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

The 'kit prime' fight: 35/2.8 Konica vs Minolta
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 9:48 pm    Post subject: The 'kit prime' fight: 35/2.8 Konica vs Minolta Reply with quote

When you start to accumulate more and more lenses, it is time to put them in to the cage and decide, which one is better.

So, this the lens duel between the Konica Hexanon 35/2.8 (f22, last version) and the Minolta MD 35/2.8 (New MD, also last version) part1 is close range and wide open





Cropped a bit for identical framing.
Can you tell which is which?


PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no Konica lenses at all, but I do have a few Minolta that I like a lot, I like them for their warm colours, so I'll say second picture is the Minolta.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:
I have no Konica lenses at all, but I do have a few Minolta that I like a lot, I like them for their warm colours, so I'll say second picture is the Minolta.

That was a brave decision Lloydy Wink i have no clues, both images are really good.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think first is Minolta (due to higher contrast)

It would be easier to use more structured background though... Wink


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
I have no Konica lenses at all, but I do have a few Minolta that I like a lot, I like them for their warm colours, so I'll say second picture is the Minolta.

That was a brave decision Lloydy Wink i have no clues, both images are really good.


Ha, yes. Laughing and I agree. They are both very good lenses and I'd be happy with both. Perhaps the amount of Pinotage is making the colours of number 2 look warmer? Wink


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Never used the Konica. The Minolta usually shows vignetting, wide open, on 35mm.film, but the Nex would negate that, and the photos have been cropped anyway; so no clues there. Going by the sensor, Sonys are (usually) very neutral. Ah think Minolta' s warm colours are only really evident on film so ah'd go for the first photo as the Minolta - contrast + sharpness... Cool


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

radissimo77 wrote:
I think first is Minolta (due to higher contrast)



+1 !

I have both as well, but never made a side by side comparison.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

100% crops





1st Konica (very good) 2nd Minolta (superb)

The lighting could have changed just a little bit I've done it several times and this came out the best.
Part2 at infinity will come later.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have both lenses but not in the very last versions .
My Hexanon is never sharp in the extreme corners. The Minolta has an advantage here even if you won't notice it in the majority of the cases. (test on A7).
In general the late Rokkor MD or Minolta MD are very contrasty due to improvement in the coating. They are impressive..


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:
.... I like them for their warm colours, so I'll say second picture is the Minolta.


I second that.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the second one is Minolta.Why?

1.Warmer,more saturated colours
2.Sharper sides of the picture
I have 6 copies of Minolta 35/2.8 lenses (55mm,49mm,""plain"" Minolta 49mm) and two (EE and AE) copies of Konica 35/2.8.

Both Konicas fall apart towards sides of the picture,even at f8,whereas all Minoltas don't.This is not caused by adapter's shortcomings,but by,what I suppose,is bigger field curvature of Konica 35mm lenses.

Smile


Last edited by shapencolour on Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:02 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guys, we've already been told which is which. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My md 35/2,8 Of course only 5 elements, was plenty of CA to F/8, my zoom MD 35-70 at 35 mm was better than this lens. Didn't seem very good to me.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Basing on my experience with all 5/5 Minolta MD 35/2.8 lenses that I got (6 altogether - 3x MD Rokkor 35/2.8 55mm,2xMD Rokkor 35/2.8 49mm,2x"plain" Minolta MD 35/2.8 49mm),I would say that they are all very good and,suprisingly,often better than similar,more complex,optical constructions,offered by contemporary competitors.I like them for their IQ,compact size and feel,though I prefer more crisp images from much bigger,old fashioned MC W.Rokkor HH 35/1.8.
Sony A7+"plain"Minolta MD 35/2.8 wide open
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/951/med_U951I1428245670.SEQ.4.jpg
Sony A7 + "plain"Minolta MD 35/2.8 at f8
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/951/med_U951I1428245668.SEQ.3.jpg
Sony NEX5N+Minolta MD Rokkor 35/2.8 55mm at f4
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/951/U951I1384187149.SEQ.1.jpg
Sony NEX5N+Minolta MD Rokkor 35/2.8 55mm wide open
http://www.zeissimages.com/gallery/951/U951I1384186930.SEQ.4.jpg