A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

Started Mar 28, 2013 | Discussions
mxl360 Junior Member • Posts: 34
A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

From what I read this is one of a few lens built in collaboration with Leica.  Minolta produced and rebadged them for Leica R series cameras.  It's been said these zoom is very comparable to primes.  Leica branded ones goes for around $500 on ebay (Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f/3.5 )

Here's some sample reviews of the minotla version

http://www.talknex.com/f12/rokkor-35-70-3-5-macro-review-1750/

I was able to get the Macro and Non-macro version (just got them today).  Remember these are constant F3.5.

The one of the right is the Macro Version, from the front you can't tell the difference.

 mxl360's gear list:mxl360's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Thamnophis Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

So what do you think of it/them?

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 4,910
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

Yes, I can also recommend this lens, it used to be my most used zoom. The sharpness and contrast are very good already @5.6, and quite useable indoors @3.5. And it does produce a quality bokeh, so there is some volume to the pictures. I noticed heavy CA in some pictures, but not often. The colors are pleasing, warm, happy  The FL range is limited thought. So, since I got Pentax 24-90mm the Minolta spends most of the time in the lens chest, but it's a great lens for very little money.

Sweet Minolta

Keit ll Veteran Member • Posts: 4,403
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

The later Minolta AF 35-70mm lens is also very good value as is the early AF 35-105mm & they go for relatively low prices. CA or any slight residual distortion is not an issue if you use the V 4.3 of Lightroom for RAWs.

-- hide signature --

Keith C

ein4290 New Member • Posts: 11
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

i like how there seems to be some kind of a "pop" in the picture. great lens(es), tempted to try one as well. enjoy!

Thamnophis Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

I enjoy exploring these old lenses that perform way beyond their purchase price. This certainly seems to be one of them. I wonder how it would compare to the more expensive Leicas?

You really have to look at this pic at 100%. Its sharp edge to edge - check the bricks.

Its shot RAW saved to jpeg, no PP.

Minolta FD 35-70mm f3.5

OP mxl360 Junior Member • Posts: 34
Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

I'll probably keep one (macro version) of the two  If anyone is interested in the other PM me.  BTW they're both very good/excellent condition.

 mxl360's gear list:mxl360's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
OP mxl360 Junior Member • Posts: 34
Pepsi can shot

 mxl360's gear list:mxl360's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Keit ll Veteran Member • Posts: 4,403
Re: Pepsi can shot

mxl360 wrote:

Yes only real sugar can rot your teeth efficiently & make you fat !  

-- hide signature --

Keith C

martindesu
martindesu Senior Member • Posts: 1,247
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

mxl360 wrote:

I'll probably keep one (macro version) of the two  If anyone is interested in the other PM me.  BTW they're both very good/excellent condition.

What's the macro ability like?

 martindesu's gear list:martindesu's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha NEX-C3 Voigtlander 35mm F1.4 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +1 more
Letsgokoulos
Letsgokoulos Senior Member • Posts: 2,283
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

martindesu wrote:

mxl360 wrote:

I'll probably keep one (macro version) of the two  If anyone is interested in the other PM me.  BTW they're both very good/excellent condition.

What's the macro ability like?

Although the term "Macro" is used, the lens only has "close-up" abilities with two positions, 1:4 and 1:7. But it helps reducing the minimum focusing distance.

Marc

martindesu
martindesu Senior Member • Posts: 1,247
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

Does it give better 'zoom' i.e. make tiny insects larger, than the Sony 30mm?

 martindesu's gear list:martindesu's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha NEX-C3 Voigtlander 35mm F1.4 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +1 more
Letsgokoulos
Letsgokoulos Senior Member • Posts: 2,283
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?
1

martindesu wrote:

Does it give better 'zoom' i.e. make tiny insects larger, than the Sony 30mm?

The Sony 30mm f3.5 Macro gives a 1:1 magnification ratio. The Minolta MD 35-70mmm f3.5 only gives 1:4. This means that the Sony will provide you with 4 times larger details.

Marc

martindesu
martindesu Senior Member • Posts: 1,247
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

Letsgokoulos wrote:

martindesu wrote:

Does it give better 'zoom' i.e. make tiny insects larger, than the Sony 30mm?

