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

Minolta MD 85mm f/2 experiences?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 8:25 am    Post subject: Minolta MD 85mm f/2 experiences? Reply with quote
Anybody there that wants to share his/ her experience with this lens?

I'm looking for a sharp and compact alternative for my Samyang 85/1.4 mk2 that I bought earlier this year. Which is a great lens, but I notice I harldy use the full open aperture, and it takes a lot of space in my bag. So I'm considering to either sell it, or swap it against something sharp and compact.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 8:59 am    Post subject: Re: Minolta MD 85mm f/2 experiences? Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Anybody there that wants to share his/ her experience with this lens?

I'm looking for a sharp and compact alternative for my Samyang 85/1.4 mk2 that I bought earlier this year. Which is a great lens, but I notice I harldy use the full open aperture, and it takes a lot of space in my bag. So I'm considering to either sell it, or swap it against something sharp and compact.


I have a few fast (f1.7, f1.8, f2) 85mm vintage lenses, and I've tested them side-by-side for landscape purposes:

Canon FD 1.8/85mm
Canon nFD 1.8/85mm
Konica Hexanon AR 1.8/85mm
Mamiya Sekor SX 1.7/85mm
Minolta MC-II 1.7/85mm
Minolta MC-X 1.7/85mm
Minolta MD-II 1.7/85mm
Minolta MD-II 2/85mm
Nikkor K 1.8/85mm (Ai converted)
Zeiss (Oberkochen) Sonnar 2/85mm for Contax RF

Out of theses lenses, the MD 2/85mm has the best detail resolution (mainly visible at edges and in the corners), and least lateral CAs. However, I don't have any experience with the samyang you own and therefore I can't say whether the MD is better, equal or worse than the Samyang.

Compared to a like-new Canon Fd 1.2/85mm L however, the Minolta MD 2/85mm is quite a bit better as far as resolution and CAs are concerned.

S


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 9:14 am    Post subject: Re: Minolta MD 85mm f/2 experiences? Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Anybody there that wants to share his/ her experience with this lens?

I'm looking for a sharp and compact alternative for my Samyang 85/1.4 mk2 that I bought earlier this year. Which is a great lens, but I notice I harldy use the full open aperture, and it takes a lot of space in my bag. So I'm considering to either sell it, or swap it against something sharp and compact.


I have a few fast (f1.7, f1.8, f2) 85mm vintage lenses, and I've tested them side-by-side for landscape purposes:

Canon FD 1.8/85mm
Canon nFD 1.8/85mm
Konica Hexanon AR 1.8/85mm
Mamiya Sekor SX 1.7/85mm
Minolta MC-II 1.7/85mm
Minolta MC-X 1.7/85mm
Minolta MD-II 1.7/85mm
Minolta MD-II 2/85mm
Nikkor K 1.8/85mm (Ai converted)
Zeiss (Oberkochen) Sonnar 2/85mm for Contax RF

Out of theses lenses, the MD 2/85mm has the best detail resolution (mainly visible at edges and in the corners), and least lateral CAs. However, I don't have any experience with the samyang you own and therefore I can't say whether the MD is better, equal or worse than the Samyang.

Compared to a like-new Canon Fd 1.2/85mm L however, the Minolta MD 2/85mm is quite a bit better as far as resolution and CAs are concerned.

S


Thanks Steve. The Samyang is probably a bit better in correcting CA's, being a modern lens, but I have no comparisons to back that up. The Samyang is great for ultra shallow DOF, but my main concern is size at the moment. I just sold my Nikkor ai 135/2 for the same reason. I've had the SMC Pentax 85/1.8 (similar to takumar) in the past, and I found that lens to be very sharp as well, at least on the A7 I had back then. That could still be the other option, but I've read many good things about the Minolta as well.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don’t have an 85mm prime, but generally I prefer the MC over MD, because they are very rugged, all metal. In some cases that comes with a significant weight penalty. Coatings can be better on MD’s, but some MC’s seem to hit a magic spot for co(u)lors. It sounds like an MD is more what you seek. The MC only comes in f/1.7 AFAIK, but not a huge size penalty compared to MD f/2.0.

Obviously, avoid the “varisoft” f/2.8. I point that out so you know it exists.

Weights and measures: http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/

MC and MD reviews, as well as some other 85’s:
https://lens.ws/lenses-reviews-tests-and-comparisons-the-list/

Forgive me if I covered what you already know.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Knudsen wrote:
I don’t have an 85mm prime, but generally I prefer the MC over MD, because they are very rugged, all metal. In some cases that comes with a significant weight penalty. Coatings can be better on MD’s, but some MC’s seem to hit a magic spot for co(u)lors. It sounds like an MD is more what you seek. The MC only comes in f/1.7 AFAIK, but not a huge size penalty compared to MD f/2.0.

Obviously, avoid the “varisoft” f/2.8. I point that out so you know it exists.

Weights and measures: http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/

MC and MD reviews, as well as some other 85’s:
https://lens.ws/lenses-reviews-tests-and-comparisons-the-list/

Forgive me if I covered what you already know.


