| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eriksen
Joined: 15 Nov 2016
Posts: 153
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:46 am Post subject: Rokkor 28mm lenses. Which is best? |
 |
|
Eriksen wrote:
Are all of these lenses of the same quality? I see they have diffent letters after Rokkor. Which of them are regarded as the best? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3669
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
MC/MD has to do with metering
The other letters refers to the number of elements and groups of elements that are glued together see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rokkor.
I love the Rokkor SI 28/2.5 it was available as both MC metal focus ring and Rokkor-X style focus rings, they have a tendency to yellow, so you would likely have to UV treat it to get the most out of it, it has lots of character wide open, and more modern as you stop down. I have a few shots tagged in my Flickr feed from it.
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012
Posts: 1840
Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
Al of the Minolta 28mm lenses are good. I have all the different versions, the Rokkor-SI mentioned by Lightshow is indeed a very impressive lens which i like a lot. The 7-element 28mm is also very good, but somehow it lacks the "wow"-factor in it's pictures (for me that is, ymmv of course!).
The least interesting version is the last 5 element MD lens i think.
This is a good starting point if you want to know about the differences and variations: http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive
_________________
My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
I have three 28mms Rokkor which I use on Sony A7 FF.
The MC Rokkor 28mm f2.5 SI is the best of them on this camera.
It is sharp . Once stopped down the quality is very good across the frame. CA are low .
Beautiful mechanic.
The only issue is that one internal element is yellowish. I loose 0.7 EV and the WB has to be modified in PP.
On this forum , I remember a thread explaining how to solve this problem. Unfortunately you have to dismantle the lens to have access to this element and treat it with UV.
The treatments , which I tried on the whole lens, were unsuccessful.
Anyway I can use it as it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
I know the Minolta lenses quite well, and i haven compared more than a dozen 28mm using the Sony A7II. When it comes to detail resolution, the MC/MD 3.5/28mm [5/5] as well as the second version of the 2/28mm are best. If you prefer the "1960ies" look, then you go for lenses such as the MC 3.5/28 [7/7] or the already mentioned MC 2.5/28mm. The latter is radiactive and usually has a quite yellow color cast.
The first version of the 2/28mm is better than the early [7/7] 3.5/28mm, but clearly not as good as the later 3.5/28mm and 2/28mm.
The 2.8/28mm [7/7] is somehow in between.
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 3462
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
| memetph wrote: |
On this forum , I remember a thread explaining how to solve this problem. Unfortunately you have to dismantle the lens to have access to this element and treat it with UV.
The treatments , which I tried on the whole lens, were unsuccessful.
Anyway I can use it as it is. |
I have this lens and solved the yellowing problem like this:
http://forum.mflenses.com/fast-lens-de-yellowing-without-a-uv-lamp-t68896.html
_________________
"I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
devinw
Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Posts: 207
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
devinw wrote:
I had one and fixed the yellowing too. You can see here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/mc-rokkor-si-28mm-f-2-5-radioactive-repair-attem-t76092,highlight,%2Brokkor+%2B28mm.html
It's a very good lens. 
_________________
Camera: Sony a6300
E-Mount: Zeiss/Sony 16-70 f/4, Samyang 12mm f/2
Rokkor: MD PG 50mm f1.4, MD 100mm Macro f3.5, MD 135mm f2.8, MD Zoom 35-70mm f3.5, MD Zoom 75-150 f4
Canon FD: nFD 50mm f1.4, Tokina AT-X 100-300mm f4
My Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/westonde/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
In my experience, the best Minolta 28 mm lens is SR mount, is the 2,5/28.
The worst, the MC 3,5/28
In my taste, with my eyes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
It is the thread I was mentioning.
Last edited by memetph on Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:39 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
| DigiChromeEd wrote: |
| memetph wrote: |
On this forum , I remember a thread explaining how to solve this problem. Unfortunately you have to dismantle the lens to have access to this element and treat it with UV.
