Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Minolta MD and MC Lenses
  • 120 Replies sorted by
  • JanHJanH

    For some lens resolution test info. on old Minolta lenses, I found this to be quite interesting, as a comparison between lenses. :

    http://www.paulfvs.dds.nl/lenstest.html

    I have Minolta 24mm f2.8 MD-W Rokkor X and 28mm f2.8 MD lenses

  • nomadnomad

    If you can read some German, there is this Swiss site with very detailed info:

    http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive

    (The colors for the menu are a pain, though)

    Some info in English here: http://digitalrokkor.altervista.org/minoltalens.html (scroll down)

  • FlaaandeeersFlaaandeeers

    Metabones answered last week that MD Speed Booster might be launched by the end of the year. But considering the ambiguous answer that @aashkar77 got from the same guy yesterday, I wouldn't be much optimistic :(

  • nomadnomad

    Maybe the Chinese will be faster, they have it for NEX already…

  • aldolegaaldolega

    I would imagine that at a certain point, after the electronic SB's are done, they will be able to crank out all the different versions for old full-frame manual lenses pretty quickly. At least, I hope so...

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    I should receive next week a Rokkor 135mm 2.8 5/5 version and the so reputed Rokkor 35-70 3.5. Adapters will take 2 weeks to come from China. I will use them for video on my GH3 and will give you feedback. I'm still hesitating between the 28mm and the 24mm... The first is cheaper but the second is closer to 50mm (Full frame)... Nonetheless, I think its only a matter of positioning the camera in the right place. The only advantage of the 24mm I can think of would be in tight places. any thoughts?

  • bumsklumpenbumsklumpen

    @aashkar77 i have the rokkor 28mm and it is a really good lens! i don't know about the minolta 24mm lens but i have another 24mm and i think i like this range more than the 28mm one.

  • nomadnomad

    While the 21mm is only so-so, both the 24mm and the 28mm are great lenses. Your choice!

    But since you have the 35-70, why not get the wider one?

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    I thought to get a weder one because its faster and I like the perspective of 50mm lens. Its what your eyes see distance wise.

  • fredfred27fredfred27

    @QuickHitRecord I use a micrometer to check my adapter flange distance, but in the end, I use Minolta zooms to check if the adapter is correct. In my experience with almost every Minolta zoom that I have owned, they are all parfocal with a correctly calibrated adapter. The only lens that gave me a problem was the 100-500/8 MD Rokkor-X. It has a brass ring inside that I had to file down to get the lens parfocal.

    Instead of scotch tape, I use aluminum tape that is made for air-conditioning duct repair. It is thin enough for the increments of thickness that I need.

    In the case of other brands of lenses with Minolta mounts, I still use the same tape, but within the lenses themselves. It is surprising how many off brand lenses are never set with the correct back focus. Most every lens that is supposed to be parfocal can have their back focus adjusted correctly, but it is usually a pain in the ass.

    Watch out for late model manual focus zoom lenses, especially Kirons. They are great lenses, but are varifocal. They do not keep focus through zooming. They are meant for stills, and by being varifocal, have better optical performance throughout the range.

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    Ok so I received my minoltas last week and been filming with them under different light conditions. I have mixed opinion about them. Lets start with the positive: Very cheap, solid built, smooth focus ring. In the correct lighting conditions, you get this unique vintage look even on a modern GH3...a pleasing warm film look.

    Negatives: When the sunlight is in front of the camera, forget filming. Both lenses (the 35-70mm and the 135mm) tend to create pink and green fringes that can sometimes spread widely on the screen, especially when the light contrast is high. This can easily happen even when the sun is not in front, through any light reflection (from a car glass for example). Nevertheless, I found chromatic aberration to be an an advantage under smooth light (early morning or before sunset), where you can play with it to achieve that retro look, but in high natural contrast, the lens is just useless. To avoid CA you have to be at least in 45° from the sun. My modern Pana 14-140 does much better in similar situations.

    Overal I am pleased with the lenses for video. I just wish CA wasn't that annoying. Its even more annoying when I notice it only latter on the big screen!

    My questions would be: is it complicated to remove CA in post using after effects for example? Is there a way to avoid CA while shooting? I tried different apertures with no much result difference. Finally, I read on the internet that CA occurs in wide apertures and cheap glass. Does that mean Minolta is a cheap glass? Anyone had experience with other vintage glass and can give his feedback? is this something normal for old glass?

    Thanks

  • panystacpanystac

    When talking about Rokkor lenses, it's essential to say which one it is, otherwise people could get a false impression of what that lens is like. For example, some people have said they got the Rokkor 58mm F1.4

    There are TWO lenses:

    Minolta Auto Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4

    Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4

    The 2nd is much superior to the 1st.

