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 MCII 1,4 58
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 4:53 pm    Post subject: Minolta MCII 1,4 58 Reply with quote

First test. Here F3,5.

Sharpness, bokeh et al.

[img]La feuille | The leaf by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]


PostPosted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice lens and picture👍


PostPosted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's not the best in control of flare and CA, as almost all MC Minolta lenses, but in b&w it's a very good lens


PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2021 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

papasito wrote:
It's not the best in control of flare and CA, as almost all MC Minolta lenses, but in b&w it's a very good lens


It actually shows less CA than the MDIII 50 1,4...


PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2021 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
Nice lens and picture👍


Thank you !


PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2021 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
papasito wrote:
It's not the best in control of flare and CA, as almost all MC Minolta lenses, but in b&w it's a very good lens


It actually shows less CA than the MDIII 50 1,4...


Generally speaking the lenses with newer high refractive glass often have more lateral CAs than older lenses with "traditional" glass. This is true even within the same series of lenses, eg with the MD-III 2/50mm, the MD-III 1.4/50mm and the MD-III 1.2/50mm: the slow 2/50 has least CAs, and the fast 1.2/50 has the strongest lateral CAs. The 2/50mm uses glass with nD of about 1.72, but the 1.2/50m uses glass with nD>1.8 which has more dispersion of course.

S


PostPosted: Sat Dec 11, 2021 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I don't really have problems with CA or any kinds of fringing with this lens myself. Stopped down I usually see none, when there is I find it easy to remove. I find it better in this regard than most vintage F1.4 lenses actually, but there are different shooting situations and we might have different experiences.
I really appreciate the rendering starting from F2, and I adore this lens for landscape (at around F8, depending on everything we usually consider). I find the colours great as starting point for processing (no need to spend much time really), and when there are great colours, as ironic as it sounds, I find this great for monochrome too (since there's nice tonality to work with).
Wide open I find the double-edged bokeh too harsh in most situations, but not every situation, sometimes it works out really well (and that's usually when shooting really up close, or with perfectly matched distances between the camera, subject and background).
Another thing that really does matter to me is the beautiful handling and tactile feel of the lens, it's a joy to use; and it looks really nice too. I also find, at least this MC-II version, much better optically than some believe it is. Corners might need F8 where some newer 50mm lenses need only F5.6, for corner to corner absolute sharpness, but that's about it. Coating is weak, but I usually manage things, sometimes I even use this to my ("artistic") advantage. The real FL is believed to be around 61mm, that's another advantage to having this lens alongside standard 50mm primes, it does make a difference when needed.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Experiencing F2,4.

3D pop?

[img]L'hiver | Winter by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]


PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmm avec le Mont Blanc behind from Le Bettex? Like 1 small


PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 7:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cordon. Au Bettex le Mont-Blanc est plus proche.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 25, 2021 11:58 am    Post subject: The teapot Reply with quote

Tea time. Same lens.

[img]La théière | The teapot by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]


PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2022 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There was some oil/haze on the inner elements of this lens due to outgassing grease.

I managed to wipe that off hoping for some improvement of the already very high contrast, so the lens would shine in very low contrast situations.

[img]L'arche fumante | Smoking Arch by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]


PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2022 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
There was some oil/haze on the inner elements of this lens due to outgassing grease.

I managed to wipe that off hoping for some improvement of the already very high contrast, so the lens would shine in very low contrast situations.

[img]L'arche fumante | Smoking Arch by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]


Beautiful image!


PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
There was some oil/haze on the inner elements of this lens due to outgassing grease.

I managed to wipe that off hoping for some improvement of the already very high contrast, so the lens would shine in very low contrast situations.



It appears you were successful Like 1 small

Magical image, works really well in black&white!


PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RokkorDoctor wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:
There was some oil/haze on the inner elements of this lens due to outgassing grease.

I managed to wipe that off hoping for some improvement of the already very high contrast, so the lens would shine in very low contrast situations.



It appears you were successful Like 1 small

Magical image, works really well in black&white!


Thank you. Much easier to play with contrast in black and white.