Legacy vs E-Mount Lens IQ

Hi All,

I already have a CZ24mm but wanted a zoom lens and didn't think I would be happy with the IQ of the SEL 55-210 from various reviews so thought I would try out a legacy lens. I bought a cheap adapter and a Minolta 70-210 f4 MD for my Nex 7 that cost me £35. Here is a JPEG shot (and my first EVER one I have posted online) I took with it unedited. Any comments welcome and especially if you have a 55-210 in terms of comparable IQ etc. Any suggestions of other cheap(ish) manual lenses would be welcome as well. Thanks!

Details:

Nex 7 , f4, 1/125, ISO 400, indoor no flash. Focal length unknown as details are not retained in image.

Looks great!  Is that a bowl of soup in her eye ?    I'd be interested in seeing how the adapter+lens looks mounted to the camera to compare to the 55-210.

Close! it's a bowl of spaghetti. Picture of Nex 7 with lens below...it's not small but it is metal and built like a tank!

The lens looks nice and sharp even though you just missed the focus on her eyes.

Post more shots pls.

Just got the lens yesterday so I don't have any shots outside in daylight. I've just taken some 'staged' shots to help you guys get a better idea of the lens - again these are straight from the camera JPEG.

You obviously have a Minolta adapter.  But Canon made a series of lightweight "plastic" zoom lenses towards the end of the FD mount manufacture.  They are light and easy to handle on an EVIL-type camera body and make respectable images.  Those lenses were not "cheap plastic" but a lasting industrial grade similar to that currently used on the 100mm f2.8 macro lens.  Ex-slr manual lenses are not very popular and are usually at bargain prices.

--
Tom Caldwell

None of the old MF lenses are as cheap as they were a few years ago.  Most of the brand name lenses are pretty good, and deals are out there if you look hard.  The fast glass is getting fairly expensive again, though not what it used to be.   One lens to look at is the Canon 50 3.5 macro.  It's only 1:2, but incredibly sharp and can go to 1:1 with a converter.

The great thing about legacy lenses is that a lens that cost $800.00 new in the 70-80's can be got for under $50.00

--
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/

Thanks for the recommendations - I'll look into them.

I had Minolta MD 70-210/4 and it's very nice (though big) lens. It's pretty sharp with a good bokeh. What I didn't like is the CA and some softness on the long end. I also have Sony 55-200/4.5-6.3. It's not a bad lens -- good sharpness, contrast, works well at close distances. It also loses resolution at the long end, but CA is low in the whole range. The worst thing about the lens, its resolution at infinity degrades significantly and its bokeh isn't as smooth as Minolta's. Bottom line, the lens is excellent for short distance shots, I used it for concerts and it worked well. For nature shots, and other long distance subjects, Minolta produces much better results. Sony is also much slower, but OSS is often able to compensate for that.

Did you take these photos handheld? I wouldn't imaging such a lens to be usable indoors without a tripod.

Myself I have a SEL 55210 (bought as a kit so not expensive). It is ok but I was wondering whether a faster legacy tele for kids' theatre plays and other indoor occasions could be worth it.

But the lack of stabilization has stopped me so far.

My girl's face was hand held. The rest were tripod, however I did try non tripod initially and they weren't too bad. This is my first manual lens and also first few attempts using focus peaking but it doesn't seem too difficult. I was also very surprised at the IQ of the lens considering it was quite cheap and I really like the constant f4.

How is your 55-210 for pictures of kids (i.e possibly moving around) ?

It is a clean picture! I can't get such clean pictures with my NEX-6 even at ISO 400. Was it a jpg or did you process a raw file? If the latter, would you mind explaining your precedure?

Thanks

Christos

Hi Christos

It's a JPEG straight from camera with no cropping/editing etc. I don't tend to shoot raw as I don't have much time to edit and besides I'm not sure I would know how to anyhow!

I know I'm not getting the best out of my images but it's just a hobby for home viewing.

I have four that I highly recommend.

1- 28mm Tokina

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tokina/sl_28

2- 28-70mm Tokina

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tokina/szx_270_sd

3- 45mm Rokkor

http://www.beanos.com/~tsoutij/wp/stuff/index-of-pancake-lenses/minolta_md_rokkor-x_45mm_f20

4- 70-150mm Vivitar

http://www.techtheman.com/2009/04/vivitar-70-150mm-f38-from-plus-kiron-2x.html

--
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/

Legendary Minolta quality.

Just wondering how you mount the camera to a tripod with that lens?

I have a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm (Kiron version) which is also long and bulky - only used it handheld as I'd worry about the camera's tripod mount and stresses on the lens mount. Do you have a tripod mount on the lens adapter?

The Series 1 also produces excellent sharpness and has a switchable macro function (not sure of magnification).

you'l love that lens it was my favorite zoom on film then I traded it in to get a sigma 70-200f2.8 which was my new favorite after than but I still reminisce about my F4..

--
http://www.daisyseyecancerfund.org/Files/Awareness/photographing_rb_poster.pdf

Hello Chewbokeh,

Focus peaking is quick and mostly sufficient but not very reliable, as in fact it is contrast peaking.

For very precise focussing I find the enlargment method better and it's almost as quick.

Rbbra

Hello Chewbokeh,

Don't mind Raw when you get Jpegs like this !

Rbbra