Photoclubalpha

I am toying with the idea of replacing my now in bits X300.
But I have little knowledge of the MD lenses, bottom line is, WA is of most interest, but anything up to short/mid tele. I currently only have a couple of 50mm MD's lying about
I know prices are good on many, and various makers made them, esp primes etc.

Anything stand out good or bad?

One for DK, who should have a fair idea of the story

MDs better than MCs because newer coating (less prone to flare)
Celtics are cheaper but more plastic on it (REF: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Mino ... age/134116" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)
a 24mm 2.8 will go for about a 100 US$
a 28 or 35 f2.8 for about 50 US$
a 85 Varisoft or a 24 VFC goes for about US$ 800 (Ebay 280276397997; 270400169512)
another beauty is the 35 mm 2.8 Shift CA
There is a highly regarded 35-70 f3.5 too, not that expensive...
Moreinfo @ http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ManualMinoltaFree/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I use mostly the 24mm 2.8; 35mm f2.8; 58mm 1.4 and the 135mm 2.8

Regards

Thanks for the info on this one..

Shall have to start building up a system, back to the oldie ways. I like MF myself, it's easy on those big split image finders.

Narayana here from Bangalore.

I do use XD-7 with MD 50mm f1.7, MD 28mm f3.5, MD 35mm f2.8 , MD 300mm f8 Mirror optics, beloows for macro and 2x teleconverter. Look at my snaps with XD-7 at http://picasaweb.google.com/narayana.sharma/XD7#

You could get answers from http://www.flickr.com - at the following discussions:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/xd-11/

http://www.flickr.com/groups/rokkor/

and look for postings by Peter Serbe- He is an encyclopedia of MD lenses

good luck

ciao

Narayana Sharma

50 1.2 MD rokkor
135 F.2.8 my favourite on film
Sigma 70-210 F2.8 these are expensive when you find them this is my favourite zoom Minolta didn't have one when I bought this

There are lots of great Rokkor lenses; the 200 f/4 is worth looking out for and makes a nice top end to a range of primes. The 50mm f/1.4 is an affordable alternative to the f/1.2.

I also won a 90mm Tamron SP macro 1:2.5 in an auction. It came with the X-700 I was after undocumented by the seller. It turned out that the X-700 wasn't working, but the lens more than compensated for this. A great performer.

Update: there's a useful archive of information on third-party lenses from the manual focus era here.

Check out the 'Rokkor Files.com with google.
Its probably the most definitive web site on Minolta manual focus cameras and lenses.

The only Rokkors I had with my SRT101s were the 55mm F1.7 and the 58mm F1.4 each of which came with their respective bodies. I purchased a 28mm f3.5 which was a stunner for its day. Being on aircraft carriers at the time I had some trouble with the lubricant running and fouling the aperture iris blades of the 58mm. It wasn't until I was on leave that I saw the processed transparencies, this entailed a ride, for the film in the off going mail, on the COD Gannet off a catapult ashore to either Kodak, Agfa or Fuji so it was some time before I knew for sure that some shots had been lost. Some I recently managed to reclaim something from with scanning for an author of recent book about Ark Royal operations. I did regularly check the operation of the lens diaphragms so picked this fault up before too many of these now historic shots had been lost.

I picked up a second hand X700 (with split image rangefinder) about twelve tears ago and on the advice of Ivor Matanle, Amateur Photographer October 2000 and 'Collecting and Using Classic Cameras' sought out an example of the 45mm f2 MD Rokkor. This provided stunning results even then and I gave the camera and lens to my son who had dropped his Cannon APS thing in a Swiss lake (he retrieved it but it was BER) who later took it with him and his girl to Venice where he took lots of shots and was blown away by the results, well APS wasn't hard to beat.

I still have all these around now with the 55mm f1.7 doing reverse mounted macro duty on the front of a longer focal length lens.

Guess who Ivor Matanle picked that one up from

I still have my complete file of 'Secondhand Shop' articles for Amateur Photographer from the 1980s. I had a look at them and I'm amazed at how much I have forgotten, but not the qualities of the 45mm f/2 Rokkor.

