STF Lens question

[cbaldeck]

I have an A900 and am considering adding the 135mm STF lens to my collection. I do not know anyone who has one, and they seem to be missing from the stock of local dealers who sell Sony. They must be a very low demand item, in spite of their uniqueness.

Is there any significant difference between the Minolta and Sony versions? I read the Dyxum user reviews on both, and aside from one person who reported that the Minolta seems to have a better build quality, nothing caught my attention.

At the moment, both versions are currently listed on eBay at "buy it now" prices only from Hong Kong dealers, at above the B&H or Adorama new price for the Sony version. So if that's any guide, I'd expect to actually have to pay more for a Minolta. Is it worth while going to the hassle and extra expense to find a Minolta version? Was there more than one Minolta version? I would expect the Sony version to have newer types of coating, at least, and it would be new and also carry a warranty. Am I missing something?

Charles

[Dr. Harout]

Charles, welcome to the forum.
I always wished to have that lens (never mind Minolta or Sony, both are awesome).
Though haven't seen any of them, I'm quite sure that there are no real differences except for improved coating (optimized for dslr) and price.

[David Kilpatrick]

Unless you have very good reasons - mainly taking portraits or fashion pictures on location at f/4.5 to f/5.6 - the lens is a very expensive novelty. The Sony examples are exactly the same as Minolta, relabelled (later ones maybe have a different rubber grip). They had the component parts still in stock as the lenses were only ever made on demand, to special order. When Sony took over they got the remaining lenses assembled.

One good reason to buy the STF is that it will one day have rarity value; it's unlikely another batch will ever be manufactured as the neutral-density glass element was a very specialised product which Minolta formulated at a time when they made their own glass.

David

[pakodominguez]

get the 100 f2.8 Soft Focus for half the price, I think is a more interesting alternative (even if I've never tried the STF...)

[cbaldeck]

"Unless you have very good reasons - mainly taking portraits or fashion pictures on location at f/4.5 to f/5.6 - the lens is a very expensive novelty. The Sony examples are exactly the same as Minolta, relabelled (later ones maybe have a different rubber grip). They had the component parts still in stock as the lenses were only ever made on demand, to special order. When Sony took over they got the remaining lenses assembled."

"One good reason to buy the STF is that it will one day have rarity value; it's unlikely another batch will ever be manufactured as the neutral-density glass element was a very specialised product which Minolta formulated at a time when they made their own glass."

David
Thanks for the reply. I do anticipate doing some outdoor portraits and macro work with the lens, and I've seen examples of images from it, hence my interest in the STF. It would just seem easier to get the Sony version.

I expect you're right about it eventually becoming a rarity. Sometimes I get lucky that way, as when I purchased the AF 28mm f1.4 Nikkor for my Nikon kit a few years ago. I thought $1700 for a 28mm lens was a lot at the time, but thought I could use it for weddings, which I did. It now sells for twice that amount on Ebay. But I don't plan to sell it yet. It has excellent correction for coma, so I'm going to try using it with my D3 for night scenics with stars.

For Pako:

I have other ways of getting a soft image: Nikon Soft 1 and Soft 2 filters, and a Soft Focus Pentax 6x7 lens, which can probably be adapted to the Sony. And a couple of old Imagons, left over from view camera days. Did I say I was a collector?

Charles

[pakodominguez]

Did I say I was a collector?

In that case: Be happy!

[David Kilpatrick]

The only issue I have with the STF lens is that a nearly identical effect can be achieved by taking a decent 135mm f/2.8 lens - maybe an old manual T-mount - and using it at f/2.8 with a strong centre filter fitted (the type used for Schneider Super Angulon, the maximum density available - the best one is the filter made for the 16mm Hologon on Contax G, but that can be very expensive). If you can obtain a splittable lens, such as the Komuranon 100mm f/2.5, the centre filter can even be added at the iris position which makes a nearly perfect copy of the STF design. I've seen the STF dismantled and examined all the parts, and it was a peculiar way to achieve something which could have been done at far lower cost.

I love the STF results but I also love the results from, for example, the Minolta 135mm f/4 TC-Rokkor manual lens with its perfectly circular iris (can't remember how many blades but it may have been 19 not 9!). I sold my last one for £20!

David