Photoclubalpha

When I sold my Minolta 7D I - mistakenly - bought an Olympus E510. Don't get me wrong, it's a good camera but just not in the same league as a Sony/Minolta. Mostly because of the limited number of lenses available. However I have paid my penalty and now regret selling all my KM equipment here and have bought a Sony A700 to atone for my sins. Mea Culpa.
But while I had the E510 I attached a Minolta MD 50mm macro and it worked very well!
My question is does anyone else here use there really old equipment when it is still capable of some quite good results?
The following taken with a Minolta MD 50mm macro attached to an Olympus E510. I set the f-stop on the camera to f5.8 - to match what I set on the lens - but have no idea what the shutter speed resulted in.

Hi Cogito, : )

These are lovely, playful photos with almost-geometrical forms as flowers. I especially liked the second shot which creates a repetition of the same subject as well as a texture-feel.

Thanks for sharing what your old lens can do. : )

Yildiz

Hi Tony - I like those flower macros with the MD 50mm macro. Having only got in to photopgraphy relatively recently I don't have any lenses that I bought a long time ago, but I have started buying old, namley Minolta MC/MD, lenses to use on my Nex. I have the MD 50/1.4, 45/2 and 28/2.8. The latter two are a ok, but the 50/1.4 is a stunner and I really enjoy using it, especially for people pictures. The manual focus action on these old lenses is fantastic, and as I use MF a lot anyway on the Nex these old primes are perfect. I'm currently hunting around for MDs 85, 135 and 200. (Any one any recommendations?) I already have a very nice AF macro in the 50ish range (Tamron 60), but your MD example would be a good alternative (I almost never use AF for macro anyway).

Here is a recent shot from my 50/1.4 on the Nex 5 (also posted in another thread).


2012 Jubilee Cream Tea by Birm, on Flickr

Birma wrote:Hi Tony - I like those flower macros with the MD 50mm macro. Having only got in to photopgraphy relatively recently I don't have any lenses that I bought a long time ago, but I have started buying old, namley Minolta MC/MD, lenses to use on my Nex. I have the MD 50/1.4, 45/2 and 28/2.8. The latter two are a ok, but the 50/1.4 is a stunner and I really enjoy using it, especially for people pictures. The manual focus action on these old lenses is fantastic, and as I use MF a lot anyway on the Nex these old primes are perfect. I'm currently hunting around for MDs 85, 135 and 200. (Any one any recommendations?)

The best variant of the 135 is the MD135/2.0 but it is large, rare and expensive. Go for the f2.8 and avoid the 3.5 one. The 24/2.8 is excellent too and works well with the NEX.

See also

http://rokkorfiles.com/Lens%20Reviews.html

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/954103

[quote="Birma"] .... (Any one any recommendations?) {/quote]
Nice shot... I also have - amongst others an MC 85mm f1.7 which is really good, MC 58mm f1.2 also very good and 2 Cat lenses - the MD 250mm and MD 500mm. Both of those work well and the 250mm is just about hand-holdable but the 500mm does require some support. It is, after all a 750mm lens shooting at f8 so a bit of wobble is inevitable.
This with the 250mm. Just trying it out once in the garden.

I have the 85/1.7 and 58/1.2 too. Both excellent but the latter is pretty expensive to buy these days, probably because it's a popular choice for converting for Canon SLRs; the 50/1.4, which I also have, is a fine alternative. One of my two favourite lenses for use with the NEX is the M-Rokkor 40/2 which is quite brilliant and still a bit of a bargain despite having doubled in value over the last couple of years.

http://forum.mflenses.com/m-rokkor-40-2 ... 29561.html

Thanks guys. I really appreciate the suggestions. I will keep a look out for the 85/1.7 and 135/2.8.

If you'll excuse the further requests for info, any experience with MD extension tubes, especially on the 50s and tele lenses?

Birma wrote:Thanks guys. I really appreciate the suggestions. I will keep a look out for the 85/1.7 and 135/2.8.

If you'll excuse the further requests for info, any experience with MD extension tubes, especially on the 50s and tele lenses?

Using extension tubes with MD lenses will be the same as with AF lenses except they will not be chipped for aperture adjustment - but of course they dont need to be. I uses Kenko rings with the LA-EA1 and the MAF 50/3.5 macro. You cd do the same with an MD-NEX adapter, the MD 50/3.5 macro and MD tubes. Clearly you want to use lenses with short minimum focus distance.

The following link will give you some useful indicators of lens quality for a variety of legacy lenses including Minolta


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

Thanks Artington, and thanks for the link, a very useful list - bookmarked!

@ artington, saw your comment regarding the Minolta MD 135/3.5 above & wondered what was so bad about it ? I've been looking for a MD fit 135mm & don't want to spend the sort of money the 2.8's go for so was restricted to the 3.5 version & now you've put doubts in my mind !!
Thanks
RT

Richard T wrote:@ artington, saw your comment regarding the Minolta MD 135/3.5 above & wondered what was so bad about it ? I've been looking for a MD fit 135mm & don't want to spend the sort of money the 2.8's go for so was restricted to the 3.5 version & now you've put doubts in my mind !!
Thanks
RT

Check out the following link which gives lens comparisons. You pay about £20 for a 135/3.5 and probably four times that for the f2.8 version, which probably says it all.

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

Artington
Thanks very much for the link, interesting results, could spend an hours or two pottering around in there ! See what you mean re the price/quality balance, interstingly (? maybe) I note the little Olympus 135/3.5 has very similar results, I wonder if there is some design reason why , other than they may have been made in the same factory !!
Best wishes
RT

Tony,
I have been using some MD lenses for a while now on my A900, A700 and in the past on A100. Here are some examples:

This is with MD/MA adapter without glass on A900. Lens: Kiron 80-200 f3.5-f5.6 (I am not sure)

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC24562Aviary by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]

This one is also with MD/MA adapter without glass on A900. Lens: Tokina 80-200 f2.8

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC26538cropAviary by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]

This one is also with MD/MA adapter without glass on A900. Lens: Vivitar 90f2.8

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC24637Aviary by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]

This one is with MD/MA adapter with glass on A900. Lens: Kiron 80-200 f3.5-f5.6 (I am not sure)

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC24412Aviary by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]

Suri, nice to see some other lenses still working! Good colour, good clarity, good focus. Nice to see that such a new sophisticated camera can still use such unsophisticated lenses. Is it the camera? Is it the lens? Or maybe just a combination of 2 excellent items?

I had good luck with all the three bodies (A100, A700 and A900). So I have to infer that lenses matter the most.
After all the body/sensor can only make things worse, right? I have about dozen lenses (between MD and M42).
Here is an example of Hanimex 135f2.8 Pentax lens on A100.

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC24777 by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]

Also you mentioned Olympus. Here is Tcon300B converter that was used with E10/E20 models that I had custom bracket made and used with
Minolta Dimage A2 point and shoot. That converter is at least couple of decades old if not longer.

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigsu ... .jpg[/img]
DSC05614 by BigSury, on Flickr[/url]