| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 2:55 am Post subject: Minolta MD Rokkor 45mm/F2 |
 |
|
tb_a wrote:
Inspired from the thread about the MD 50/2 lens I've taken the predecessor lens on my today's dog walk. It was btw. the warmest November day in Austria since temperatures are measured (max. 24 centigrades).
This lens is a little bit smaller compared to it's successor but besides that not very different. Specifications and picture of the lens may be seen here: http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/153-minolta-45mm-f2
All pictures shot with my Ricoh GXR-M and converted in LR6. The used aperture varies between F2 and F5.6. Smaller apertures don't really increase any picture quality further.
For the pixel peepers a 100% crop of the first picture:
If anybody finds any major shortcomings he might keep them. 
It was said by another member that the 50mm sibling is the sharper lens. I don't believe that any longer. How would a "sharper" lens look like?
Maybe another lens delivers higher resolution but on the used camera you wouldn't see any difference. Maybe on a 50MP/FF camera. I don't know.
As always comments are welcome.
Cheers,
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012
Posts: 551
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
Impressive, indeed; I own that lens, but still miss the right adapter to test it. Thanks for sharing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
monkjason
Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 301
Location: Beijing, China
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
monkjason wrote:
In fact I think this one is better than Konica 40MM/F1.8. 
_________________
I like Hexanon and EBC.
Cameras: Pentax K01, Konica T3N chrome and black, Minolta XD11, Porst CR-7
Konica Lenses: UC Hexanon 35/2, UC Hexanon 28/1.8AE, UC Hexanon 15/2.8AE Fish-eye, UC Hexanon 80-200/4AE, UC Hexanon 45-100/3.5AE, UC Hexanon 400/5.6AE, FL-Hexanon 300/6.3AE, Hexanon 85/1.8AE, Hexanon 24/2.8 F22 Version, Hexanon 35/2AE, M-Hexanon 50/2, M-Hexanon 35/2
Minolta Lenses: MC Rokkor-X 35/1.8，MD Rokkor-X 50/1.2
Fujifilm Lenses: Porst UMC 50/1.2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012
Posts: 1840
Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
It isn't better or worse, maybe it is when you shoot test charts in a laboratory, but picture quality is what counts in the end!
Like the 2/50 this one is also a bit "forgotten". People always want the f/1.4 or f/1.2 versions and they completely forget that the joy of taking pictures isn't made by expensive equipment.
You can have so much fun with the "cheap" kitlenses from the old days!
_________________
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 |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| TrueLoveOne wrote: |
It isn't better or worse, maybe it is when you shoot test charts in a laboratory, but picture quality is what counts in the end!
|
I have no idea. The only Hexanons I have are for the Koni Omega 6X7 camera.
However, I know for sure that there are visibly worse lenses in this range around and I am not talking about test charts.
I would at least say that this Rokkor was a very good buy for 20 Euro including shipping earlier this year.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kryss
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Posts: 2169
Location: Canada
Expire: 2017-09-18
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kryss wrote:
Very nice Thomas... 
_________________
Do not trust Atoms....they make up everything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Ultrapix & Kryss
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uddhava
Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Posts: 3071
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-06-21
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uddhava wrote:
Nice results!
I often think of buying Minolta lenses even though I don't have a camera to use them on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7785
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I swapped some stuff with Ian ages ago and got one of these 45 / 2 Rokkors in the deal, and hardly used it as I reach for the 50 / 1.4 if Im having a Rokkor day, which is often. But I did take this lens out a few weeks ago and it surprised me. I think I shall be using it a bit more from now on.
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2927
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2015 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I had a minolta MD 50 f2 that I got with a bag of camera stuff for 20 dollars at a local 2nd hand shop. On my Canon 60D they were very nice but due to short flange distance I could not get even close to infinity. I swore I would try it again when I got a mirrorless. I have yet to follow through. I have been buying up the inexpensive Konica and Minoltas that give such great results on mirrorless (A7ii) and have been pleased with all that I have tried. I have this lens, the 45 F2 (I think) and will have to give it a try. Weather has been very crappy lately here though.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
Some great results.
