Minolta 50s and the A7

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Murx
Regular MemberPosts: 162
Like?
Re: your photos sure isn't impressing :)
In reply to forpetessake, 4 months ago

forpetessake wrote:

Murx wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

Murx wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

kuuan wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

I've had a dozen of different old ~50mm lenses, including several Minoltas. They are cheap and widely available, so it doesn't take much to build a big collection. Some samples are here . I got rid of most of them, still have Minolta 50/1.7 and 45/2 -- they are too cheap to bother selling them, and keeping Canon FD 50/1.4 for sentimental value, and it's probably the best of any other old 50mm lens. Still, the Sony 50/1.8 was noticeably better than any of those. Here is a comparison with Rokkor 50/1.4

note : the best lens in your test in terms of sharpness @ its respective sweetspot is not the sel but the fd 28/2.0 ...

I'm not sure I can declare a winner here, but in my memory the Canon FD and Nikon lenses were noticeably better than the lenses from the third tier manufacturers like Minolta, Konica, Olympus (with the exception of some Olympus Pen-F, which were very good). Most of FD lenses I tried when stopped down sowed great resolution and contrast. Wide open though they showed worse halation, flare, and CA than the modern glass.

ah - but thats just coatings and even more critically: "wide open" == 1.8 @ 50 these days for a 1k$ lens. chickens.

Cheapskate, as it's well known, pays twice There is nothing more expensive than a cheap stuff. IMHO a $1G for a high quality lens is a better deal than any old Minoltas/Konicas/Canons for $50. The latter is a waste of money. You'll still end up buying the good stuff, otherwise why even paying $1700 for the body if you are limited by a poor quality lens. And putting $1G in perspective, it's what a family spends on a bottled water per year, or just one day of vacation.

well not ... quite - i have e.g these two old minoltas :

- md 35-70 / 3.5 macro - 19 Euro

- md 35 / 2.8 last version - 20 Euro

in the 35-ish range i own yet another cheap 30 mm :sigma 2.8.

is the latter better ? i don't think so

for some silly reasons i prefer the minoltas if i go out with a 30-ish fl.

or an equally good (but not better) c/y 28/2.8

but then again my family drinks water from the tap, so ymmv.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow