Minolta 100mm f/2

Discussion of lenses, brand or independent, uses and merits
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
User avatar
Birma
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6642
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:10 pm

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby Birma » Wed Apr 22, 2009 5:25 pm

Wes Gibbon wrote:
Wow!

Sorry if this makes some of you green with envy, but having bought an A900 recently, I looked through my collection of Minolta glass, as I thought I had a 100mm macro somewhere. I did, but I also found a 100mm f2, which I had forgotten about! I can't remember what I paid for it, but I probably paid rather less than £200 for it, during the dark days before Sony came to rescue the Minoota AF mount. I didn't realise I was sitting on a goldmine (slight exaggeration)...


Double wow! :shock: I am equally amazed that anyone has a collection of glass so big they forget they have lenses. As a humble newbie with a handful of lenses I dream of having that much glass. :D
Nex 5, Nex 6 (IR), A7M2, A99 and a bunch of lenses.

Wes Gibbon
Oligarch
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Peterborough, U.K.
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby Wes Gibbon » Wed Apr 22, 2009 5:53 pm

You have a few lenses yourself, though perhaps not as specialised as a 100mm f2, which of course can be used for any purpose which requires this focal length, but is primarily for 'head and shoulders' portraits, or so I believe.

I had forgotten about this lens because I didn't use Minolta that much at the time, but I bought anything which looked interesting and didn't cost too much. I realise I don't deserve to have it, but I think I'll keep hold of it for the time being; now that I have the A900, I might occasionally find it just the thing. It will probably gradually appreciate in value unless and until Sony or CZ decide to produce more primes for FF in Sony mount. The last announcement from Sony was not encouraging - it seems to me that Sony will leave the A900 to tick over for some time while they concentrate on the APS-C sector. I don't see that they can be taken really seriously with their existing line up of FF lenses, but I imagine prime lenses are unprofitable these days and they have produced as few as they think they can get away with.

For my purposes, the A900 looks as though it is going to give me the quality I 'm looking for (to replace my Mamiya 645 system which is getting heavier and heavier as I get older, and hasn't always given me quite the resolution I would have liked), when paired up with classic Minolta glass like the 28-135, beercan and 100mm macro.

User avatar
bossel
Viceroy
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:49 pm
Location: France, Côte d'Azur

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby bossel » Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Now that you have an A900, 100mm is much too short - the ideal replacement would be a 135/2.8 8) Ohhhh I do have one of these, not much used ...

Wes Gibbon
Oligarch
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Peterborough, U.K.
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby Wes Gibbon » Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:41 pm

bossel wrote:Now that you have an A900, 100mm is much too short - the ideal replacement would be a 135/2.8 8) Ohhhh I do have one of these, not much used ...


Too short for what?

User avatar
InTheSky
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby InTheSky » Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:23 pm

Ghor wrote:Hello!
This is my first post even if I've already read many of your interesting discussions in this forum. I would like to know your opinion about this prime lens because I was looking for a second hand 85mm1.4 but I've found one 100mm f/2 at a good price and "like new". It's known to be sharp and probably sharper than the minolta 85mm1.4 but I'm more concerned about its bokeh. Is it good or is it better to spend a little bit more and to go for the 85mm instead?


The F/2.0 family of Minolta is almost a wow any time on any shot, but the 100mm F/2.0 is the best of this class I think.

In fact I'm not able to say now if it is the 200mm 2.8 or the 100mm 2.0 who is the best lens I ever use from Minolta. The 100mm even at 2.0 on the A900 will blow you away with the detail and color.

This is a single portrait shot I have to execute for the company I'm working on (I'm a software Engineer, but they ask me when there is picture to take) :
F2.5: http://www.pbase.com/nadeauf/image/109091514
F2.2 (my test light picture ... but I have keep it): http://www.pbase.com/nadeauf/image/109091498/large
(Both pictures has passed thought Portrait Pro unfortunately ... )

Probably people have already said that, at any price under 900 US at this moment with a very good copy, don't be afraid to buy one. I can insure you that with more Full frame camera Sony around this lens will be impossible to find under 1000 US next year.

This is the keeper you can buy play with it and resell it and never lost money.

In fact on my side I have more than one :-), in case I'm loosing one and never been able to find another one in the future.

In any situation, when I need to bring some prime and I have not a lot of space, the 100mm 2.0 wine every time on the 85mm F/1.4. I'm still some time thinking that I should sell the 85 1.4 (that will be most common to find in the future) and stay only with the 100mm 2.0.

Regards,

Frank
Frank
A7 (R, S & R II) + NEX 3N ( and few lenses )

Ghor
Acolyte
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:59 am

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby Ghor » Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:24 pm

Wow! Thanks for all your advices.
In fact the one I've found costs 550 euros in very good condition so probably 100 euros cheaper than a good 85mm1.4. However I'm still not sure if it's a good lens for me. It seems to me from the following review (in italian) and from dyxum that there's a kind of balance between sharpness and bokeh: the 100mmf2 would be sharper than the 85mm but its bokeh would be more harsh, less subtle...? Or maybe I'm wrong or maybe I would not be able to see the differences. :?:

http://www.nadir.it/ob-fot/MINOLTA_100F2/100_f2.htm

youpii
Heirophant
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:55 pm

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby youpii » Fri Apr 24, 2009 5:50 pm

$840 is a lot for such a lens.
My 135/1.8za cost me $1200 in Hong-Kong with a 1 year international guarantee and it also works very well on the a900.

User avatar
InTheSky
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby InTheSky » Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:45 pm

youpii wrote:$840 is a lot for such a lens.
My 135/1.8za cost me $1200 in Hong-Kong with a 1 year international guarantee and it also works very well on the a900.


Optic has a price, but weight and size too. I have not played with the Zeiss lens on A900. But the 100mm F/2.0 on A900 for the size, weight, image quality, build like a tank, perfect for portrait or even other event (100mm on Full frame is not that long) is impossible to find on the market.

I was interest by the Zeiss lens before, but unfortunately, only in the size of the Zeiss lens itself on a bag, I can almost fit my 28mm 2.0, 50mm 1.4, 100mm 2.0 and 135mm 2.8.

If the photograph is a walk around photograph and want to carry the camera everywhere I will strongly recommend the 100mm 2.0 over the 135 1.8.

Regards,

Frank
Frank
A7 (R, S & R II) + NEX 3N ( and few lenses )

youpii
Heirophant
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:55 pm

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby youpii » Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:39 pm

When I want to "go light", I only take the 35/2 & 85/1.4za. I might add the 50/3.5 Macro, which is tiny.

I never tried the 100/2. Do you think it's better than the 85/1.4za?

User avatar
InTheSky
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby InTheSky » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:20 pm

I cannot say for the Zeiss, I have never tried or took picture with it.

But if you already have the Zeiss and for the review I have saw from this lens, you should keep it :-). I'm pretty sure at F/2.0 the Zeiss is probably sharp corner to corner as the 100mm F/2.0 on the A900.

Now :-( I need to find a Zeiss to try it :-).

Regards,

Frank
Frank
A7 (R, S & R II) + NEX 3N ( and few lenses )

User avatar
artington
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby artington » Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:24 pm

If anyone seriously wants to buy one of these this now seems to be the going price. This seller (see link) is reliable and sold another one earlier in the week for the same price. They had a batch of 50/3.5 macros a few weeks ago and I bought one and was delighted both with the lens and also with their service.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... SS:GB:1123

youpii
Heirophant
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:55 pm

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby youpii » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:26 pm

Yes, it is the price now. All the F/2 series are rare and thus expensive.

I'm a happy Alpha user now. But honestly, if my 35/2 was broken one day and Sony does not have a replacement available, finding another one is such an hassle that I would seriously consider going back to Canon.

User avatar
AJ Gressette
Initiate
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 3:36 pm
Location: Charleston, South Carolina USA

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby AJ Gressette » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:14 am

In the 35mm format, Minolta's STF, f/2, f/4 and f/1.4LE are my favorite lenses. I think I would hold out until I could find another 35 before I ever went back to Cannon.

I have yet to figure out what it is about the 100 f/2 but I like the look from the photos produced from the 700 more than the 900.
Hey this looks dangerous.......You go first!
If at first you do not succeed, Skydiving is not for you.

pooschey
Acolyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Location: A little red dot... Singapore

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby pooschey » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:50 am

I've been a lurker for a while since I first got my A350, though I've upgraded to the A700 beginning this year. Saw this thread and I thought I'd register and become an official member :D

I just got a nice copy of this lens from the guy I bought my A700 and 200mm/F2.8 APO from. It was a lucky break, and I got it for the equivalent of about US$570. Happy as a lark! I'm going out tomorrow night to try this out on my regular weekend night visits to the performances at the theatre.

User avatar
Dr. Harout
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5788
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Contact:

Re: Minolta 100mm f/2

Unread postby Dr. Harout » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:08 am

pooschey wrote:I've been a lurker for a while since I first got my A350, though I've upgraded to the A700 beginning this year. Saw this thread and I thought I'd register and become an official member :D

I just got a nice copy of this lens from the guy I bought my A700 and 200mm/F2.8 APO from. It was a lucky break, and I got it for the equivalent of about US$570. Happy as a lark! I'm going out tomorrow night to try this out on my regular weekend night visits to the performances at the theatre.


Nice lenses and welcome, Pooschey. :D
A99 + a7rII + Sony, Zeiss, Minolta, Rokinon and M42 lenses

Flickr


Return to “Lens Lore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests