View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 566 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 9:09 am Post subject: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
I bought this lens yesterday, it looks the same of the CELTIC version in every detail, but it does not show that word in the nameplate .
Any help?
It performs remarkably, anyway
#1
#2
[/img] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1617 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:26 am Post subject: Re: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
Super rare or replaced parts maybe. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3952 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:31 am Post subject: Re: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Ultrapix wrote: |
I bought this lens yesterday, it looks the same of the CELTIC version in every detail, but it does not show that word in the nameplate.
Any help? |
Usually this kind of "bastards" arises from repair work ... My original Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO "non-HS" for instance was transformed by Minolta Switzerland into a "HS" (="High Speed") with proper HS-gear and original "HS"sticker on the lens, however it was missing the "AF stop" button of the factory MinAF 2.8/200mm APO G HS.
Ultrapix wrote: |
It performs remarkably, anyway
|
Yeah, a nice small lens - as good as the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, at least for landscape purposes (for what I test my lneses).
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RokkorDoctor
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 1413 Location: Kent, UK
Expire: 2025-05-01
|
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
I would suggest that this lens is a Celtic version, but has had the name ring replaced by one of the regular MD Rokkor series.
Of the MD 28mm/2.8 generation with the conical DOF scale, the regular MD Rokkor versions I have seen all have the feet scale in green, whereas all the Celtic versions I have seen have had the feet scale in orange.
There are no guarantees with replaced parts, but the orange feet scale, ribbed focus grip and colour of the coating reflections would lead me to believe the lens actually is a Celtic edition, with the name ring replaced.
...but coating reflections are not easy to judge, so it is unlikely but nevertheless possible that this is a regular MD Rokkor version with a damaged focus ring replaced by one from a Celtic edition. _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 566 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2022 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
Thanks to everyone. What I can say is that the lens does not show any signs, so in the event that it has undergone some servicing and parts replacement, whoever did it really had fairy hands, which would have been possible if it had gone through an official service centre. In any case, the most likely hypothesis remains that it is a Celtic that has had its front ring replaced, for reasons that are hard to imagine, or that it has been produced with a mix of parts already at the factory, something that companies sometimes did at particular times. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RokkorDoctor
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 1413 Location: Kent, UK
Expire: 2025-05-01
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2022 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
Ultrapix wrote: |
Thanks to everyone. What I can say is that the lens does not show any signs, so in the event that it has undergone some servicing and parts replacement, whoever did it really had fairy hands, which would have been possible if it had gone through an official service centre. In any case, the most likely hypothesis remains that it is a Celtic that has had its front ring replaced, for reasons that are hard to imagine, or that it has been produced with a mix of parts already at the factory, something that companies sometimes did at particular times. |
If I am not mistaken, the name rings on that model/generation 28/2.8 are plastic, so easily scratched. It may simply have been a substitution for cosmetic reasons.
Again, if I am not mistaken, the Celtic lens line was a budget lens line marketed in the U.S. only (some mechanical & cosmetic simplifications and less advanced coatings, but otherwise optically the same), so outside of the U.S. a replacement Rokkor name ring would have been easier to source than a replacement Celtic name ring. But I am in no doubt that the performance of your lens will be indistinguishable from the regular Rokkor version under most conditions. _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1226
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2022 3:03 pm Post subject: Re: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
Ultrapix wrote: |
I bought this lens yesterday, it looks the same of the CELTIC version in every detail, but it does not show that word in the nameplate.
Any help? |
Usually this kind of "bastards" arises from repair work ... My original Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO "non-HS" for instance was transformed by Minolta Switzerland into a "HS" (="High Speed") with proper HS-gear and original "HS"sticker on the lens, however it was missing the "AF stop" button of the factory MinAF 2.8/200mm APO G HS.
Ultrapix wrote: |
It performs remarkably, anyway
|
Yeah, a nice small lens - as good as the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, at least for landscape purposes (for what I test my lneses).
S |
As philip mentioned ,distagon would be a close match with the Sony Fe f2 ,but regarding Minolta 28mm there are some statements saying that 3.5 it would be as good as the 2.8 on f8/11 , anyway, having the 35 mm the ideal choice for me would be 21-24mm FL , that are not easy options for the amount of money they go nowadays. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RokkorDoctor
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 1413 Location: Kent, UK
Expire: 2025-05-01
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2022 4:36 pm Post subject: Re: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
kiddo wrote: |
stevemark wrote: |
Ultrapix wrote: |
I bought this lens yesterday, it looks the same of the CELTIC version in every detail, but it does not show that word in the nameplate.
Any help? |
Usually this kind of "bastards" arises from repair work ... My original Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO "non-HS" for instance was transformed by Minolta Switzerland into a "HS" (="High Speed") with proper HS-gear and original "HS"sticker on the lens, however it was missing the "AF stop" button of the factory MinAF 2.8/200mm APO G HS.
Ultrapix wrote: |
It performs remarkably, anyway
|
Yeah, a nice small lens - as good as the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, at least for landscape purposes (for what I test my lneses).
S |
As philip mentioned ,distagon would be a close match with the Sony Fe f2 ,but regarding Minolta 28mm there are some statements saying that 3.5 it would be as good as the 2.8 on f8/11 , anyway, having the 35 mm the ideal choice for me would be 21-24mm FL , that are not easy options for the amount of money they go nowadays. |
From memory my experience with the latest models (Rokkor MD-II 28/3.5 and MD-III 28/3.5) is that they are really quite well-behaved as far as flare & contrast are concerned, very likely due to the simple 2-lens construction of the cell ahead of the aperture.
I always thought these two latest calculations by Minolta (Rokkor MD-II 28/3.5 and MD-III 28/3.5) are not very well-known sleepers, only let down a bit by a noticeable higher level of light-fall-off at the corners when shot wide open, but otherwise really excellent. _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 868
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2022 8:18 pm Post subject: Re: Minolta 28mm f/2.8 MD Lens: "CELTIC" or not? |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
RokkorDoctor wrote: |
kiddo wrote: |
stevemark wrote: |
Ultrapix wrote: |
I bought this lens yesterday, it looks the same of the CELTIC version in every detail, but it does not show that word in the nameplate.
Any help? |
Usually this kind of "bastards" arises from repair work ... My original Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO "non-HS" for instance was transformed by Minolta Switzerland into a "HS" (="High Speed") with proper HS-gear and original "HS"sticker on the lens, however it was missing the "AF stop" button of the factory MinAF 2.8/200mm APO G HS.
Ultrapix wrote: |
It performs remarkably, anyway
|
Yeah, a nice small lens - as good as the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, at least for landscape purposes (for what I test my lneses).
S |
As philip mentioned ,distagon would be a close match with the Sony Fe f2 ,but regarding Minolta 28mm there are some statements saying that 3.5 it would be as good as the 2.8 on f8/11 , anyway, having the 35 mm the ideal choice for me would be 21-24mm FL , that are not easy options for the amount of money they go nowadays. |
From memory my experience with the latest models (Rokkor MD-II 28/3.5 and MD-III 28/3.5) is that they are really quite well-behaved as far as flare & contrast are concerned, very likely due to the simple 2-lens construction of the cell ahead of the aperture.
I always thought these two latest calculations by Minolta (Rokkor MD-II 28/3.5 and MD-III 28/3.5) are not very well-known sleepers, only let down a bit by a noticeable higher level of light-fall-off at the corners when shot wide open, but otherwise really excellent. |
Do not disregard the latest 28 2,8 5/5 which I found even better than the 3,5. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 566 Location: Italy
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
RokkorDoctor
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 1413 Location: Kent, UK
Expire: 2025-05-01
|
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2023 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
Or a dodgy seller taking regular "Rokkor" nameplates from defective 28mm lenses, and putting them on Celtic lenses in order to sell them at a premium?
(Celtic lenses usually go for a bit less than Rokkor lenses...)
Athough, not sure why they wouldn't then swap the differently patterned vinyl focus grip as well; they are not glued. _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
michelb
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 Posts: 67 Location: Montréal area,Québec, Canada
|
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2023 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
michelb wrote:
These actually came from the factory like this sometimes in the middle of the MD-II production run and were apparently only sold in Europe (most of the ones i have seen for sale were from the UK.
MD-II era Celtic lenses had serial numbers from 1015XXX up to approx. 1078XXX
MD-II lenses had serial numbers from about 1015XXX to 1238XXX
These special production lenses had serial numbers from about 1063XXX to 1076XXX so they appear intermixed with regular MD ROKKOR's and Celtics.
See pic of a boxed copy that shows that this lens has no ROKKOR name on it (or on the box) and did not come with a lens shade (like the Celtic lenses) so it appears that Minolta was stuck with leftover Celtic parts and decided to use them intermixed with regular lenses to send to market at maybe a lower price in some countries.
[img]
#1
[/img]
#1
_________________ Michel B
Interested in Minolta SLR's since 1971 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 566 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2023 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
Quote: |
These actually came from the factory like this sometimes in the middle of the MD-II production run and were apparently only sold in Europe (most of the ones i have seen for sale were from the UK.
MD-II era Celtic lenses had serial numbers from 1015XXX up to approx. 1078XXX
MD-II lenses had serial numbers from about 1015XXX to 1238XXX
These special production lenses had serial numbers from about 1063XXX to 1076XXX so they appear intermixed with regular MD ROKKOR's and Celtics.
See pic of a boxed copy that shows that this lens has no ROKKOR name on it (or on the box) and did not come with a lens shade (like the Celtic lenses) so it appears that Minolta was stuck with leftover Celtic parts and decided to use them intermixed with regular lenses to send to market at maybe a lower price in some countries. |
Thank you for your detailed answer, which I think puts an end to this little mystery. Interestingly, the drawing on the box shows the normal rubber ring, but if they really were disposing of unused parts, it is consistent that they didn't bother to redo the drawing... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|