Actually, there was one better Rokkor - the 50mm f/2 MC Rokkor issued immediately before the 45mm MD. This was sold on the SRT100X, a slightly reduced spec low-cost SRT which omitted the selftimer but had a hot shoe and didn't need the attachment, and also had a far better focusing screen. This was the exact period when Minolta was first working with Leica on the new lenses for the R3, and was pre-XE-1 (XE-7 in renamed markets). This camera was a complete R3 in a different shell. It was never sold with the 50mm f/2, a very slim lens.

I got to use the Leicaflex S2 alongside the SRT100X, with its 50mm f/2 and the Minolta 50mm f/2. We had them both together. The Minolta len was not uncannily similar to the Leica, it matched it in performance. The 45mm was the lighter lens which replaced that f/2 design - which remains one of the highest resolution lenses I've ever used.

David

I liked the 45mm f2 on my first XG1, but my favourite MD lens was the 100mm f2.5. That was a classic. I wish I'd kept that, but trading up meant having to sell for my XD7. C'est la vie!

This link to a photozone.de lens survey provides some useful indicators for all manner of lenses including Minolta MC/MD/AF. Some, with few respondents, can probably be taken with a pinch of salt, like that for the 45/2 MC, where the view from the two respondents is clearly very different from David's of the MD version. A useful resource, nevertheless. Indeed, looking at it again has prompted me to dig out my old 28-85 MD to try out on my NEX-7, not that its range is that compelling.

http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylens.jsp

David Kilpatrick wrote:Actually, there was one better Rokkor—the 50 mm f/2 MC Rokkor issued immediately before the 45 mm MD.

Hey—I love it when others come to the same conclusions, with regard to lens performance, as I do. I also found the MC Rokkor-PF 50 mm 1:2 one of Minolta's best standard lenses ever. It is at least as good as the MC Rokkor-PG 50 mm 1:1.4 (which is Minolta's best high-speed standard lens), if not even slightly better.

However the MC 50/2 was not immediately followed by the MD Rokkor 45 mm 1:2—there was a short-lived MD Rokkor 50 mm 1:2 following the MC 50/2 and preceding the MD 45/2. It was the very same lens as the MC 50/2 but with an updated MD aperture mechanism. After the MD Rokkor 45 mm 1:2 came the MD 50 mm 1:2, without the 'Rokkor' name, which must not be confused with the previous MC and MD Rokkor 50 mm 1:2 lenses.

By the way—did you know that Minolta made a metal screw-in hood specifically for the MD 45/2? It was not delivered together with the lens but a separately-sold accessory, so it's extremely rare in today's used market.

David Kilpatrick wrote:We had them both together. The Minolta lens was not uncannily similar to the Leica, it matched it in performance.

I guess there's a reason why there's a rumour that the Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 50 mm 1:2 actually is the Leitz Summicron-R 50 mm 1:2 glass in a Minolta barrel. I don't know if it's true—probably not but it could be. It was the time when Leitz and Minolta closely co-operated, the lenses' performance is virtuall equal, and also the lens element formulas match—six elements in five groups, with the cemented group behind the aperture. In 1976, Leitz switched to a new design for the Summicron-R 50 mm lens (now six elements in four groups) ... so maybe they generously let their co-operation partner have the old 6/5 design ...

Olaf, I have a box full of those lens hoods. I use one on the 30mm f/2.8 SAM macro!

David

01af wrote:It is at least as good as the MC Rokkor-PG 50 mm 1:1.4 (which is Minolta's best high-speed standard lens), if not even slightly better.

I still have the MC Rokkor-PG 50 mm 1:1.4 that I got with my XK in 1976 (sold the XK in 2000). I used it on the X-700 later, but it hasn't been touched since I shot with the X-700 + 50mm f1.4 in Tokyo occasionally using B&W film in about 1991. In May I bought an m4/3-MC/MD adapter and I tried the 50mm on the Olympus EM-5 for a few test shots trying out the MF with enlarged view to see how well it worked. I recall shooting a daytime long view handheld test shot at f1.4, lowest ISO, and fast shutter speed. I downloaded the raw and was quite surprised how good it looked even though it was wide open. Of course, this is with the m4/3 2x crop, but still it looked good. Very sharp and I didn't see any CA (although the scene was one that one would often see some).