Kiron 24/2 OR Minolta MD Rokkor 24/2.8?

[motleypixel]

Hey gang,

I currently have the Kiron 24/2 by Kino Precision Japan in a C/Y mount using a c/y-to-eos adapter and I'm happy with it. However, I'm now a certified glass nut (I have the sickness now) and I'm considering picking up the Minolta MD Rokkor-X 24/2.8 and would like to know if any of you know which would be a better performer with regards to contrast/color/sharpness/distortion?

Thanks,
Roy

[aleksanderpolo]

Not to derail you, but have you check out OM 24/2.8?

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/24mmcup/final/24mm_final1.html

A little low contrast at 2.8 but great stopping down.

[karabud]

I got one Kiron 24/2 which i tested a little today. Lens is enough sharp at f/2 but not perfect. At f/2.2 or 2/5 is much sharper and at f/2.8 is very good in center. Corners ar very good from f/4. At f/8 or f/11 lens is sharp from corner to corner but isn`t superb sharp like distagons or other zeiss. CA control is very good; there are some little axial CA and very very little loCA. Vinietting is very high and distortion is moustache type but not bad at all.
Some samples at f/2









f/2.2 or 2.5



and crop (no sharpening)

[motleypixel]

That's a possible contender for sure. I guess the question is where does the Minolta and Kiron fall w/in these 3 that were tested?

[cooltouch]

If you want to use a Minolta MD lens on your EOS, you'll be stuck with either an adapter that has an element for infinity focus, which will reduce lens performance, an adapter without an element, which will make the lens a macro only one, or you can convert the mount. Converting from MD to EOS is apparently trickier than converting from Canon FD to EOS, but it is possible. I've seen how-to's on converting an MD 58mm f/1.2 on the net.

So anyway, if I were in your shoes, I'd just stay with the Kiron. It's an excellent lens, most likely rivaling or even surpassing the Minolta in image quality, plus it has one more stop of light, which can be useful at times.

[motleypixel]

I will be posting a video that may, or may not, make you think WOW! (I normally don't brag like this, but I rarely surprise myself with accomplishments) It will be a high definition video on how I machined both the MD mount (yes it's non-reversible) and a M42-EOS adapter to marry them together, retaining 43.5mm registry distance and then adjusting infinity focus to bring the element groups .5mm closer to the focal plane and then turning the rear element group housing to "almost" achieve infinity focus on a FF EOS body w/o mirror collision. I has skillz and toolz

Seriously, I just finished my MD Rokkor-X 50/1.4 conversion to EOS and I'll be editing video clips taken with my 5DMK2 this weekend, so the conversion for me is not too difficult. My next conversion (which should be easier because of the lack of aperture mechanics) will be the Minolta RF 800mm f/8 Mirror Lens

So, hypothetically, if I had an EOS version of the MD Rokkor-X 24/2.8 how do you think it would stack up to the OLY mentioned here?

[motleypixel]

As promised

http://vimeo.com/14891384

[walter g]

So, hypothetically, if I had an EOS version of the MD Rokkor-X 24/2.8 how do you think it would stack up to the OLY mentioned here?


The Minolta Md Rokkor X 24 2.8 would beat it at every setting, in my opinion. Do a search for images for comparison.

[jjphoto]

[poilu]

[symphonic]

[symphonic]

And to add to the original post, here's an article comparing just those two (Kiron 24/2 and Minolta 24/2.8 ): link

[motleypixel]

Thank you Toni for the link comparing the Kiron 24/2 and Minolta MD 24/2.8...Minolta is clearly the winner in those samples shots. Now I'd like to find a second gen MD 24/2.8

Well, I'm preparing to clean-up and remove the mount on the RF 800/8...it's such a gem...a complete setup caps/case/drop-in filter/warranty card...the only thing missing is the original manual. I think the conversion to EOS will be simple...just a machined and shimmed M42-EOS or even better maybe an M39-EOS adapter will work better to close the gap.

The only piece of the whole lot that's worn or broke down due to age is the front lens cap. It's made of a leather-like paper with Minolta embossed in the top and lined with the same red felt as the inside of the case. I would really like to re-skin it...I have some ideas, like using a similar material and spray adhesive and then using a vacuum sealing gizzmo to suck the material tight...IDK...I just feel like restoring it to like-new.

[cooltouch]

I've used spray adhesive before when redoing a motorcycle seat's cover material, and all I did was just stretch it tight after spraying a light coat of 3M sealer on it, and it stuck instantly. I suspect you won't need any sort of vacuum device to suck it down tight. Far as that goes, the same type of vinyl used for M/C seats might work well for your lens cover. In the mean time, if you want something to cover your lens with while you're redoing the old one, do like a lot of astronomers do to cover the ends of their big telescopes -- use a shower cap.

[motleypixel]

shower cap sounds good, thanks! as far as using a vacuum system to "suck" the material tight against the cap...I was thinking this would help in the material sucking into the recess of the embossed Minolta name.

[Ivan Lee]

I had the MD version (was stolen) and compared to the MC version, the MD focus closer and is a bit sharper wide open in the center, but the MC is overall a better lens, sharp at all apertures.

BTW, the MC 24/2.8 and the Leica R 24/2.8 are the same lens