjM9ZgQ
_________________
my flickr stream
Last edited by miran on Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:21 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57849
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2015 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Teo
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Posts: 1079
Location: Romania
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2015 9:54 pm Post subject: Re: Testing Minolta MD W.Rokkor 35mm/2.8 |
|
|
Teo wrote:
| miran wrote: |
I recently bought yet another cheap lens I don't need.
Btw, I can't understand how it's possible that some lenses with similar specifications and lower mechanical and optical quality (like czj flektogons for example) can reach such insane prices on the used market while a lens like this can be had for 30€, give or take.] |
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!! 
_________________
Cheers ,Teo
( former yinyangbt )
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189381640@N08/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/44698004@N02/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2015 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Very nice pics with good colors and details.
It seems to me that you did work with the CA. I guess that this lens suffer from longitudinal CA or Spherochromatism.
Am I wrong?
Thanks for sharing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2015 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| papasito wrote: |
Very nice pics with good colors and details.
It seems to me that you did work with the CA. I guess that this lens suffer from longitudinal CA or Spherochromatism.
Am I wrong?
Thanks for sharing. |
I think you are wrong. I didn't notice any visible CA's with the Rokkor 35/2.8 lens.
You may check also this tests:
http://forum.mflenses.com/35mm-2-8-rokkor-vs-nikkor-vs-mir-37-t72410,highlight,+rokkor++35.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/test-of-different-35mm-lenses-on-aps-c-sensor-t71258,highlight,+35mm++test.html
I think it's one of the best old 35mm lenses and very capable to deliver excellent pictures.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2015 7:26 am Post subject: Re: Testing Minolta MD W.Rokkor 35mm/2.8 |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| miran wrote: |
Btw, I can't understand how it's possible that some lenses with similar specifications and lower mechanical and optical quality (like czj flektogons for example) can reach such insane prices on the used market while a lens like this can be had for 30€, give or take.
|
That's one of the miracles of the used lenses market. 
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2015 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
I don't notice any problems with CA either. Nothing has been done about CA in these photos.
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
So, I was very pleased with this lens but then for some reason I sold it (someone made a very good offer). Regretted it the moment I let it go, so eventually I bought another. The first one was MD-II type (W.Rokkor on the nameplate), the new one is MD-III (or plain MD). The same optically and it's in very good condition so I'm happy again.
The lens:
 Minolta MD 35mm/2.8 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
1.
 NEX6_0003_3749 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
2.
 NEX6_0003_3794 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
3.
 NEX6_0003_3817 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
4.
 NEX6_0003_3863 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
5.
 NEX6_0003_3869 by Miran Amon, on Flickr
Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHskJc4Xzu
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 3462
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
 
_________________
"I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ks73
Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 45
Location: Kokkola, Finland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
ks73 wrote:
Very nice!
_________________
Kalle
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/140575793@N08/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coase
Joined: 08 Aug 2016
Posts: 99
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
coase wrote:
Along with the FD 35mm f2.8 and f2s, these are the great bargains of the manual lens 35mm world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danikatia wrote:
_________________
Daniele |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tf
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tf wrote:
The 'collectors test' or "LensRomantic" - comparison of two different copies of Minolta New-MD 35/2.8
And a few photos additionally.
Like this one:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 834
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2020 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Fully agree with the findings in this thread.
My experience is that the FD 35mm2,8 has flatter field and somewhat better resolution close to minimum focus distance but that the MD is sharper to the corners when field curvature has been taken into account.
This is a pic on A7II.
[img] [/url]Eglise de Saint-Cloud by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 834
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2020 5:16 pm Post subject: Minolta MDII 35mm 2,8 Black & White |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
And this is for black and white.
[img] [/url]Tempête sur Paris | Storm on Paris by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 1247
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2020 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eddieitman wrote:
I have to say i love the Minolta 35mm F2.8 and think that it is highly underrated It has nice Bokeh IMHO controls flaring very well, and overall feels well built and certainly has the colours
Some Samples from mine, on the Sony A7
#1
#2
#3
#4
_________________
My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Disjointed
Joined: 06 Jul 2020
Posts: 13
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2021 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Disjointed wrote:
| lumens pixel wrote: |
Fully agree with the findings in this thread.
My experience is that the FD 35mm2,8 has flatter field and somewhat better resolution close to minimum focus distance but that the MD is sharper to the corners when field curvature has been taken into account.
|
Maybe we just see things the same way and different from another who see's it some other person's way...I've used the Convex and many other Canon 35's, I preferred the SSC 35 F2 for....."Tone" and the Resolution, which means better Dynamics but when I compare my Minolta results the best way to see what I'm expressing is in micro contrast and the Minolta appears
sharper...so the Minolta has better overall contrast control emphasis, the Canon more color control emphasis and in Physics, for every gain you must give up something so my point is something in the middle, a splitter of split hairs would be a perfect 35 for me ... one thing I know the unwanted step-child Minolta 7-6 had going for it was ..."coma" over the later 5-5, what is an advancement if in reality it cost something....that's the question? ,,, is the advancement worth the cost of what was sacrificed for the gain?
If I used a manual 50mm, focus was a challenge....if I use a 50mm on m4/3 it's a 100mm and I can zoom in 20x to focus but it's not film is it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NikonAIS
Joined: 23 Mar 2014
Posts: 215
Location: Pawleys Island, SC, US
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2021 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
NikonAIS wrote:
Some very nice images. For some reason Minolta never did all that good a job at coating their lenses. Most were rather ghost prone. I started with Minolta in 1972 but was not satisfied with the lenses so I switch to Nikon in 1973 after a year and a half and have never looked back.
_________________
Nikon FTn, F2A, F3HP, F4E, F5, Nikkormat FT2, Nikon FE-2, Nikonos V, D850, D500 and D750. 8mm f/2.8 AIS, 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye AIS, 15mm f/3.5 AIS, 18mm f/3.5 AIS, 24mm f/2 AIS, 28mm f/2 AIS, 28mm f/3.5 Nikkor H non-AI, 25-50mm f/4 AIS, 28mm f/3.5 and 35mm f/2.8 UW-Nikkors, 35mm f/1.4 AIS, 50mm f/1.4 AIS, 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S, 50-135mm f/3.5 AIS, 55mm f/2.8 AIS Micro w/ PK-13, 80-200mm f/4 AIS, 85mm f/1.4 AIS, 105mm f/1.8 AIS, 10.5 cm f/2.5 non-AI, 105mm f/2.8 AIS Micro, 135mm f/2 AIS, 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS, 200mm f/4 Micro AIS and PN-11, 200mm f/2 ED-IF AIS, 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF AIS, 400mm f/2.8 ED-IF AIS, 500mm f/8 Reflex, 600mm f/4 ED-IF AIS, TC14B and TC300.
Hasselblad 500CM with PM-90 eye level finder and assorted A12 and A16 backs, Carl Zeiss C and CF T* 40mm f/4. 60mm f/3.5. 80mm f/2.8, 150mm f/4 and 250mm f/5.6
AF lenses are for sissies! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
