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? MD 2.8 24mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:51 pm    Post subject: Minolta? MD 2.8 24mm Reply with quote
I was rooting in my boxes of lenses and found a lens I never knew I had and don't know much about because the name ring is missing.

This is the lens in question, not my copy, but it looks identical:




Clearly it's in Minolta mount and it's a 2.8/24 lens, but beyond that I know nothing.

I thought it might be the 1981 MD-III Minolta 2.8/24 as it looks a little similar, but on closer comparison, it's not the same.




So what I'm wondering is this a different variant of the Minolta or a third party lens that has copied the styling of the Minolta?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't know the variants but I have a copy of this lens with the bezel.







PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anybody know why the f mark chang3s to green at 22?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have to say the distance markings on yours look a tad phony. But not even third party lenses I've seen are necessarily painted bad, so I'm not quite sure the reason? Maybe I'm just seeing things.



PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:
I have to say the distance markings on yours look a tad phony. But not even third party lenses I've seen are necessarily painted bad, so I'm not quite sure the reason? Maybe I'm just seeing things.



Yeah, it's similar but the small details are off - there's no f22 on the dof scale on mine, it only shows upto f16, and the distance markings are different too.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I made a little graphic to show the detail differences.



PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 6:14 am    Post subject: Seagull 24mm 1:2.8 Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I was rooting in my boxes of lenses and found a lens I never knew I had and don't know much about because the name ring is missing.

...........

So what I'm wondering is this a different variant of the Minolta or a third party lens that has copied the styling of the Minolta?


Ian, yours is a Seagull 24mm 1:2.8, a copy made in the 1990s by the Chinese brand 海鸥 (pronounced [hai Ō]. 海 = sea; 鸥 = gull ). According to some Chinese testers, it doesn't perform optically as well as the Minolta MD-III 24/2.8. (I hope this fact doesn't make you feel bad. 🙏)

There's a practically new one (pictured below) for sale on a Chinese online flea market for which the seller asks for the equivalent of $38.75 USD including domestic shipping.

The only difference between it and your copy, as far as I can see, is the shape of the opening for the aperture post on the mount, maybe because it is from a different batch.


Seagull 24mm 1:2.8


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Aah, I see, thankyou for clearing up the mystery!

I'll enjoy trying the lens out anyways.

Interesting how they copied the Minolta styling, I wonder if they also copied the optical design?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Interesting how they copied the Minolta styling, I wonder if they also copied the optical design?


No, they didn't. The optical formula of the Minolta MC-X~MD-II 24/2.8 is 9 elements in 7 groups; MD-III 24/2.8 is 8 in 8 while the Seagull 24/2.8 is 8 elements in 7 groups.

As far as I know, the Seagull company did pay Minolta for permission in using the SR mount and cosmetics design patents as a form of "technological collaboration" and produced some Minolta-lookalike lenses that are dubbed "Poorman's Minolta".

Enjoy your Seagull. Take its optical characters as its "personality". When used by a skillful photographer in the right condition for the right intention and subject matter, there are really no bad lenses on earth, IMHO.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus wrote:
Anybody know why the f mark chang3s to green at 22?


Minolta MD-III era lenses (and most MD-I and MD-II era lenses) have their minimum aperture indicated in green. It indicates that the minimum aperture must be set on the lens for use with the program mode or shutter speed priority mode that some of the Minolta cameras support. E.g., on the XD7/11 the "S" on the "M/A/S" mode switch for Manual/Aperture priority/Shutter priority is also painted green. On the X700 the "P" on the mode selector indication "Program" mode is also green. Just a reminder to the user that if they set the camera to the "green" operation mode, they should also set the lens to the "green" minimum aperture.

Most MD-III era lenses also have a small lock to fix the aperture ring on the minimum aperture, to avoid it being changed accidentally.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sakyaputta wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Interesting how they copied the Minolta styling, I wonder if they also copied the optical design?


No, they didn't. The optical formula of the Minolta MC-X~MD-II 24/2.8 is 9 elements in 7 groups; MD-III 24/2.8 is 8 in 8 while the Seagull 24/2.8 is 8 elements in 7 groups.

As far as I know, the Seagull company did pay Minolta for permission in using the SR mount and cosmetics design patents as a form of "technological collaboration" and produced some Minolta-lookalike lenses that are dubbed "Poorman's Minolta".

Enjoy your Seagull. Take its optical characters as its "personality". When used by a skillful photographer in the right condition for the right intention and subject matter, there are really no bad lenses on earth, IMHO.


Thankyou very much for this info. I very much agree, there are no bad lenses, it is like the old English proverb goes 'tis a poor workman that blames his tools'.

If I need a high quality 24mm, I have a Hexanon, a Nikkor and a Yashica ML I can use, so I will, as you suggest, just enjoy the character of this one.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

If I need a high quality 24mm, I have a Hexanon, a Nikkor and a Yashica ML I can use, so I will, as you suggest, just enjoy the character of this one.


Right on! Have fun with it! 🙏


PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2024 6:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seagull 28mm and 24mm are designed by Ding, Guangchu, who designed Pearl River 28mm F2.8 in 1980s by referring Olympus 28mm F2.8 and Osawa 28mm F2.8.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1