The treatments , which I tried on the whole lens, were unsuccessful.
Anyway I can use it as it is. |
I have this lens and solved the yellowing problem like this:
http://forum.mflenses.com/fast-lens-de-yellowing-without-a-uv-lamp-t68896.html |
I have this lamp which I used for a Takumar 55mm.
How long did it take with the Rokkor ?
Have you noticed that the pictures have a different WB ? It helps the demonstration.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| papasito wrote: |
In my experience, the best Minolta 28 mm lens is SR mount, is the 2,5/28.
The worst, the MC 3,5/28
In my taste, with my eyes. |
Can you write a bit more in detail? There are, for instance, three different optical calculations of the MC 3.5/28mm, one with 67mm filter thread, the two others with 55mm filter thread - and they come in five different variations:
1) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 67 mm filter (MC-I)
2) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 55 mm filter (MC-I, MC-II, MC-X)
3) MC 3.5/35mm [5/5], 55 mm filter (MC-X)
See here on my website: http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/148-minolta-28mm-f35
I have tested all of them on 16MP APS-C and 24MP FF. Using 24MP FF, the last [5/5] calculation certainly is quite good. The others give more a "1960-look", especially wide open. The 24MP test results are not published, the 16MP results can be found here:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/330-nex-5n-und-28mm-objektive
The 2.5/28mm mechanically is a joy to use; focusing is smooth and precise. On APS-C the lens is among the best 28mm MF lenses from Minolta (only the MD-III 2/28mm is better), but on FF things look a bit different. All three versions (MC-I, MC-II and MC-X) share the same optical formula:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/146-minolta-28mm-f25
The MC/MD 2.8/28mm exists in several versions, most of them share the same [7/7] formula (MC-X, MD-I, MD-II, MD-III). There is, however, a late MD-III with only five lenses [5/5]:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/147-minolta-28mm-f28
The 2/28mm can be found in four variants. The first three (MC-X, MD-I, MD-II) have the same [10/9] optics, the latter (MD-III) is a [9/9] construction. It is much smaller and ... better than the older versions!!
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/145-minolta-28mm-f2
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
I have the MC 28 3.5 SG (55mm) which is definitely not as good as the 2.5 .
I have the MD W 28 3.5(49mm) which a good lens but with high CA in the corners.
I prefer my MC 28 2.5 to them .
I'll try to make a comparison between the MD , the MC 2.5 and my Pentax beloved K 28 3.5. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| papasito wrote: |
In my experience, the best Minolta 28 mm lens is SR mount, is the 2,5/28.
The worst, the MC 3,5/28
In my taste, with my eyes. |
Can you write a bit more in detail? There are, for instance, three different optical calculations of the MC 3.5/28mm, one with 67mm filter thread, the two others with 55mm filter thread - and they come in five different variations:
1) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 67 mm filter (MC-I)
2) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 55 mm filter (MC-I, MC-II, MC-X)
3) MC 3.5/35mm [5/5], 55 mm filter (MC-X)
See here on my website: http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/148-minolta-28mm-f35
I have tested all of them on 16MP APS-C and 24MP FF. Using 24MP FF, the last [5/5] calculation certainly is quite good. The others give more a "1960-look", especially wide open. The 24MP test results are not published, the 16MP results can be found here:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/330-nex-5n-und-28mm-objektive
The 2.5/28mm mechanically is a joy to use; focusing is smooth and precise. On APS-C the lens is among the best 28mm MF lenses from Minolta (only the MD-III 2/28mm is better), but on FF things look a bit different. All three versions (MC-I, MC-II and MC-X) share the same optical formula:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/146-minolta-28mm-f25
The MC/MD 2.8/28mm exists in several versions, most of them share the same [7/7] formula (MC-X, MD-I, MD-II, MD-III). There is, however, a late MD-III with only five lenses [5/5]:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/147-minolta-28mm-f28
The 2/28mm can be found in four variants. The first three (MC-X, MD-I, MD-II) have the same [10/9] optics, the latter (MD-III) is a [9/9] construction. It is much smaller and ... better than the older versions!!