The Sony 30mm f3.5 Macro gives a 1:1 magnification ratio. The Minolta MD 35-70mmm f3.5 only gives 1:4. This means that the Sony will provide you with 4 times larger details.

Marc

Gotcha. Won't bother with this lens then, thank you though.

 martindesu's gear list:martindesu's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha NEX-C3 Voigtlander 35mm F1.4 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +1 more
Letsgokoulos
Letsgokoulos Senior Member • Posts: 2,283
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

martindesu wrote:

Letsgokoulos wrote:

martindesu wrote:

Does it give better 'zoom' i.e. make tiny insects larger, than the Sony 30mm?

The Sony 30mm f3.5 Macro gives a 1:1 magnification ratio. The Minolta MD 35-70mmm f3.5 only gives 1:4. This means that the Sony will provide you with 4 times larger details.

Marc

Gotcha. Won't bother with this lens then, thank you though.

Martin,

This lens is really excellent, but it is not a macro lens. If you are looking for a macro lens, please let us know what you expect to take with such a lens and we will advise you.

Marc

OP mxl360 Junior Member • Posts: 34
Just did an outdoor pixel peeping test with 6 other lens... i'm quite impressed

This is my only zoom and I've compared the outdoor pixels to my other prime lenses (including sony 50mm f1.8 oos and minolta 50mm 1.4 md).  Better than most of my primes.  Sharpness and contrast is impressive.

My test was in line with another pixel test found here.  The 35-70mm f3.5 lens is the 3rd one.

http://artaphot.ch/nex-lens-comparisons/346-nex-5n-und-minolta-md-zooms-bei-50mm

 mxl360's gear list:mxl360's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Mike Fewster Veteran Member • Posts: 7,077
Questions re adapter

mxl360 wrote:

From what I read this is one of a few lens built in collaboration with Leica.  Minolta produced and rebadged them for Leica R series cameras.  It's been said these zoom is very comparable to primes.  Leica branded ones goes for around $500 on ebay (Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f/3.5 )

Here's some sample reviews of the minotla version

http://www.talknex.com/f12/rokkor-35-70-3-5-macro-review-1750/

I was able to get the Macro and Non-macro version (just got them today).  Remember these are constant F3.5.

The one of the right is the Macro Version, from the front you can't tell the difference.

Which adapter are you using with these please?

Do you know which adapter would be used to use them on an alpha mount?

Thanks

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

 Mike Fewster's gear list:Mike Fewster's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony a7R II
nzmacro
nzmacro Forum Pro • Posts: 15,845
Re: A lot has been said about Minolta MD 35-70 f1:3.5 (leica) - Just got TWO!

Nice lenses no doubt. Good on you and great to see more legacy lenses at work.

All the best and very nice !!

Danny.

-- hide signature --
 nzmacro's gear list:nzmacro's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7 +6 more
martindesu
martindesu Senior Member • Posts: 1,247
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

Letsgokoulos wrote:

Martin,

This lens is really excellent, but it is not a macro lens. If you are looking for a macro lens, please let us know what you expect to take with such a lens and we will advise you.

Marc

Hi Marc, thanks for the reply (might PM you if this doesnt reach you).

I would like to take some photos of "products" (watches, electronics) up close, with great magnification. I have the Sony macro; my main issue is that I need to get very close to really get decent magnification  and then lighting is an issue. Perhaps my problems can be solved simply with better lighting... such as a ring light around the lens..?

 martindesu's gear list:martindesu's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha NEX-C3 Voigtlander 35mm F1.4 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +1 more
zerevo Forum Member • Posts: 55
Re: Keeping one. Anyone interested in the other?

martindesu wrote:

I would like to take some photos of "products" (watches, electronics) up close, with great magnification. I have the Sony macro; my main issue is that I need to get very close to really get decent magnification  and then lighting is an issue. Perhaps my problems can be solved simply with better lighting... such as a ring light around the lens..?

With a ring light, you'll get a shadow around the product and a ring shaped reflection.

Ring light shadow

With a small focal length, you're effectively shading the product, so I prefer to use an 85mm lens with diffused flashes.

I have also used a 35mm Tilt Shift lens, but not for close ups. I'd probably get better results from an 85mm Tilt Shift macro lens, but they are pretty dear.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads