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

Test shots Minolta MD 100mm f/2.5
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2021 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Oke, I was able to make some more images today.

Lens has very nice sharpness to bokeh transition IMO:
dsc07770586 by devoscasper, on Flickr

After bribing my son with some cookies I was able to make a few portraits:

dsc07806588 by devoscasper, on Flickr

dsc07815589 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Images remind me somewhat of my Tokina AT-X 90/2.5. Similar vivid colors, good contrast, soft bokeh. The Tokina is still a bit sharper though, but for portraits really unnecessary. Both lenses hardly need any post processing. I slightly warmed up the colors, and slightly increased the exposure in RAW. The Tokina is more versatile, being a macro lens, but the Minolta is way smaller and much more compact.



Like 1 Like 1 Like 1

Like Dog


PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had the aperture thoroughly cleaned, and now it's working perfect again.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Love this lens (and the wine). Shot with A7R2/Techart PRO at F2.5. Clickable for best quality viewing...



PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Love this lens (and the wine). Shot with A7R2/Techart PRO at F2.5. Clickable for best quality viewing...



Yeah, bokeh is very good on this one.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Yeah, bokeh is very good on this one.


Very good is somehow underrated. It's almost perfect, at least for me.
However, that's purely a matter of taste. Some folks even like bubbles - I hate them....


PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This thread made me seek this lens out. I scanned Minolta cameras for a couple of months and one came up with this lens. Auction ended at 80 w free shipping. I'm not sure if that is a creat deal or if I over paid but if so it wasn't by much. Body was a SRT MCII in very good working order including the meter. I'm not sure if that is a great deal or if I overpaid, but if so it wasn't by much. Just a fantastic optic. My copy was in very good shape s. some brightpointing of the all metal knurled focus ring, a couple very minor dings. It was a bit dirty externally but a few minutes with some ETOH and a toothbrush and it looks pretty damn good. My regular model, Kiko loves to climb around in the apple tree.







an out of focus bokeh test:


PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice images, enjoy your lens!


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
jamaeolus wrote:
Like 1 very nice. Excellent separation. Good colors. Crisp images. Nice bokeh.


Yes, I think this lens is a keeper.

Definitely a keeper.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like all the MC/MD 100/2.5's, but it is one of Minolta's more flare-prone designs and needs the deep hood.

The older MC 100mm f/2 has more collector value and is sought after, but in practice I find the later 100mm f/2.5 to be better optically. At f/2 wide-open the 100mm f/2 has a noticeable trace of spherical aberration which requires a bit more care focussing, especially at short focus distances. The later f/2.5 behaves better here wide-open.

The harder-to-find last incarnation of the f/2.5 (MDIII) is small for a 100mm lens, at 310g much lighter than its predecessors, and has an unusual 2-section telescoping built-in lens hood. It also has a 49mm filter thread as opposed to the 55mm of the previous versions.

But honestly, I would be hard-pressed to pick a favourite amongst these for day-to-day use; they are all a joy to work with.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I picked up a Minolta body a while ago, with the intent of getting some of these well-respected lenses. This one looks great and I'm a proponent of hood use anyway. Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

The older MC 100mm f/2 has more collector value and is sought after, but in practice I find the later 100mm f/2.5 to be better optically. At f/2 wide-open the 100mm f/2 has a noticeable trace of spherical aberration which requires a bit more care focussing, especially at short focus distances.


That's exactly what makes it a sought-after portrait lens. See here for comparing bokeh and center resolution at portrait distance:

* MC-II 1.7/85mm
* MD-II 2/85mm
* AR 2/100mm
* MC-II 2.5/100mm [6/5]
* MD-I 2.5/100mm [5/5]

http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/466-bokeh-mc-1-7-85mm-md-2-85mm-ar-mc-2-100mm-mc-2-5-100mm-md-2-5-100mm

RokkorDoctor wrote:

The later f/2.5 behaves better here wide-open.

Yes, the second [5/5] 2.5/100mm is better wide open than the earlier [6/5] computation. Be aware that MC-X exists as both [6/5] as well as [5/5]. All MD are [5/5], and all MC-I / MC-II are [6/5].


RokkorDoctor wrote:

The harder-to-find last incarnation of the f/2.5 (MDIII) is small for a 100mm lens, at 310g much lighter than its predecessors, and has an unusual 2-section telescoping built-in lens hood. It also has a 49mm filter thread as opposed to the 55mm of the previous versions.

I even suspect the MD-III to be slightly better than the MD-I/MD-II, but that might be sample variation.


RokkorDoctor wrote:
But honestly, I would be hard-pressed to pick a favourite amongst these for day-to-day use; they are all a joy to work with.

Out of my small collection I would prefer the AR/MC 2/100mm for portrait and the MD-III 2.5/100mm for landscapes. Or the Minolta AF 2/100mm for both ... but that's another story!

