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

Mamiya C 105-210mm f/4.5 vs Minolta MD 75-150mm f/4
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:52 pm    Post subject: Mamiya C 105-210mm f/4.5 vs Minolta MD 75-150mm f/4 Reply with quote

These two lenses don't cover the same focal length, but there is overlap. And they are the only 2 zoom lenses I own, so time to compare them. Unfortunately it started snowing a bit half way the shooting, but I think we can still draw some conclusions.

First the Minolta @ 75mm:
MinoltaComparison75mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

Very solid performance at this focal length. The corners are already good at f/4, but improve further when stopping down.

Then, a comparison of both lenses at 105mm focal length:
Comparison105mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

Center performance of both lenses very comparable at this focal length. The corners look slightly sharper to me of the Minolta, at least up to f/8. At f/11, the Mamiya corners look pretty much perfect, but with a slight hint of CA. I'll be careful with further conclusions because of snowfall. The VW Beetle seems somewhat stretched out, compared to the Mamiya.

Comparison @ 150mm:
Comparison150mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

The image of the Mamiya is soft compared to the Minolta, at least up to f/8. At f/11, the image of the Mamiya looks very good. I will do a new comparison at this focal length when the circumstances are better, because I'm not sure if this is a focusing error, or just a weak focal length of the Mamiya.

Then, the Mamiya @ f=210mm:
MamiyaComparison210mm by devoscasper, on Flickr
Performance looks very good at this focal length. The corner image improves when stopping down.

Careful conclusion: both lenses seems to be very good performers. Yet to be determined is whether the Mamiya's performance @ f=150 is weaker or not.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just for fun I have been running a similar test as you, using the A7RII to check the "landscape" performance of a few well known lenses at f=100mm (105mm):

Mamiya Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm (large non-ULD version)
Mamiya Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm (small ULD version)
Minolta MD-III 4/100mm Macro
Minolta MD-III 4/75-150mm
Nikkor P C Auto 2.5/105mm
Tamron SP 3.5/70-210mm (19AH)
Zeiss CY Vario-Sonnar 4/80-200mm

Plus one AF lens, just for comparison:
Sony AL 2.8/70-200mm G

I now can confirm with certainty that my Mamiya 105-210mm ULD is defective: It clearly is de-centered. One corner looks pretty good
(same as the non-ULD), the other one simply is not sharp. Its a pity - the lens itself looks perfect (like new).

That said, comparing the others is quite interesting as well.

Best perfomer is the Minolta MD-III 4/100mm Macro, both at f4 as well as at f8. Completely sharp in the exteme corners of 43MP
FF, no lateral CAs at all, and very little longitudinal CAs (purple fringing) which is gone at f8.

The MD-III 4/75-150mm performs nearly identically (!!) at f=100, but has slightly less contrast. Yep, it's a zoom ... otherwise
extremely good for a vintage lens.

The same can be said for the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar CY 4/80-200mm at f=100mm. Again slightly less contrats than the Minolta
zoom, but equal resolution and freedom from CAs (at f=200mm it has CAs, though!!). At f=100mm also the Zeiss zoom is an
extremly good lens, both wide open and at f8.

Compared to the lenses above, both the Nikkor- P C 2.4/105mm and the Tamron SP 3.5/70-210mm (19AH) have much
more lateral CAs and visibly less corner resolution at f4 (f3.5). Stopped down to f8 the Nikkor gets pretty sharp, yet contrast remains
low. The Tamron zoom at f8 / 100mm actually is better than the (much older) Nikkor prime, but still has more CAs than the Zeiss and
the Minoltas.


Finally something about the image field (90% of the image, except the extreme corners) of the Sony (Minolta) AL 2.8/70-200mm G zoom:

At f2.8 the Sony (Minolta) zoom has comparable contrast and better details than most lenses tested above at f8. Exceptions are the
MD 4/100 Macro and the Zeiss 4/80-200; both at f4 are comparable to the fast Sony zoom at f2.8. The Sony gets even better at f4.
Remarkably, its resolution / contrast af f8 is slightly worse than at f4!!

This pretty much explains why for my "real world photography" I usually am using just the Zeiss 2.8/16-35mm and the Sony
2.8/70-200mm APO G zooms - sometimes combined with special lenses such as the Canon 17mm shift or the Canon 2.8/400 L.


Images (100% crops) will follow later on.

S


PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2023 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your insights Stephan.
The Minolta MD 75-150/4 probably remains my favorite zoom. F/4 is fast enough for most of my applications. It's optical performance leaves little to complain, it's only fourhundredsomething grams and I actually prefer the push/ pull mechanism above two separate rings. I like its bokeh as well.