    Or the 50mm F1.4

    It is MC Rokkor, or MD Rokkor or MD?

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    Sorry, I thought everybody have read the past posts where I mentioned the lens models. I'm talking about Minolta MD 35-70 3.5 MACRO and the MD 130 2.8 late version (5/5).

  • ivanleeivanlee

    @panystac, those 58mm Rokkors are optically identical... now for the 50mm, there are about 3 or 4 different versions... I've used all of them, except the late MD with 49mm filter... but the 50mm with 55mm filter is the sharpest, and the 50mm PG version has the best rendering... (it's subjetctive though...)

    Guys, I've been using Rokkors since the GH1! actually, since when I was using film... I have large experience with the rokkors

  • ivanleeivanlee

    @aashkar77 , I also have the 35-70mm but never used for video... it's a very sharp lens and it's identical do the Leica 35-70... (you know that Minolta and Leica worked together), I have never had any problem with CA...

  • ivanleeivanlee

    Some quick tips... the Minolta 24mm is fantastic... but there are 2 versions! the MC is identical to the Leica 24mm R lens, and there's the smaller MD version that it's a bit sharper wide open. The 28mm f/2 MD is fantastic, VERY sharp wide open but my sample flares a lot when you have bright lights on a scene. The 35mm f/1.8 Rokkor is OK, a bit soft wide open but very sharp from f/2.8 (I have the modern Minolta AF 35mm f/2 and it's a much better lens) All the 50mm Rokkors are good... I have the 50mm f/1.2 and I love it... but the 58mm f/1.2 is legendary...one of the best lenses ever. The 50mm f/1.4 are all good... The 85mm f/1.7 I was not impressed... maybe was a bad sample... Never used the 100mm f/2, but everyone say it's terrific... I hope I can contribute with this topic... if anyone need samples, just ask...

  • fredfred27fredfred27

    @ivanlee The Minolta Auto Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4 and the MC Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4 do have the same optical design, but Minolta was always updating their coatings. Another difference is the aperture blades. The old Auto Rokkor has blades with more of a metallic finish which creates more light dispersion in the lens compared to the matte black finish of the MC version's blades.

  • nomadnomad

    @aashkar77

    Are you really referring to CA or to flare? The older Minoltas can indeed flare – quite nicely, if you ask me – but more than modern glass. The newer ones had improved coatings.

    But CA is something very different, it's the way light of different wavelengths is not landing on the very same spot, in particular in the corners. I have tested the 35-70mm against the famed Zeiss Contax 35-70mm, and it comes very close. CA is minimal in both.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    As far as the 135mm Rokkor goes, I prefer the Vivitar "close focusing" 135 with the same design as the 55mm, which is also a fantastic lens. The Rokkor 135s are OK, or OK plus, but it isn't super. I don't really care for the Rokkor 35mms. Love the 24mm and the 50mm. The 58mm has great Bokeh but the coating isn't great. Not as sharp as a good copy of the 50mm. Several of the zooms are very nice including the "mini beercan" and the "beercan". I don't use them so much since I got the Olly 45mm and the Panny 20mm.

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    I'am talking indeed about CA especially in video, undesirable pink and green fringes appear when the lens is exposed to the sun. It appears as spots on the image. I have no complaints about flare from these lenses. Have you tried the lenses shooting video?

  • ivanleeivanlee

    I have the exact same opinions as @DrDave

    I have never used the Vivitar 135 close focusing....only the 200mm f/3 close focusing...I've used this lens for a job but I was not impressed with its sharpness and CA control, but the bokeh is nice

    @aashkar77, never used the 35-70 for video... but I will try soon

  • tetakpataktetakpatak

    @ivanlee what you see is probably just a ghosting and reflections of the coating. It is not CA

  • DrDaveDrDave

    If you are used to the super sharp legacy 50mm from any of the major brands and of course the newer lenses like the Olly 45mm, the legacy 135s are only going to be "good" in comparison. However, the close focussing Viv. 135 is worth acquiring if you can get it at a good price, especially with the handy macro. If I have some time I will AB it with my Minolta 135 and also my $7 JC Penney 135mm. The Russian 135 I had was a tad sharper, but slower.

  • aashkar77aashkar77

    What I see is indeed CA and I'm starting to wonder if the problem might be with the adapter? I bought a cheap one from ebay but built from metal and solid. I tried a Cosina MD 28 2.8, which should be an inferior lens, it did not have CA as the minoltas. If someone can do a short video test that would be great.

  • kavadnikavadni

    If I have it wrong somebody please correct me.

    @aashkar77

    CA is not dependent on the angle of the sun to the lens. I suspect also that you are seeing flare.
    Have you tried shading the lens?

Add a Comment