I've had very good results with Minoltas on my a6000. Shots like yours got me curious about this lens. It seems to have a demand as prices range 35-60 USD.
Luckily, found one for a lot less. I also thought this was a very good performing pancake.
A Minolta collector on another forum touted the sharpness of the stupidly affordable MD III 50 f/2. So, I got one to try. And yes, cheaper than a pizza!
But looking at the images, it didn't eclipse the 45mm f/2. I thought the 45 was equally sharp, if not sharper. And preferred the rendering from the 45mm.
I also read (I think here) about the history of this lens....the claim was the 45mm and the Konica 40mm f/1.8 are the same lens. One marketed it at each end of the tolerance range. It's focal length is actually 42.5mm. Could be true given Konica and Minolta did merge.
But I do know the Hexanon 40mm f/1.8 was not made in-house by Konica, but commissioned Tokina to make it.
Some pics from my Rokkor 45mm at f/2:
 DSC05765_Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f2 by wNG 555, on Flickr
 DSC05775a_Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f2 by wNG 555, on Flickr
 DSC05763_Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f2 by wNG 555, on Flickr
This one should be at f/4:
 DSC05766_Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f2 by wNG 555, on Flickr
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
| Lloydy wrote: |
| I swapped some stuff with Ian ages ago and got one of these 45 / 2 Rokkors in the deal, and hardly used it as I reach for the 50 / 1.4 if Im having a Rokkor day, which is often. But I did take this lens out a few weeks ago and it surprised me. I think I shall be using it a bit more from now on. |
I missed that 2/45 after a while so I bought another one.
It is a better lens than the over-hyped Konica 1.8/40, on several fronts, most obviously in the bokeh which is very smooth and attractive to my eyes, whereas the Hexanon's bokeh is quite busy. I also find the Minolta has really vibrant, saturated colours.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2015 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| WNG555 wrote: |
Some great results.
|
Thank you, Sir! 
Your's are not bad as well......
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2015 1:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
| tb_a wrote: |
| WNG555 wrote: |
Some great results.
|
Thank you, Sir!
Your's are not bad as well...... |
Thanks!
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
awa54
Joined: 02 Jun 2018
Posts: 39
Location: VT, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
awa54 wrote:
This one is a bit of an odd lens out, not quite a pancake, but definitely not a cheap-o "kit" lens (at least not optically).
I liked this one on my film cameras and it's fantastic on M4/3. The modern Olympus glass *might* be sharper, but then again...
This is one of the lenses that keeps me contemplating an a7 purchase 
all images taken with Olympus OM-D E-M5
 slack chain and pentagons by David Wimmer, on Flickr
 Six and Five by David Wimmer, on Flickr
 P4170012 by David Wimmer, on Flickr
 P7050040 by David Wimmer, on Flickr
 P4170016 by David Wimmer, on Flickr
_________________
Mostly Minolta (Sony) but Bronica too 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/awa54/
Flickr Tamron 04B 200mm f/3.5 close focus group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3139513@N20/
Flickr Tamron 54B SP 300mm f/5.6 tele macro group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3051622@N20/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| awa54 wrote: |
| This is one of the lenses that keeps me contemplating an a7 purchase |
Certainly not a bad idea. Maybe I should test this lens on my recently acquired A7R2 as well. It's most probably likewise good as its successor (MD 50/2).
BTW, nice examples. Thanks for posting.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| awa54 wrote: |
...
This is one of the lenses that keeps me contemplating an a7 purchase
|
The Minolta MD 2/45mm is not the best lens on 24MP FF. It's design is a bit overstreched; the Konica AR 1.8/40mm would be a better choice. Even better than the Konica would be the MD-III 2/50mm. In addition to its very good corner resolution it is free from distortion (about 0.1%).