I've had the MD 100/4 macro in the past. It immediately struck me how good its optical performance is. I think I've sold it because I wanted something faster, but definitely a lens I shouldn't have sold and will buy again in the future.

I will do a similar comparison between the Minolta and Mamiya when the weather is better. The Mamiya is of course less practical than the Minolta on a FF camera, but is actually fun to use. It's not thát heavy actually for a medium format lens at eighthundredsomething grams, and it has a really high quality feel to it. They were very expensive lenses new but are an absolute bargain nowadays. I guess the f/4.5 minimum aperture doesn't have sex appeal.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Found out something quite annoying when this morning I tried to focus at a far away (approx. 1km) subject with the Mamiya lens. The focus ring stops just before I reach true infinity. I've dealt with similar issues in the past with Mamiya 645 lenses, but I solved it by buying a better (Fotodiox Pro) adapter. With this lens, I just can't quite reach infinity; I hope my local repair man can make a modification. I wouldn't be surprised if the inside of the lens allows for relatively simple calibration.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the inside of the lens allows for relatively simple calibration.


I might have a look at my 105-210 ULD during the coming days since it's pretty useless the way it is now ... maybe just to see how it is constructed (Mamiya Sekor CS 45-90 mm was pretty straightforward to repair:
http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/mamiya-cs-objektive/433-mamiya-cs-45-90mm-f35-repair

S


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the inside of the lens allows for relatively simple calibration.


I might have a look at my 105-210 ULD during the coming days since it's pretty useless the way it is now ... maybe just to see how it is constructed (Mamiya Sekor CS 45-90 mm was pretty straightforward to repair:
http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/mamiya-cs-objektive/433-mamiya-cs-45-90mm-f35-repair

S


Thanks. I believe I’ve seen on the internet before there’s a way to callibrate them. It’s very useful with a system like the 645.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
Found out something quite annoying when this morning I tried to focus at a far away (approx. 1km) subject with the Mamiya lens. The focus ring stops just before I reach true infinity. I've dealt with similar issues in the past with Mamiya 645 lenses, but I solved it by buying a better (Fotodiox Pro) adapter. With this lens, I just can't quite reach infinity; I hope my local repair man can make a modification. I wouldn't be surprised if the inside of the lens allows for relatively simple calibration.


Try and see if this applies to all zoom settings; it may be that the par-focal setting is off rather than it just being an infinity collimation issue.

If you use legacy MF lenses a lot (I think that applies to you Wink ), adjusting infinity focus yourself on those lenses is definitely something worth getting experience with.

Most legacy lenses use one of a few common ways of doing that. I can't speak for other brands, but going by the service procedures of Minolta lenses and having seen the construction of quite a few others, collimation is one of the last if not the last adjustment done on lenses during the manufacture, so it tends to be a relatively easy to access adjustment (often a few grub screws hidden under the focus grip rubber waffling, or screws hidden under the beauty/name ring). Older lenses sometimes used adjustment shims underneath the seat of the inner lens barrel; they are a pain to adjust.

Exceptions tend to be lenses with floating focus, and some zoom lenses, which may have a less straightforward adjustment procedure.

But sometimes it may not be worth it, depending on intended use of the lens as well as how far (or little) it is off perfect collimation. Especially on zoom lenses without a DOF scale, if infinity focus is close, it may not be worth adjusting; under most stopped-down aperture settings you wouldn't have focus set to infinity anyway if you make effective use of the DOF.
It becomes more critical if you frequently shoot astronomy or distant landscapes with it, or you do lens tests like yourself.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RokkorDoctor wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Found out something quite annoying when this morning I tried to focus at a far away (approx. 1km) subject with the Mamiya lens. The focus ring stops just before I reach true infinity. I've dealt with similar issues in the past with Mamiya 645 lenses, but I solved it by buying a better (Fotodiox Pro) adapter. With this lens, I just can't quite reach infinity; I hope my local repair man can make a modification. I wouldn't be surprised if the inside of the lens allows for relatively simple calibration.


Try and see if this applies to all zoom settings; it may be that the par-focal setting is off rather than it just being an infinity collimation issue.

If you use legacy MF lenses a lot (I think that applies to you Wink ), adjusting infinity focus yourself on those lenses is definitely something worth getting experience with.