Thank you. Usefull info. I'm also considering the 100/2.5 from Minolta.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you like sharp and compact you might consider olympus. They make excellent optics and their lenses are almost always nearly the smallest good optics at any given FL. I recently got one but have not compared it to others.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus wrote:
If you like sharp and compact you might consider olympus. They make excellent optics and their lenses are almost always nearly the smallest good optics at any given FL. I recently got one but have not compared it to others.


Thank you, I read that the latest version of the 85/2 is pretty good.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:

Thank you. Usefull info. I'm also considering the 100/2.5 from Minolta.


If you go for the Minolta 2.5/100mm and if you look for a "landscape lens" (= "as much detail as possible at infinity"), avoid the earlier 6 lens versions. The later 5 lens computations are better. It's not a huge difference, but visible.

I have the MC 2/100, the MC-I, MC-II, MC-X 2.5/100mm (6L), and the MD-II and MD-III 2.5/100mm (5L). My MD-III is the sharpest, slightly better than the MD-II (pixel peeping, though). The MD-III, however, is handsome because of it built-in telescopic lens hood.

If you PM me your e-mail adress, I can send you some RAWs. Please specify lens, aperture, resolution (24MP FF or 43 MP FF) and subject you want.

S


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
caspert79 wrote:

Thank you. Usefull info. I'm also considering the 100/2.5 from Minolta.


If you go for the Minolta 2.5/100mm and if you look for a "landscape lens" (= "as much detail as possible at infinity"), avoid the earlier 6 lens versions. The later 5 lens computations are better. It's not a huge difference, but visible.

I have the MC 2/100, the MC-I, MC-II, MC-X 2.5/100mm (6L), and the MD-II and MD-III 2.5/100mm (5L). My MD-III is the sharpest, slightly better than the MD-II (pixel peeping, though). The MD-III, however, is handsome because of it built-in telescopic lens hood.

If you PM me your e-mail adress, I can send you some RAWs. Please specify lens, aperture, resolution (24MP FF or 43 MP FF) and subject you want.

S


Hi Stephan, thank you for the offer. I read on your website that there is also a 5 element MC-X version. Is there an easy way to recognize this version?


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:

Hi Stephan, thank you for the offer. I read on your website that there is also a 5 element MC-X version. Is there an easy way to recognize this version?


Yes.

First, it obviously has to be MC-X (silver ring at lens base, not black one like the MD-I/MD-II lenses, just in case you can't see the engravings)
Second, it has to look similar to MD-I/MD-II 2.5/100mm in shape (not like the MC-X [6L] 2.5/100mm)
Third, it has to have five waffle rows on the rubber focusing ring

Quite easy to detect.

S


PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
caspert79 wrote:

Hi Stephan, thank you for the offer. I read on your website that there is also a 5 element MC-X version. Is there an easy way to recognize this version?


Yes.

First, it obviously has to be MC-X (silver ring at lens base, not black one like the MD-I/MD-II lenses, just in case you can't see the engravings)
Second, it has to look similar to MD-I/MD-II 2.5/100mm in shape (not like the MC-X [6L] 2.5/100mm)
Third, it has to have five waffle rows on the rubber focusing ring

Quite easy to detect.

S


Thanks. Also for your tip about the md-iii with integrated sun hood. I may look around a bit.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Image 1 showing the 2 MC-X ( 6 elements on the far left, 5 elements in the center, and a prototype MD-I that has a slight difference in the shape of the focusing ring and offers F 32 as minimum aperture.

Image 2 showing difference between prototype MD-I versus a regular production MD-I (notice the 5 waffle rows on the prototype,like the latest MC-X) versus only 4 on the regular lens)

Image 3 shows the MD-III with its 2 piece telescopic hood deployed



#1


#2


#3


PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
michelb wrote:
Image 1 showing the 2 MC-X ( 6 elements on the far left, 5 elements in the center, and a prototype MD-I that has a slight difference in the shape of the focusing ring and offers F 32 as minimum aperture.

Image 2 showing difference between prototype MD-I versus a regular production MD-I (notice the 5 waffle rows on the prototype,like the latest MC-X) versus only 4 on the regular lens)

Image 3 shows the MD-III with its 2 piece telescopic hood deployed



#1


#2


#3


Thank you. Would there be any significant difference in build quality between the 5 element MC and MD?


PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
michelb wrote:
Image 1 showing the 2 MC-X ( 6 elements on the far left, 5 elements in the center, and a prototype MD-I that has a slight difference in the shape of the focusing ring and offers F 32 as minimum aperture.

Image 2 showing difference between prototype MD-I versus a regular production MD-I (notice the 5 waffle rows on the prototype,like the latest MC-X) versus only 4 on the regular lens)

Image 3 shows the MD-III with its 2 piece telescopic hood deployed



#1


#2


#3


Thank you. Would there be any significant difference in build quality between the 5 element MC and MD?


There should not be, they are the exact same size and weigth


PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 7:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Minolta MD 85mm f/2 experiences? Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
...my main concern is size at the moment.


If that's the case, I'd look at the AiS Nikkor 85 f2. It's a superb lens, and very compact.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1