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/145-minolta-28mm-f2
Stephan |
No, Stephan. Minolta lenses, that I use from the 60's, never called my attention to know one version or other when they are in front of my camera.
Some of them are very good, yes, of course. But not inside my historical interest, like anothers brands are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3669
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| papasito wrote: |
In my experience, the best Minolta 28 mm lens is SR mount, is the 2,5/28.
The worst, the MC 3,5/28
In my taste, with my eyes. |
Can you write a bit more in detail? There are, for instance, three different optical calculations of the MC 3.5/28mm, one with 67mm filter thread, the two others with 55mm filter thread - and they come in five different variations:
1) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 67 mm filter (MC-I)
2) MC 3.5/35mm [7/7], 55 mm filter (MC-I, MC-II, MC-X)
3) MC 3.5/35mm [5/5], 55 mm filter (MC-X)
|
You wrote 35mm...
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antoine
Joined: 08 Jan 2016
Posts: 298
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Antoine wrote:
Thanks Steven.I have checked:
- My 28mm/2 is the old version (heavy and bad) 
- My 28mm/3.5 MC is the 5/5 version (220g) good and light (got it in a bunch)
I need to use the 3.5 lens then. 
_________________
Antoine
Sony A6000 APS-C and Sony A7 Rii
Minolta Fisheye MD Rokkor 7.5 mm f4, Fisheye MD 16 f2.8 MD R 17mm f4, MD R 20mm f2.8, MC VFC & MDIII 24mm f2.8, MD 28mm f2.0 &3.5, MD II 35mm 1.8, MD 45mm f2.0, MD 50mm f 1.2 & MD I f1.4, MC PG 58mm 1.2, MD 85mm f2.0, MD R 85mm f2.8 Varisoft, MC 85mm f1.7 MD R 100mm f2.5, MD R 100mm f4.0 macro, MD III 135mm f2.8, MD R 200mm f2.8 & 4.0, RF 250mm f5.6, MD 300mm f4.5, MD APO 400 mm f5.6, RF 500mm f8.0, RF 800mm f8.0 *2 300-s and 300-l
100 mm f4 macro bellows (5/4)
Vivitar 17mm f3.5, Elicar 300mm mirror f5.6, Zhongi turbo ii
Sigma 16mm f 2.8 fish eye
Zooms:24-50 mm f4, 35-70 mm f3.5 macro, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5, 50-135 f 3.5, 70-210 f4 and MD APO 100-500 mm f8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012
Posts: 1840
Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
| Antoine wrote: |
- My 28mm/2 is the old version (heavy and bad)
|
I wouldn't say bad..... if you read the comments below the article on artaphot (http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/145-minolta-28mm-f2) you'll notice that some say it's the newer 9/9 version that's "worse" compared to the old 10/9 version. Some things are in the eye of the beholder.
Stephan, if you're reading this: mine does not look like the 2 on your website, i'm guessing it's the MD-II version.
_________________
My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
I have 28/2.8 MD-II (7/7) and 28/3.5 MD-II. Both are good. Can't say anything more than that.
_________________
my flickr stream
Last edited by miran on Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:06 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| Lightshow wrote: |
...
You wrote 35mm... |
Thanks for correcting that error!
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| TrueLoveOne wrote: |
I wouldn't say bad..... if you read the comments below the article on artaphot (http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/145-minolta-28mm-f2) you'll notice that some say it's the newer 9/9 version that's "worse" compared to the old 10/9 version. Some things are in the eye of the beholder. |
Yes and no . Of course, in typical "f2" situations one usually doesnt need perfect corner resolution. On the other hand: i recently was using the Zeiss Apo-Distagon 1.4/28mm for architectural work, in Rome, during twilight. It was a relief to work witout tripod, simply usig f1.4 and ISO 200 - 400 for perfect image quality (the weight of the lens was a pain, though).
There was one person at the Minolta-Forum (fwiesenberg) who constantly was belittling the MD-III lenses. At that time (around 2005-2010) there was little to say from my side, but in the mean time i have gathered quite some experience with >110 MC/MD lenses using the Sony A7, A7II and A7RII. Nowadays i simply think he was wrong.
| TrueLoveOne wrote: |
Stephan, if you're reading this: mine does not look like the 2 on your website, i'm guessing it's the MD-II version.
|
I have never used this version myself. It's published lens section is the same as with the MC 2/28mm, but of course they may be small changes between MC and MD-I/MD-II.
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Stephan,
The MDIII and the late MDII 28 3.5 ( 49mm) are the same , aren't they? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
walter g
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 2463
Location: NC, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
walter g wrote:
Out of the half dozen or so Minolta 28mm lenses I have, my favorite and best one is the
Minolta MDiii 28mm f2.8 5/5 version.
_________________
Main cameras
Panasonic G5,Nikon J1,Pentax Q10,Sony Nex 6
Minolta MC W SI 2.5/28, MD 2.8/28, MC W SG 3.5/28, MC Celtic 3.5/28, MC W HG 2.8/35, MD Celtic 2.8/35, QE 4/35, Rokkor X 2/45, MC Rokkor X PG 1.4/50, MC Rokkor X PG 1.7/50, MD Rokkor X 1.7/50, MD 2/50, MC Rokkor PF 1.7/55, MC Rokkor PF 1.9/55, Auto Tele Rokkor PG 2.8/135, MC Tele Rokkor QD 3.5/135, TC 4/135, MC Celtic 4/200, MC Tele Rokkor PE 4.5/200
MD 28-70 f3.5-4.8, MD Macro 35-70 f3.5, Md 70-210 f4, MD Rokkor X 75-200 f4.5, MD 100-200 f5.6
Nikon Nikkor 4/20, O Auto 2/35, S Auto 1.4/50..... Miranda Auto 2.8/28, Auto 2.8/35, Auto 1.4/50, Auto EC 1.4/50, Auto 1.8/50, Auto EC 1.8/50,Auto 1.9/50, Auto 3.5/135
Various Soligor,Sun,Fujita,Komura,Spitatone, etc. Lenses
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| memetph wrote: |
Stephan,
The MDIII and the late MDII 28 3.5 ( 49mm) are the same , aren't they? |
I guess so - but since e. g. the MD-II and the MD-III versions of the 3.5/35-70mm are not the same, we can't be completely sure. I don't have the MD-III 3.5/28mm; the lens seems to be fairly uncommon here in Switzerland.
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
| walter g wrote: |
Out of the half dozen or so Minolta 28mm lenses I have, my favorite and best one is the
Minolta MDiii 28mm f2.8 5/5 version. |
I have several too and my best is the AF 2.8/28, which is probably the same lens as the MD-III.
It's just superb on my a850, I love it.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| memetph wrote: |
Stephan,
The MDIII and the late MDII 28 3.5 ( 49mm) are the same , aren't they? |
I guess so - but since e. g. the MD-II and the MD-III versions of the 3.5/35-70mm are not the same, we can't be completely sure. I don't have the MD-III 3.5/28mm; the lens seems to be fairly uncommon here in Switzerland.
Stephan |
I made a confusion . You were talking about the 28 2.8 MDIII ( 5/5) not about the f3.5.
Yesterday I tested my MD II 28 3.5 . It is inferior to the 2.5 SI and the Pentax K 3.5. Corners are weaker and there is some CA.
The 2.5 SI is really good. I have to get rid of this yellow cast which generates too much work in PP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012
Posts: 1840
Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
This topic made me think about wide open performance again, i couldn't find any samples i had already made, so i got curious and had to try my 2.0/28 wide open.
Following 2 shots were made on a Sony A7, straight from camera STD-JPEG, no processing whatsoever.
1.
2.
_________________
My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