Most legacy lenses use one of a few common ways of doing that. I can't speak for other brands, but going by the service procedures of Minolta lenses and having seen the construction of quite a few others, collimation is one of the last if not the last adjustment done on lenses during the manufacture, so it tends to be a relatively easy to access adjustment (often a few grub screws hidden under the focus grip rubber waffling, or screws hidden under the beauty/name ring). Older lenses sometimes used adjustment shims underneath the seat of the inner lens barrel; they are a pain to adjust.

Exceptions tend to be lenses with floating focus, and some zoom lenses, which may have a less straightforward adjustment procedure.

But sometimes it may not be worth it, depending on intended use of the lens as well as how far (or little) it is off perfect collimation. Especially on zoom lenses without a DOF scale, if infinity focus is close, it may not be worth adjusting; under most stopped-down aperture settings you wouldn't have focus set to infinity anyway if you make effective use of the DOF.
It becomes more critical if you frequently shoot astronomy or distant landscapes with it, or you do lens tests like yourself.


Yes, I will try to find our where the adjustment is hidden. I did some lens repairs in the past, but also screwed up a few so I'm careful with doing my own repairs, especially when I really like the lens. I hardly ever have infinity focus issues with lenses; most of my adapters allow beyond infinity, but this Fotodiox Pro adapter does not. It works perfectly with my Mamiya 300/5.6 though.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2023 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RokkorDoctor wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Found out something quite annoying when this morning I tried to focus at a far away
(approx. 1km) subject with the Mamiya lens. The focus ring stops just before I reach true infinity.
...


Try and see if this applies to all zoom settings; it may be that the par-focal setting is off rather than it just being an infinity collimation issue.
...
But sometimes it may not be worth it, depending on intended use of the lens as well as how far (or little) it is off perfect collimation.
Especially on zoom lenses without a DOF scale, if infinity focus is close, it may not be worth adjusting; under most stopped-down
aperture settings you wouldn't have focus set to infinity anyway if you make effective use of the DOF...


Those two (infinity collimation and farfocal zoom setting) usually are interdependent, and quite tricky to adjust if one doesn't have the proper manuals and equipment.

About one year ago I bought my second sample of the rather rare Minolta 2.8/70-200mm APO G SSM telezoom. It was a local auction,
and I went to pick up the lens myself (from a nice rural photo store "at the end of Switzerland"). From my previous work with Sony Switzerland
I knew that this very lens was the most finicky lens of the entire lineup. Very tricky to produce and to repair! Equally tricky was the correct focus
adjustment with the (then) Sony A700. The A900 was easier since it allowed for easy manual AF adjustments by the end-user. Therefore I
decided to test my "new" 70-200 G SSM using an adapter on the A7II (focusing manually with the magnifier in the EVF). At 2.8/200mm
the lens was performing great. BUT when I was zooming to 100mm the image became completey de-focused! Shit!! ... Re-focusing and
checking the result again gave a very good resolution, including corners. In spite of this problem I did accept the lens (price was OK).

Down the road - now being at home and re-checking the "new" 2.8/70-200 APO G SSM on my Sony A900 SLRs - I found that a
slightly too short MAF=> Sony E adapter had caused the strong deviations. On all my A900 SLRs the lens was performing billiantly, slightly better even than my Sony SAL 2.8/70-200 G (which technically should be the same lens).

Actually I knew that the length of my MAF=>SEL adapter was "slightly off", but it didn't occur to me that this would influence the zoom
lens collimation at different focal lengths that much.

That said, I have never have opened / adjusted my Sony / Minolta 2.8/70-200mm lenses. Looking at the repair manual it seems very tricky,
unlike the Sony / Zeiss ZA 2.8/24-70 which was quite easy to dis- and reassemble (with good results - I have two of those and could
compare their performance after the repair).

S


PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Just for fun I have been running a similar test as you, using the A7RII to check the "landscape" performance of a few well known lenses at f=100mm (105mm):

Mamiya Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm (large non-ULD version)
Mamiya Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm (small ULD version)
Minolta MD-III 4/100mm Macro
Minolta MD-III 4/75-150mm
Nikkor P C Auto 2.5/105mm
Tamron SP 3.5/70-210mm (19AH)
Zeiss CY Vario-Sonnar 4/80-200mm

Plus one AF lens, just for comparison:
Sony AL 2.8/70-200mm G
...
Images (100% crops) will follow later on.

S


I obviously have a problem connecting the large, long and heavy Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm lenses to my A7II series. There's no tripod socket on my adapters, and the A7RII bayonet isn't stable enough to support the Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm: The lens is tilting down slightly. Therefore a correct assessment of its performance at the moment isn't possible. And my Sekor C 4.5/105-210mm ULD is de-centered.

