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

Rokkor 28mm lenses. Which is best?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This one is for sale now for about 32 usd included shipping. Will that be a good deal?

https://www.finn.no/bap/forsale/ad.html?finnkode=93953437&ref=conversation&fks=93953437


PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd say the 28/2.5, even bettere than the later 28/2


PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
I'd say the 28/2.5, even bettere than the later 28/2


I'd not say - but let's wait a few days until i have pubished the results from three 2.5/28mm and from three 2/28mm (later version) Wink


Stephan


PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The MDIII 28 f2.0. How could you possibly find 3 versions? I could only find an earlier MD W rokkor version


PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

memetph wrote:

...
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.


I'll have to check Minolta MC and MD 3.5/28mm [5/5] performance again. Both computations of the earlier MC 3.5/28mm [7/7] are softer than the later [5/5], though. Tomorrow i'll have some time;)

Yesterday i compared the MC-X 2.5/28mm, MC-X 2/28mm, and MD-III 2/28mm for corner resolution on 24MP FF. The 2.5/28mm was worst, the MC 2/28mm visibly better and the MD-III 2/28mm was best. Since i have three 2.5/28mm (MC-I, MC-II, and MC-X), and since they behave nearly identically, i'm pretty sure the findings about the 2.5/28mm are valid.

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have perhaps a very good copy. I have to say that I judge corner sharpness of those 28mm when I stop them down ( f5.6 or fCool
I just bought a MD 28 2,8 ( 49mm) as I am looking for a good compact 28mm to marry my Rollei Planar 50 1.8 and Sonar 85 2,8.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

memetph wrote:


... as I am looking for a good compact 28mm to marry my Rollei Planar 50 1.8 and Sonar 85 2,8.


Zeiss C/Y Distagon 2.8/28? or the Distagon 2.5/25mm, which in reality is a 2.8/26mm?

They both have a bit field curvature, but other aberrations (including CAs) are rather well corrected. I would not consider them "extraordinary", but both are solid performers, and both have slightly less CAs than the average Minolta/Canon/Nikon MF lens of that era.

I recently used the Apo-Distagon 1.4/28mm ("Otus") and the C/Y Distagon 2.8/28mm side by side.
At f11 on 24PM FF, there was not much difference any more.

Stephan


PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Antoine wrote:
The MDIII 28 f2.0. How could you possibly find 3 versions? I could only find an earlier MD W rokkor version


Sorry, my writing was not clear! I meant "three copies" of that [9/9] computation.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have added some information on the 28mm Rokkors on my website, using the 24MP FF Sony A7:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/506-minolta-mc-md-28mm-lenses-on-24mp-full-frame

All eight known computations are described:

* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 67mm filter (AR / MC-I)
* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 55mm filter (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 3.5/28mm [5/5] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [7/7] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [5/5] (MD-III)
* 2.5/28mm [9/7] (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 2/28mm [10/9], floating element (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II)
* 2/28mm [9/9], floating element (MD-III; same optical formula as later AF 2/28mm)

Stephan


PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
I have added some information on the 28mm Rokkors on my website, using the 24MP FF Sony A7:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/506-minolta-mc-md-28mm-lenses-on-24mp-full-frame

All eight known computations are described:

* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 67mm filter (AR / MC-I)
* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 55mm filter (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 3.5/28mm [5/5] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [7/7] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [5/5] (MD-III)
* 2.5/28mm [9/7] (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 2/28mm [10/9], floating element (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II)
* 2/28mm [9/9], floating element (MD-III; same optical formula as later AF 2/28mm)

Stephan


The MD-III 28mm f2 is the best of these lenses, but how is it compared to the Rokkor SI 28/2.5 as somebody regarded as the best in the start of this thread?


PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eriksen wrote:
stevemark wrote:
I have added some information on the 28mm Rokkors on my website, using the 24MP FF Sony A7:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/506-minolta-mc-md-28mm-lenses-on-24mp-full-frame

All eight known computations are described:

* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 67mm filter (AR / MC-I)
* 3.5/28mm [7/7], 55mm filter (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 3.5/28mm [5/5] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [7/7] (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II / MD-III)
* 2.8/28mm [5/5] (MD-III)
* 2.5/28mm [9/7] (MC-I / MC-II / MC-X)
* 2/28mm [10/9], floating element (MC-X / MD-I / MD-II)
* 2/28mm [9/9], floating element (MD-III; same optical formula as later AF 2/28mm)

Stephan


The MD-III 28mm f2 is the best of these lenses, but how is it compared to the Rokkor SI 28/2.5 as somebody regarded as the best in the start of this thread?


I have published two tests with the 28mm Rokkors:
* 28mm Rokkors on 16 MP APS-C http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/330-nex-5n-und-28mm-objektive
* 28mm Rokkors on 24 MP FF http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/506-minolta-mc-md-28mm-lenses-on-24mp-full-frame

Both tests include the Rokkor SI 28/2.5 (MC-I, MC-II, and MC-X versions shown in the first test, only MC-X version shown in the second test). You may want to look at them again Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let me share my five cents among the huge amount of 28mm lenses tests:

This is a "fresh" Smile battle between:
Rokkor MC I 28mm 1:3.5
Rokkor MC II 28mm 1:3.5
Rokkor MC II 28mm 1:2.5
New-MD (MD III) 28mm 1:3.5



PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I own an MC 28 2,5 and a md II 28 3,5.

In the central area the 2,5 is stunning and far exceeds an A7II sensor.

The 3,5 seems somehow behind since corner sharpness is apparently not much better and central sharpness a little bit lower. However not the same blur as the SI. It is all about field curvature on the 3,5 and if you focus for the corner even f 4 is very nice.

Lenses to be used according to their characteristics. When I travel I tend to grab the 3,5 for weight.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would also recommend not to disregard 24 35 3,5 MD zoom since central sharpness is also excellent. Angles are not perfect and f6,7 is a plus but then you have versatility.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've only own the 7-element 28mm f2.8 version. But it seems to do great. I really like it, though having the later version with 49mm filter ring would be convenient to match my 50mm and 135mm.



Last edited by gaeger on Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:03 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2020 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't tried all of them.
However, my best 28mm are the Minolta 28mm f/2.5 SI and Vivitar 28mm f/2 Close Focus made by Komine which isn't a Minolta but can be found in Minolta mount. I use both on APS-C so I can't say how corner sharpness is on FF.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No mention of the Leica M mount 28 for the CLE ??

p.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2020 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

paulhofseth wrote:
No mention of the Leica M mount 28 for the CLE ??

p.


The question is the general usefulness of such RF wide angle lenses on mirrorless digital cameras. Several digital sensors suffer from the short distance betw. rear lens and sensor.
The lens itself may perform very nicely on film but maybe troublesome on specific digital cameras. A general statement about it's performance is therefore rather difficult.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssswwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiissssssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......................................

Last edited by Mr. Disjointed on Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:35 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 7:23 pm    Post subject: 28M works on Leitz Reply with quote

Further to the comment about digital devices and the Minolta M mount 28mm for the CLE-;

I tried it on my Leitz Lmount TL camera. No electronic corrections, since no coding on the lens; colours & corner sharpness & worked as well as with my 50mm summicron. Admittedly the TL camera has a smaller sensor than the digital Leitz SL so the extremities of the image circle on that body may turn out to be different to results on film.

p.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


Ah I now understand why you say the 28 mm 2.5 is the best... the best of the 3 you have...

But not as good as the MD III 28 f 2 though


PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After some more use it seems to me that the outbound field curvature of the MDIII 28 3,5 get reduced at long distances, so typical landscape use.

That seems to be a smart decision from the designers since I do not foresee many cases where you would take a picture of a flat subject near MFD.

At F6,7 8 corners are really fine but one must remember that like most Minolta's wide angles I have tested there is focus shift and focusing at working aperture brings in a lot of sharpness.

So, considering these aspects, it seems to me that last MD 3,5 is a real bargain without compromises quality-wise.