Some information about the AR/MC 2/100mm (I have been able to use both versions):
http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/164-minolta-100mm-f2

Some information about the different MC/MD 2.5/100mm lenses (a bit out of date since in the meantime I've been able to get the MC-I as well as the MD-III):
http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/165-minolta-100mm-f25

And finally the AF 2/100mm:
http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sony-af/objektive/263-minolta-af-100mm-f2


S


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

The older MC 100mm f/2 has more collector value and is sought after, but in practice I find the later 100mm f/2.5 to be better optically. At f/2 wide-open the 100mm f/2 has a noticeable trace of spherical aberration which requires a bit more care focussing, especially at short focus distances.


stevemark wrote:

That's exactly what makes it a sought-after portrait lens.

S


Indeed. I think the same goes for the MC/MD 85mm f/1.7 vs the later MD 85mm f/2

If spherical aberration (and I suspect some decent astigmatism) at short focus distance is desired (for whatever purpose), then the ROKKOR-TD 45mm f/2.8 (Minolta's real pancake, not the later f/2) should be a good candidate. That one is of Tessar configuration I believe (I could be wrong), but rather than unit focussing it uses only the first element for focussing, enabling the very short dimensions. This is a known focus configuration sometimes used for the Tessar, but equally known to mess up corrections.
On my copy the correction for aberrations at infinity is OK (not stellar), but at the MFD of 90cm the aberrations get very noticeable, so much so that focussing at f/2.8 at 90cm is difficult; there is a significant apparent focus shift when stopping down. Easy to spot in live view, but I wonder how many film-users in the past have been caught out by this (the user manual may have warned about this, but that is even rarer than the lens itself now).

Which reminds me; I should try that on on a 2x TC and see if that gives an alternative 90mm f/5.6 soft focus lens Wink


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:
RokkorDoctor wrote:

The older MC 100mm f/2 has more collector value and is sought after, but in practice I find the later 100mm f/2.5 to be better optically. At f/2 wide-open the 100mm f/2 has a noticeable trace of spherical aberration which requires a bit more care focussing, especially at short focus distances.


stevemark wrote:

That's exactly what makes it a sought-after portrait lens.

S


Indeed. I think the same goes for the MC/MD 85mm f/1.7 vs the later MD 85mm f/2


Sure. I have linked the corresponding images above.


RokkorDoctor wrote:

If spherical aberration (and I suspect some decent astigmatism) at short focus distance is desired (for whatever purpose), then the ROKKOR-TD 45mm f/2.8 should be a good candidate.
...
Which reminds me; I should try that on on a 2x TC and see if that gives an alternative 90mm f/5.6 soft focus lens Wink


Are you kidding me Wink??

Simply take any "common" portrait lens, put an UV filter in front and smear some vaseline on it. Depending on how and where you do it, you'll get all kinds of different results. Much more flexible and adaptable than any soft focus lens ... let alone your "90mm f5.6" combo Wink. But then - it certainly is fun to give it a try, especially since the 2.8/45 is so rare (I've never seen one here in Switzerland).

S

S


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
But then - it certainly is fun to give it a try, especially since the 2.8/45 is so rare (I've never seen one here in Switzerland).

S


Oh, I was joking really. I did just give it a quick try in my study; ROKKOR-TD 45mm f/2.8 on a Teleplus MC7 2x Tele-Macro converter, as that allows you to use the lens in unity focussing. I wasn't expecting much, but first impressions on the camera's focus magnifier showed better sharpness than I was expecting. Not much contrast though (not SA, just not very effective coatings).

Availability of the rarer Minolta Rokkor lenses (and I am sure the same applies to many other brands) is a lot better if you are willing to import them from Japan (and Korea) (e.g. through eBay).

I've bought many a used lens from Japan, and I have to say I generally rate the reliability of Japanese sellers. I have personally never received an incorrectly rated/described item from a Japanese seller, and the correspondence tends to be exceptionally polite. But then I may just have been lucky, and I may be biased (all my in-laws are Japanese Wink ). The only caveat is that at least in the UK it seems pot-luck whether or not you get to pay extra customs duty.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2022 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

Availability of the rarer Minolta Rokkor lenses (and I am sure the same applies to many other brands) is a lot better if you are willing to import them from Japan (and Korea) (e.g. through eBay).


I'm quite aware of that - but somehow I'm not that keen to pay
1) Ebay fees
2) Paypal fees
3) Postage
4) VAT
5) Custom duties
6) Custom handling fees
7) Addidional custom fees like storage fees (no joke ... when they delay it, they charge you additinal storage fees)

I have done it once or twice, but just for AF lenses to be used for certain projects - not for "coillectors stuff".

There's plenty of interesting stuff available here in Switzerland, albeit not always from Minolta. And I simply get what's around here, locally.


RokkorDoctor wrote:

I've bought many a used lens from Japan, and I have to say I generally rate the reliability of Japanese sellers. I have personally never received an incorrectly rated/described item from a Japanese seller, and the correspondence tends to be exceptionally polite.

That's my impression too - not only from buying stuff, but also from my contacts with Japanese Minolta/Sony people.

S
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2