That said, here are the test results of the rest of the bunch. Unlike my other vintage gear tests, this on was taken with the 43 MP A7RII, and RAW images were developped using Photoshop. In addition (also unlike with my other tests) the light was varying. Thus i have corrected the white balance accordingly while developping the RAWs. That's not good, and I certainly will repeat the test including at least the Mamiya 105-210mm "non-ULD" as soon as the wheather allows. 100% crops from the extreme corners as usual. Images taken using a large stable carbon tripod and electronic shutter combined with 10s self timer.

Most of the lenses mentioned above per top lenses back in their days. We can see from the results that - at least at f=100mm - three of the zoom lenses are extremely well corrected (Minolta MD 4/75-150, Minolta / Sony AF 2.8/70-200 APO and Zeiss CY 4/80-200). Same applies for the MD-III 4/100mm Macro, of course.

AS USUAL: PLEASE CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGE TO GET THE FULL RESOLUTION!



S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Stephan: thanks for sharing your test, I totally missed it. The Minolta definitely does a good job.

In the meantime my Mamiya's focusing issues have been fixed, so time to do a new comparison.

First, performance of the Minolta MD 75-150mm f/4 @ 75mm:
MinComp75mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

Very sharp in the center wide open, especially considering the 42+ mp sensor. Corners very good as well; slightly improving when stopping down. CA control is very good: there's a hint of purple fringing in the corners @ f/4. Stopping down improves CA performance further, leading to pretty much perfect control @ f/11.

Then, comparison of the two lenses @ 105mm:

Comparison105mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

The Minolta's image center is slightly crisper than the Mamiya's. @ f/5.6 they are pretty much the same. Corners of the Minolta are a bit better as well at every aperture.

Then, 150mm:
Comparison150mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

This somewhat confirms my earlier findings: that the Mamiya's strongest setting is not 150mm. The Minolta is noticeably sharper in the center at all apertures. The Mamiya's corners are sharper wide open and @f/5.6. The Minolta's corners become sharper than the Mamiya's @f/8 and @f/11. The Mamiya is the winner when it comes to CA control (corners).

Finally, the Mamiya's performance @ 210mm:
MamComp210mm by devoscasper, on Flickr

Pretty solid performance. I think the blurriness of last image @ f/11 may be caused by some vibration through the tripod. In an earlier test this was the strongest aperture setting, at least for the corners.

Conclusion: both lenses are strong performers but the Minolta is the overall winner for me. CA control is sometimes behind the Mamiya, but the sharpness of this lens is just incredible. On top of that, it's very compact and has great bokeh. Anyway, I will keep both of them as they are both capable of shooting great images. Earlier tests reveal that the Minolta seems to have more distortion; it depends on the situation if this is important or not.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just found an old Mamiya 645 prospect on the attic - in fact there was Sekor C 4.5/75-150mm for the 645 as well. Pretty heavy at 975g,
and quite larg too (77mm filters). An [11/10] construction, but no lens section is given in the Mamiya leaflet.
Probably a cousin to the unlucky Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm ...

While I have two of the Mamiya CS 3.5/45-90mm lenses, I've never ever seen a copy of the Sekor C 75-150mm.

S


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Just found an old Mamiya 645 prospect on the attic - in fact there was Sekor C 4.5/75-150mm for the 645 as well. Pretty heavy at 975g,
and quite larg too (77mm filters). An [11/10] construction, but no lens section is given in the Mamiya leaflet.
Probably a cousin to the unlucky Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm ...

While I have two of the Mamiya CS 3.5/45-90mm lenses, I've never ever seen a copy of the Sekor C 75-150mm.

S


How's the CS?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
stevemark wrote:
Just found an old Mamiya 645 prospect on the attic - in fact there was Sekor C 4.5/75-150mm for the 645 as well. Pretty heavy at 975g,
and quite larg too (77mm filters). An [11/10] construction, but no lens section is given in the Mamiya leaflet.
Probably a cousin to the unlucky Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm ...

While I have two of the Mamiya CS 3.5/45-90mm lenses, I've never ever seen a copy of the Sekor C 75-150mm.

S


How's the CS?


I had run just a few "quick'n'dirty" tests when I got the Fotodiox Mamiya E => Sony E adapter. I remember there were some issues (one lens, the "newer" one, not focusing to infinity). I have to look at them again, and I certainly should service the second CS 3.5/45-90 I got last year.

S