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

Canon nFD35/2 vs Minolta MD35/1.8 & MD35/2.8 [UPDATE!]
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which one should I sell?
Canon nFD 35mm f/2
33%
 33%  [ 4 ]
Minolta MD 35mm f/1.8
50%
 50%  [ 6 ]
Minolta MD 35mm f/2.8
16%
 16%  [ 2 ]
Total Votes : 12



PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:25 am    Post subject: Canon nFD35/2 vs Minolta MD35/1.8 & MD35/2.8 [UPDATE!] Reply with quote
This one's a bit more extensive than the others, I'll have to split it into parts.

UPDATE: I've added some test shots at a distance (~70m) below

Canon nFD 35mm f/2 (245g, 63 x 46 mm)
Minolta MD 35mm f/1.8 (MD-II version, 235g, 64 x 48 mm)
Minolta MD 35mm f/2.8 (MD-III version, 170g, 64 x 38 mm)

note: If the crops aren't displayed right (above each other rather than next to each other), that might be due to your chosen "Board Style". The "mflenses" style (which is the default if you're not logged in) inserts a line break for some reason, the other 3 styles don't.


[PART 1/6]

These three aren't quite the same focal length, this should make it a bit clearer:

Focused to infinity (at f/11):
Canon 35/2 || Minolta 35/1.8 || Minolta 35/2.8

(click for full resolution)

Focused to ~40cm (at f/11):
Canon 35/2 || Minolta 35/1.8 || Minolta 35/2.8

(click for full resolution)


Scene & crops - nFD 35/2:


Scene & crops - MD 35/1.8:


Scene & crops - MD 35/2.8:


Sharpening:

(no sharpening on export)


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/1.8 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/2 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/2.4 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/2.8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/2.8 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/2.8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/3.4 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/3.4 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/4 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4.8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4.8 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/4.8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/5.6 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/5.6 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/5.6 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/6.7 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/6.7 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/6.7 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/8 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/8 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/9.5 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/9.5 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/9.5 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/11 - focus in the center


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/11 - focus in the center


Canon 35/2 - f/11 - focus in the center



The two Minolta lenses appear to have significant amounts of field curvature (at least at close distances).

Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:27 pm; edited 5 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Canon is clearly better for taking pictures of test scenes. I wonder if it's any different when focusing near infinity and if that's even important to you. If I had to sell one of these, it would be one of the Minoltas. If you're not into building a collection, then I'd sell the 1.8. It will get you more money to buy more Canon lenses. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
The Canon is clearly better for taking pictures of test scenes. I wonder if it's any different when focusing near infinity and if that's even important to you.

I'm planning to shoot a distance series (~70m) today, I expect the Minoltas' field curvature to be smaller at a distance (the Canon has floating elements, the Minoltas don't).
For now, I've shot another series with the lenses focused on the corners (this time at all apertures).
Going in, I expected the MD35/2.8 to be sharper in the corners and the Canon sharper in the center.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
[PART 2/6]

Minolta 35/1.8 - f/1.8 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/2 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/2.4 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/2.8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/2.8 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/2.8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/3.4 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/3.4 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/4 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4.8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4.8 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/4.8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/5.6 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/5.6 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/5.6 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/6.7 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/6.7 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/6.7 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/8 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/8 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/9.5 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/9.5 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/9.5 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/11 - focus in the corner


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/11 - focus in the corner


Canon 35/2 - f/11 - focus in the corner


Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:26 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Again Canon show how it's done!


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would have told you "35/1.8" without any samples. I've been maintaining all along that this lens is overvalued and receives respect not consistent with its performance. And while I recognize that bokeh is not the strong suit for wide angle I think on 35/1.8 it is particularly terrible.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pick anyone you don't like.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gardener wrote:
I would have told you "35/1.8" without any samples. I've been maintaining all along that this lens is overvalued and receives respect not consistent with its performance. And while I recognize that bokeh is not the strong suit for wide angle I think on 35/1.8 it is particularly terrible.


Oh, I know, I was already planning to sell it and keep the MD35/2.8. I didn't expect the Canon to be quite this good, though.

I didn't find the time to take the long distance test shots today, I'm curious how the MD35/2.8 will fare in the corners


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[PART 3/6]


Scene & crops - MD 35/1.8:


Scene & crops - MD 35/2.8:


Scene & crops - nFD 35/2:



Minolta 35/1.8 - f/1.8


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2.4


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/2.8


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/2.8


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2.8


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/3.4


Canon 35/2.0 - f/3.4


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4


Canon 35/2.0 - f/4


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4.8


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4.8


Canon 35/2.0 - f/4.8


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/5.6


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/5.6


Canon 35/2.0 - f/5.6


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/6.7


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/6.7


Canon 35/2.0 - f/6.7


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/8


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/8


Canon 35/2.0 - f/8


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/9.5


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/9.5


Canon 35/2.0 - f/9.5


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/11


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/11


Canon 35/2.0 - f/11


Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:26 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, Canon again very clearly better. And the 1.8 Minolta worse than the 2.8 @2.8. Surprised


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
Wow, Canon again very clearly better.

Yeah, I didn't expect the Canon to be this good in the corners. The MD35/2.8 has slightly less CA in the corners but the Canon is the clear winner. I'll add a flare comparison to round things off.

The focusing mechanisms on the nFD lenses are rather susceptible to wear, on lenses with floating elements (like the 35/2) that might impact IQ.
Mine seems to be in very good condition (well worth the 120 I paid) but there might be more sample variation than with the MD35/2.8.

miran wrote:
And the 1.8 Minolta worse than the 2.8 @2.8. Surprised

That's in line with Stephan's results:


(source: artaphot.ch)


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I'll add a flare comparison to round things off.

I'd expect the difference to be even bigger in Canon's favour here. At least in my experience flare resistance is not Minolta's strong side in general and the 35/2.8 in particular isn't very strong against light. See this example: https://flic.kr/p/yL2MKM


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I'll add a flare comparison to round things off.

I'd expect the difference to be even bigger in Canon's favour here. At least in my experience flare resistance is not Minolta's strong side in general and the 35/2.8 in particular isn't very strong against light. See this example: https://flic.kr/p/yL2MKM


I'll hope I can get it done today, I also have a few more shots of the first test scene waiting to be posted.
One series with the lenses set to infinity (-> foreground bokeh) and one with the lenses set to ~40cm (-> backgound bokeh).


PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Part 4/6

These are from the first test scene, lenses set to infinity (actually a bit beyond since the adapters are a bit short).


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/1.8 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2.4 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/2.8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/2.8 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/2.8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/3.4 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/3.4 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0- f/4 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/4.8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/4.8 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/4.8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/5.6 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/5.6 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/5.6 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/6.7 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/6.7 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/6.7 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/8 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/8 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/9.5 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/9.5 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/9.5 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/1.8 - f/11 - set to infinity


Minolta 35/2.8 - f/11 - set to infinity


Canon 35/2.0 - f/11 - set to infinity


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What camera were these shot on? Some say the earlier MC-I/MC-II or MC-X 35/1.8 are better than the later compact models, at least in the corners and overall better than the 35/2.8 but the prevalent opinion is the oppposite. I've seen as many good photo samples, as awful photos from these Minolta 35's and I was really hesitant to buy one myself but I did get the MC-I in rather unused condition and even on the 64MP equiv. density of m43, I was really impressed by the quality, even wide open compared to contemporary lenses of different focal lengths from Minolta. I've not had a time to test it properly because I'm waiting for a lens hood to arrive but the only thing I can admit negatively thus far is that it does have what seems like the worst flare/ghosting of all my other Minolta lenses, but at the same time the contrast and detail is better.

I agree that the average price of the 35/1.8 in particular is way too exaggerated. Perhaps my expectations for quality are just lower, without a Canon to compare by the side. Anyway, I should have the lens hood this week to trial it on m43... Like 1 small

Antony has 2 tests on his website but they are scanned film images. http://www.rokkorfiles.com/Lens%20Reviews.html

I just would not expect the MD 35/1.8 to be as rubbish as your test images show! Shocked


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Teemō wrote:
What camera were these shot on?


Sony A7


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Teemō wrote:
I agree that the average price of the 35/1.8 in particular is way too exaggerated.

That I agree with too. I paid a silly amount for mine just because I wanted it and it didn't look like one will turn up for normal money. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have Minolta MD W.Rokkor-X 35mm F1.8 with a scratch on front element. It perform pretty good to my standard although I am sure there are better lens from other brands.
http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-md-w-rokkor-x-35mm-f1-8-on-sony-a7-t73617.html


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
Teemō wrote:
I agree that the average price of the 35/1.8 in particular is way too exaggerated.

That I agree with too. I paid a silly amount for mine just because I wanted it and it didn't look like one will turn up for normal money. Rolling Eyes


I hope there's more of you, I have one ebay sale with commission limited to 5 left and I think the MD35/1.8 will take that spot...

calvin83 wrote:
I have Minolta MD W.Rokkor-X 35mm F1.8 with a scratch on front element. It perform pretty good to my standard although I am sure there are better lens from other brands.
http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-md-w-rokkor-x-35mm-f1-8-on-sony-a7-t73617.html


I don't know how much sample variation there is with the MD35/1.8 (the seems to be quite a lot with the nFD35/2), you might have a better copy.

Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:33 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I hope there's more of you, I have one ebay sale with commission limited to 5 left and I think the Md35/1.8 will take that spot...

If there's one thing about this world you can be sure of, it's that it'll never run out of idiots. Embarassed


PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
miran wrote:
If there's one thing about this world you can be sure of, it's that it'll never run out of idiots. Embarassed


Well, fuck.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I haven't had the time to upload the last two parts (the first test scene with the focus at ~40cm and the flare test).
The crops are ready but uploading & formatting is a bigger pain than making the crops...


PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My financial situation has changed for the worse and I have decided to give up the hobby, at least for the foreseeable future.

In case someone would like to take the nFD 35/2 off my hands... http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1522520.html
The MD 35/2.8 will be going on sale too.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1