FF body for old A mount minolta lenses?

[Fswartz]

I have a small collection of A mount Minolta and Sony SLR’s and lenses, and my “newest” is an A77 with the Sony DT 16-80mm lens. I’m interested in adding a full frame body. As I understand it my options are Sony A850/900/99/99ii, or possibly KM 5D/7D. (My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

I’m wondering how much difference there would be across these bodies with the older Minolta lenses, esp. whether the better specs on the a99ii would be noticeable/ worth the much higher price. I haven’t used CF cards in a long time and assume these are still available, but prefer SDs.

I have seen some pretty rough A850s and 900s with high shutter counts so have some concerns there too. In general I prefer an older camera in very good condition to a newer one which has been heavily used.

I am grateful for any thoughts on the tradeoffs in my situation.

 

[ishwanu]

I have a small collection of A mount Minolta and Sony SLR’s and lenses, and my “newest” is an A77 with the Sony DT 16-80mm lens. I’m interested in adding a full frame body.

Do you have some full frame lenses as well?

As I understand it my options are Sony A850/900/99/99ii, or possibly KM 5D/7D.

Both KM cameras are APS-C.

(My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

Good, because it's just an A99 in fancy clothes.

I’m wondering how much difference there would be across these bodies with the older Minolta lenses, esp. whether the better specs on the a99ii would be noticeable/ worth the much higher price.

There are differences in the results if you look, but probably more important IMO are the differences in handling and functions.

My own choice is the A99. I will add that my other A-mount body is an A77, and I don't find the difference between APS-C and full frame to be very dramatic, at least for the things I typically shoot. The A99 has the expected edge for narrower DOF and lower noise in low light situations.

I am grateful for any thoughts on the tradeoffs in my situation.

I just don't want to use a moving mirror camera anymore despite the lower cost ... and though the A99II is certainly more desirable, its advancements are not worth the extra cost to me. Other folks choose differently, of course.

 

[artichokes]

I bought an A7ii couple of years back after my A900 broke, just to use with my collection of A mount glass along with an Laea4 (now an Laea4r) adapter. I don't know what the cost would be now, but I've been told that the camera and adapter basically give me an A99. Been very happy with it so far. Also gives me the option of using my collection of SR mount glass too. All the best.

 

[ActionPhotoPassion]

I think the real question would be why do you think you want/need to go FF?

I own a KM 17-35/2.8-4 since I shoot APSC. I always wanted to try uwa lens but prices of those lens for APSC was never an incentive to me, so I paid more to get a FF body.

The minolta lenses are working great whatever the body you'll use apsc or FF. On the older bodies, the AF is just slow. At least that's what I get from KM D7D. Once on the A58, a beercan 70-210/4 for instance is blazing fast with lots of torque.

 

[Photo-opinion]

I have a small collection of A mount Minolta and Sony SLR’s and lenses, and my “newest” is an A77 with the Sony DT 16-80mm lens. I’m interested in adding a full frame body. As I understand it my options are Sony A850/900/99/99ii, or possibly KM 5D/7D. (My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

I’m wondering how much difference there would be across these bodies with the older Minolta lenses, esp. whether the better specs on the a99ii would be noticeable/ worth the much higher price. I haven’t used CF cards in a long time and assume these are still available, but prefer SDs.
I have seen some pretty rough A850s and 900s with high shutter counts so have some concerns there too. In general I prefer an older camera in very good condition to a newer one which has been heavily used.

I am grateful for any thoughts on the tradeoffs in my situation.

It depends on what A mount lenses you have, which ones, and how many. The obvious ‘best’ FF A mount Sony is the A99ii, but they are extremely rare, and usually so expensive it would probably be better and more economical to get something like an A7iv and adapter.

And, in the future, have the advantage of being able to get Sony’s newer (and often optically better, quieter and—sometimes, esp. the teles—lighter lenses.

One important point is that even the 42mP A99ii will only give you 18mP resolution with an APSC (or DT) lens. I think the A77ii, which I got despairing of ever finding an A99ii, is a good choice anyway, it’s way ahead of the A77. (Why, exactly, I don’t know, but the Minolta 24-105 for instance, which I thought was great all round on everything from my Dynax 5 through the 5D, Sony A100, A77, A77ii, isn’t on the A99ii.)

(I faced that decision last year, but after years of looking and hoping finally found an A99ii at a price that did make economic sense, but that was clearly a fluke. And I had enough of a collection of Minolta and Sony A mount lenses that made replacing them a pretty expensive proposition. And I wanted more than 24mP for reasons other than just the high resolution and A7-like technical features.)

The other essential thing to bear in mind is repairability: AFAIK, Sony will still repair the SLT’s, but I’m not sure of the older models. (Even with the best of luck, things can go wrong, and cameras can be dropped. . .) And even with the latest (the A99ii) they’ll have used up the spare parts sometime in the next few years. . .

 

[toughluck]

I have a small collection of A mount Minolta and Sony SLR’s and lenses, and my “newest” is an A77 with the Sony DT 16-80mm lens. I’m interested in adding a full frame body.

Do you have some full frame lenses as well?

As I understand it my options are Sony A850/900/99/99ii, or possibly KM 5D/7D.

Both KM cameras are APS-C.

(My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

Good, because it's just an A99 in fancy clothes.

Note about Hasselblad HV: I saw it selling for peanuts, much less than A99, which made no sense, but that's how it is. Or was. And it was also available in a kit with the ZA 24-70/2.8 G SSM (perhaps even II) lens, and it's been said that those were handpicked to be the best ones there were (which made sense because the kit came in a nifty case, so the lenses needed to be repackaged into the kit, not just have the box shoved like with ordinary kits).

 

[ActionPhotoPassion]

I bought an A7ii couple of years back after my A900 broke, just to use with my collection of A mount glass along with an Laea4 (now an Laea4r) adapter. I don't know what the cost would be now, but I've been told that the camera and adapter basically give me an A99. Been very happy with it so far. Also gives me the option of using my collection of SR mount glass too. All the best.

I also bought second hand an original A7 mark I a couple years ago or so to backup my A99ii.

I won't say that the A7 is my favourite camera as it has a lot of caveats using the LA adapters (in practice the LAEA4), but I work around those and it does the job.

Let's face it though, Sony A7 and A7ii don't have the level of construction manufactured for A99 or A99ii. It's not even reaching the level of construction of A77ii in my experience, but for around 200 euros or so I consider it fair.

 

[ActionPhotoPassion]

I have a small collection of A mount Minolta and Sony SLR’s and lenses, and my “newest” is an A77 with the Sony DT 16-80mm lens. I’m interested in adding a full frame body. As I understand it my options are Sony A850/900/99/99ii, or possibly KM 5D/7D. (My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

I’m wondering how much difference there would be across these bodies with the older Minolta lenses, esp. whether the better specs on the a99ii would be noticeable/ worth the much higher price. I haven’t used CF cards in a long time and assume these are still available, but prefer SDs.
I have seen some pretty rough A850s and 900s with high shutter counts so have some concerns there too. In general I prefer an older camera in very good condition to a newer one which has been heavily used.

I am grateful for any thoughts on the tradeoffs in my situation.

It depends on what A mount lenses you have, which ones, and how many. The obvious ‘best’ FF A mount Sony is the A99ii, but they are extremely rare, and usually so expensive it would probably be better and more economical to get something like an A7iv and adapter.

And, in the future, have the advantage of being able to get Sony’s newer (and often optically better, quieter and—sometimes, esp. the teles—lighter lenses.
One important point is that even the 42mP A99ii will only give you 18mP resolution with an APSC (or DT) lens. I think the A77ii, which I got despairing of ever finding an A99ii, is a good choice anyway, it’s way ahead of the A77. (Why, exactly, I don’t know, but the Minolta 24-105 for instance, which I thought was great all round on everything from my Dynax 5 through the 5D, Sony A100, A77, A77ii, isn’t on the A99ii.)

(I faced that decision last year, but after years of looking and hoping finally found an A99ii at a price that did make economic sense, but that was clearly a fluke. And I had enough of a collection of Minolta and Sony A mount lenses that made replacing them a pretty expensive proposition. And I wanted more than 24mP for reasons other than just the high resolution and A7-like technical features.)

The other essential thing to bear in mind is repairability: AFAIK, Sony will still repair the SLT’s, but I’m not sure of the older models. (Even with the best of luck, things can go wrong, and cameras can be dropped. . .) And even with the latest (the A99ii) they’ll have used up the spare parts sometime in the next few years. . .

I will rebound on the repairability thing.

Last year I brought my A7 to my official Sony store for sensors cleaning. When the technician looked at the A7, he asked me if I also wanted to replace the rubber part in the lower part back of the camera because the rubber is going off (The part with a little hole dot to see the red LED when images are stored on the SD Card.).

I said yes as he told me that the piece of rubber is around 20 euros.

When I got back there to retrieve my camera, he told me that finally he gave up with the rubber part replacement and the store did actually open a former complain at Sony, because he explained me that when he asked for the rubber part, Sony asked for more than 200 euros for the piece of rubber... He told me that obviously he didn't do this kind of replacement since several years and indeed the price the last time he did this was like 20 euros. Naturally a piece of plastic that cost the price of a second hand camera does not make any sense.

So repairability, probably yes, but the prices for spare parts might have suffered a dramatic increase.

 

[Fswartz]

I hadn’t considered build quality but would consider this an important factor for me personally, given how solid the old Minolta equipment is and how I still enjoy using these “vintage” items.

Thanks for all the thoughts shared here! I will need to think some more about this.

 

[ishwanu]

(My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

Good, because it's just an A99 in fancy clothes.

Note about Hasselblad HV: I saw it selling for peanuts, much less than A99, which made no sense, but that's how it is. Or was.

There was a dramatic price reduction in new old stock at one point.

But aside from cost, one reason to avoid the HV is that it inserts different metadata into its files. DxO's software supports the A99, but it does not support the HV (unless the metadata can be successfully modified to simulate A99 files).

https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/does-anybody-own-the-hasselblad-hv_topic128157.html

And it was also available in a kit with the ZA 24-70/2.8 G SSM (perhaps even II) lens, and it's been said that those were handpicked to be the best ones there were (which made sense because the kit came in a nifty case, so the lenses needed to be repackaged into the kit, not just have the box shoved like with ordinary kits).

 

[AndroC]

As I have said on this forum before, I have two lovely A850's and lots of glass, and I really like them. The sensor colour luminance noise is bad, but can be removed with any contemporary photo software. Slow AF, but hey, that's OK. Highly recommended if you have the lenses already. The comparative second hand price for the A99ii is just crazy,

 

[toughluck]

(My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

Good, because it's just an A99 in fancy clothes.

Note about Hasselblad HV: I saw it selling for peanuts, much less than A99, which made no sense, but that's how it is. Or was.

There was a dramatic price reduction in new old stock at one point.

But aside from cost, one reason to avoid the HV is that it inserts different metadata into its files. DxO's software supports the A99, but it does not support the HV (unless the metadata can be successfully modified to simulate A99 files).

https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/does-anybody-own-the-hasselblad-hv_topic128157.html

If DxO config files are exposed, you could probably edit them to add an alias to A99 profile, so that a camera recognized as a "Hasselblad HV" is mapped to the A99 profile.

You certainly can do that with, e.g., RawTherapee.

 

[QuietOC]

My full-frame A-mount digital camera body is the A7RIV + LA-EA5. I do have an A77II that I don't use--I prefer using the A7RIV camera body.

 

[ishwanu]

(My budget would not stretch to the Hasselblad HV!)

Good, because it's just an A99 in fancy clothes.

Note about Hasselblad HV: I saw it selling for peanuts, much less than A99, which made no sense, but that's how it is. Or was.

There was a dramatic price reduction in new old stock at one point.

But aside from cost, one reason to avoid the HV is that it inserts different metadata into its files. DxO's software supports the A99, but it does not support the HV (unless the metadata can be successfully modified to simulate A99 files).

https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/does-anybody-own-the-hasselblad-hv_topic128157.html

If DxO config files are exposed, you could probably edit them to add an alias to A99 profile, so that a camera recognized as a "Hasselblad HV" is mapped to the A99 profile.

You certainly can do that with, e.g., RawTherapee.

The DxO module files are 'exposed' in the sense that they are visible in a folder. However, they contain unintelligible binary data. Who would know what to edit?

The filenames are coded, like C822a_006. I made a few copies of that file and gave them new names: C821a_006, C822a_005, and C822b_006. Then I deleted the original file from the folder. When the app was restarted, the module for the original file was no longer available, and nothing had taken its place. When I put the original file back, without deleting the fakes, the module became available again ... so the app can only recognize specific filenames that have been established by DxO.

Maybe someone with the right tools and skills could make the kind of changes you're talking about, but the EXIF modification approach to make files appear to be from the A99 would be much more straightforward as long as the HV has only changed the camera name or other tags that are easy to modify. People have already been doing that as a workaround while waiting for DxO to add modules for newly released cameras that are otherwise similar to ones that are supported.

 

[tbcass]

Which of your lenses are designed for Full Frame? To answer your question in my opinion and your desire to not spend a lot of money I recommend the A99.

 

[Fswartz]

I have 6 Minolta A mount lenses which were made for 35mm film cameras so are full frame.
I have a Sony Zeiss DT 16-80mm for APSC which is on an a77, and a Sony 18-70mm kit lens that came with a Sony a100 which is also APSC.

 

[Ralf B]

Which of your lenses are designed for Full Frame? To answer your question in my opinion and your desire to not spend a lot of money I recommend the A99.

https://www.dpreview.com/members/9851309413/gearlist

Let's have a look.

Other gear:

• Minolta 100-200mm/F4-4.5 - little Beercan
• Minolta 28-135mm/F4-4.5 - the gem in his list
• Minolta 28mm/F2.8 - average, dated
• Minolta 35-70mm/F4 - average, dated
• Minolta 50mm/F1.4 - severe focus shift, LoCa wide open, dated

The OP's 28-135 would certainly benefit from being put on an FF body.

At OP: check out https://www.dyxum.com/LENSES/INDEX.ASP for lots of user views of your legacy lenses to see wether they are worth the move you consider. And cross-check used proices as well, as they indicate which lenses are considered worth while.

In my book, it would only be the 28-135. Good luck with your decision!
Cheers,
Ralf

 

[Fswartz]

Thanks for this. Do you have any suggestions as to the FF body I should look for, i.e. A850/900/99?

 

[alanlinde]

Which body you get depends on what it will mostly be used for. The 850/900 are excellent cameras. The only significant reason I can think of for moving up to the 99II (as I did) is if you need better low light performance. I think that the first 99 wasn't significantly better than the 900.

Alan

 

[Ralf B]

Thanks for this. Do you have any suggestions as to the FF body I should look for, i.e. A850/900/99?

Many variables come in here:

• What is your budget? low - a900/a850, mid a99, high - a99II not worth it, rather buy a used A7IV + LA-EA5 - that is what I use since December 2023 and FYI I owned the a900 since 2008 (new) and an addtional a99 (used) since 2016 and am very happy I switched while keeping my A-Mount lenses. See my gear list for more detailed feedback.
• OVF or EVF - a900/850 or a99, a bit detail on that point :
  The OVF a850 and a900 are old school DSLRs with mirror slap and the only live view idsthrough the (brilliant!) OVF. The a99 has an okay EVF by today's standards but an immensely flexible hinge mount for its rear LCD, which helps a lot in shooting from a lot more angles than the OVF allows. And the LCD works well even by todays standards
• Do you need / want a video option - a99 only option
• Do you shoot mostly JPG - a99 ahead with a matured JPG engine
• Do you shoot RAW - well all three cams have more noise and less DR than today's offerings with the a99 ahead by at least one full stop better performance, but all three also benefit from today's advanced noise reduction software based on AI

So much from my side. Good luck and let us know the result!
Cheers,
Ralf