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
awa54
Joined: 02 Jun 2018
Posts: 39
Location: VT, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
awa54 wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| awa54 wrote: |
...
This is one of the lenses that keeps me contemplating an a7 purchase
|
The Minolta MD 2/45mm is not the best lens on 24MP FF. It's design is a bit overstreched; the Konica AR 1.8/40mm would be a better choice. Even better than the Konica would be the MD-III 2/50mm. In addition to its very good corner resolution it is free from distortion (about 0.1%).
Stephan |
Interesting... on M4/3 the 45/2 beats the 50/2 by a noticeable margin in the center and by a slightly lesser margin at the corners. I know that the smaller sensor benefits from utilizing the center of the lens' image circle, but the 16MP M4/3 sensor does have a significantly higher pixel density than the 24MP FF sensor, which should make it more revealing of ultimate optical resolution.
**I should note that I have both the early and late variants of the MD 50mm f/2 and three copies of the 45mm f/2. The early 50 seems like the better lens of my copies and my 45s are all indistinguishable from each other optically. Sadly, there doesn't seem to be an a7 of any stripe in my near future... though an a7R III would would be quite a step up from my current a900+OM-D E-M5 lineup.
_________________
Mostly Minolta (Sony) but Bronica too
https://www.flickr.com/photos/awa54/
Flickr Tamron 04B 200mm f/3.5 close focus group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3139513@N20/
Flickr Tamron 54B SP 300mm f/5.6 tele macro group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3051622@N20/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| awa54 wrote: |
| stevemark wrote: |
| awa54 wrote: |
...
This is one of the lenses that keeps me contemplating an a7 purchase
|
The Minolta MD 2/45mm is not the best lens on 24MP FF. It's design is a bit overstreched; the Konica AR 1.8/40mm would be a better choice. Even better than the Konica would be the MD-III 2/50mm. In addition to its very good corner resolution it is free from distortion (about 0.1%).
Stephan |
Interesting... on M4/3 the 45/2 beats the 50/2 by a noticeable margin in the center and by a slightly lesser margin at the corners. I know that the smaller sensor benefits from utilizing the center of the lens' image circle, but the 16MP M4/3 sensor does have a significantly higher pixel density than the 24MP FF sensor, which should make it more revealing of ultimate optical resolution.
**I should note that I have both the early and late variants of the MD 50mm f/2 and three copies of the 45mm f/2. The early 50 seems like the better lens of my copies and my 45s are all indistinguishable from each other optically. Sadly, there doesn't seem to be an a7 of any stripe in my near future... though an a7R III would would be quite a step up from my current a900+OM-D E-M5 lineup. |
I've just done a very quick comparison between the two lenses on my A7R2 42MP/FF camera at 100 ISO (infinity landscape only free hand wide open and at F5.6) and I would not be able to tell any difference, not even in pixel peeping mode. Sorry.
It may well be that if compared in a studio test scenery under controlled conditions one lens has the edge over the other but under normal conditions in real life photography I really doubt that anybody would be able to spot any difference without knowing before which picture was shot with which lens. At least that's my personal impression after watching the results on my 32 inch 4K monitor even in 100% view.
My initial judgement originally based on the Ricoh GXR-M APS-C camera hasn't changed therefore.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| tb_a wrote: |
I've just done a very quick comparison between the two lenses ... |
Which two lenses? MD 2/45 and MD 2/50mm? And if so, which computation of the MD 2/50mm - MD-I or MD-III?
| tb_a wrote: |
... on my A7R2 42MP/FF camera at 100 ISO (infinity landscape only free hand wide open and at F5.6) and I would not be able to tell any difference, not even in pixel peeping mode. Sorry. |
If you compare a MD-I 2/50mm and a MD 2/45mm, i would agree
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
awa54
Joined: 02 Jun 2018
Posts: 39
Location: VT, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
awa54 wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| tb_a wrote: |
I've just done a very quick comparison between the two lenses ... |
Which two lenses? MD 2/45 and MD 2/50mm? And if so, which computation of the MD 2/50mm - MD-I or MD-III?
| tb_a wrote: |
... on my A7R2 42MP/FF camera at 100 ISO (infinity landscape only free hand wide open and at F5.6) and I would not be able to tell any difference, not even in pixel peeping mode. Sorry. |
If you compare a MD-I 2/50mm and a MD 2/45mm, i would agree
Stephan |
Huh, my 50/2 MD-III must be a dud.
_________________
Mostly Minolta (Sony) but Bronica too
https://www.flickr.com/photos/awa54/
Flickr Tamron 04B 200mm f/3.5 close focus group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3139513@N20/
Flickr Tamron 54B SP 300mm f/5.6 tele macro group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3051622@N20/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| awa54 wrote: |
| stevemark wrote: |
| tb_a wrote: |
I've just done a very quick comparison between the two lenses ... |
Which two lenses? MD 2/45 and MD 2/50mm? And if so, which computation of the MD 2/50mm - MD-I or MD-III?
| tb_a wrote: |
... on my A7R2 42MP/FF camera at 100 ISO (infinity landscape only free hand wide open and at F5.6) and I would not be able to tell any difference, not even in pixel peeping mode. Sorry. |
If you compare a MD-I 2/50mm and a MD 2/45mm, i would agree
Stephan |
Huh, my 50/2 MD-III must be a dud. |
Sorry, I've forgotten to mention that I have only the MD-III 50mm/F2 lens. Therefore my comparison was between the MD-III 50mm/F2 and the MD-II 45mm/F2 and I have only 1 copy per lens.
Additionally I should also clarify that I've applied the existing lens profiles which are available for both lenses within Lightroom 6.14 and I primarily concentrated on sharpness across the frame; i.e. this was no scientific test by any means.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
awa54
Joined: 02 Jun 2018
Posts: 39
Location: VT, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
awa54 wrote:
Looks like we're into the realm of lenses that perform closely enough that sample variation may be the biggest difference... Although I would argue that the 50mm variants show marginally smoother bokeh than the 45, which many would perceive as a superior feature.
I wonder how a six bladed (or more) aperture would affect the overall rendering of the 45/2?
_________________
Mostly Minolta (Sony) but Bronica too
https://www.flickr.com/photos/awa54/
Flickr Tamron 04B 200mm f/3.5 close focus group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3139513@N20/
Flickr Tamron 54B SP 300mm f/5.6 tele macro group
https://www.flickr.com/groups/3051622@N20/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2018 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| awa54 wrote: |
| Looks like we're into the realm of lenses that perform closely enough that sample variation may be the biggest difference... |
That may well be. On the other hand we should not forget that the used camera/sensor plays also a very important role for the final picture quality. Therefore meaningful comparisons can only be made on the same camera-lens combinations.
I've realized that if I compare the pictures of the same lens on both of my FF cameras (Sony A850 24MP and Sony A7R2 42MP) the result may be quite different, particularly in pixel peeping mode. Most probably the existence of an anti-aliasing or low pass filter like in the A850 plays also a certain role for the individual subjective impression and not only the resolution of the sensor.
Last but not least we should never forget that the final pictures are composed by our brains based on our individual and most probably different "experience data bases" triggered by the signals delivered from our eyes. Most probably there we have the biggest "sample variations".
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
I have re-tested a few common 50mm / 45mm f2 lenses on the 24MP Sony A7. While my first copy of the MD 2/45mm was visibly worse than all other lenses tested, a second copy (result shown here) was on par with lenses such as the Minolta MC-X/MD-I 2/50mm or the Hexanon AR 1.8/50mm.
The MD-III 2/50mm, however, is clearly the sharpest of the bunch, and it has the least CAs. And, in addition, at 0.1% it is virtually distortion-free.
I wonder how this lens would compare to a late Summicron 2/50mm, be it M or R ...
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
