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.
Dr. Harout wrote:Zeb, tell your wife it's wonderful to be "insane" from time to time.
Example: if a patient pays a visit with a camera on, I will deal with him much better... Just tell this to your wife.
That's funny! When I went in to the OR for my wife's C-section w/ my A350, the nurse said I couldn't take pics until after the baby was out. I told her I would use it sans flash, and the Doc looked up and said "I have that exact same camera!" He okayed the shooting.
I got the shots, and the Doc and I later talked photography - after Lilly was safely here.
Dusty
An a700, an a550 and couple of a580s, plus even more lenses (Zeiss included!).
Dr. Harout wrote:Zeb, tell your wife it's wonderful to be "insane" from time to time.
Example: if a patient pays a visit with a camera on, I will deal with him much better... Just tell this to your wife.
That's funny! When I went in to the OR for my wife's C-section w/ my A350, the nurse said I couldn't take pics until after the baby was out. I told her I would use it sans flash, and the Doc looked up and said "I have that exact same camera!" He okayed the shooting.
I got the shots, and the Doc and I later talked photography - after Lilly was safely here.
What is meant by a "crossed X" version of the Minolta AF 135mm ?
I do own one, but never realised that there are any special versions, so would appreciate any information.
Thanks
[email protected] wrote:What is meant by a "crossed X" version of the Minolta AF 135 mm?
When the Minolta AF system was young back in the mid and late '80s, the system was called 'Maxxum' in North America, and the double letter x was written in a certain kind of ligature on the lenses' front rings. After a few years, Minolta had to stop using this particular writing due to some kind of trademark infringement IIRC, so they resorted to a regular way of writing the Maxxum name.
So the 'crossed X' versions of lenses are early samples originally sold to the North American market. Apart from that, it doesn't mean anything ... in particular no special optics or so. The glass inside is the same as in non-Maxxum versions of the same lenses.
Minolta should have put out a line of Valdez products just to get even.
Sorry, I got off topic about the 135mm f2.8.
I remember I had to wait a loooonnnnng time for my Minolta 9000 because of that double x nonsense.
Wow thanks! Welcomed by the Viceroy, now I feel like a VIP. It eased the painful memory of that fiasco.
I liked the cross x design of the maxxum name.
Seriously, I was considering between 85mm and 135mm but went middle of the road and got the 100f2.8 macro.
The 135 STF is just too darn expensive, so is the Zeiss 135f1.8 (and heavy too).
Has anyone noticed the old Minolta lenses are jumping up in price recently?
No doubt thanks to the A900.
FramerDave wrote:Has anyone noticed the old Minolta lenses are jumping up in price recently?
They took their first significant jump upwards four years ago when the Konica-Minolta Dynax 7D arrived. Before that, hardly anybody wanted Minolta lenses; they used to be dirt-cheap. And now they're taking another jump ... indeed due to the arrival of the Sony A900, no doubt.
