eBay is a great place for Minolta lenses and cameras (AFFILIATE LINKS): $35 Bokeh king (55mm F1.7 PF): ebay.us/ZIv9JJ Another great bokeh lens: ebay.us/6FeGPD $100 macro for everyone (50mm F3.5): ebay.us/CPqWyj
Thank you for a very well put together video on Minolta lenses. I came across a Mark 2 prime 58 mm 1.4 for the incredible price of $3 at a local Goodwill.
Great Video on some very underrated lenses! I’m using many Minolta and SR Third Party Lenses on my Pentax DSLR’s and Lumix Mirrorless. One astonishing Zoom Lens I got recommended in Ireland by another Photographer, who used manual Minolta Lenses on his Canon 5D, is the 35-70mm 1:3.5, I’ve got the MD Zoom with built-in Macro up to 1:4 and the standard MD Zoom Rokkor. Also witht Third Party Lenses like Tokina, Sigma and Exakta I have made very good experiences. One of my favourite lenses on my Lumix is a MC Exakta WW-Macro 1:2.8/28mm with a damaged filter thread, which makes outstanding pictures at night.
Thanks for watching and for sharing your experiences with these old school lenses :) The 35-70mm has a great reputation, one day I shall try it out for myself.
Having used Minolta since the SR1 and an early SRT101 I have purchased and used quite a few MC and MD lenses and now use them on digital bodies. I would suggest that looking for SR, MC or MD lenses not be the driver unless you already know the lens details. Some MC lenses were better than the MD versions and also the other way round. So if purchasing now, pick a focal length and then look at reviews on both versions and look at flicker images of the lens when used on your camera body. Or, simply buy the cheapest lens and see if you like it and then look for a better quality one if you feel you need to. Minolta lenses can take a lot of abuse so heavy wear and some scratches on the body should not unduly affect image quality. Dings and dents should be treated with caution, they may be perfectly functional but conversely may cause operational or image problems. A lens that has a lot of wear on the barrel rings is often one that has been used a lot and it has been used a lot because its a good copy, a great example. As with any lens check the glass is clean and has no scratches or separations
You're preaching to the choir here. One of my favorite pictures I've ever taken was with a cheap 55mm f/2 lens I picked out of a junk bin for 1 USD. Over the last 20 years I've added a few more. Easily disassembled and cleaned.
I thrifted a Minolta camera + 2 lenses for 25 bucks a couple weeks ago. One of the lenses was a Sigma zoom lens that doesn’t zoom without a lot of force. The other was a 135mm macro lens that basically has two focus rings. When you focus all.the way in then the part that extended out can also be turned to focus even closer. Unfortunately it’s very soft and the aperture ring does not work without moving the tab on the back by the mount (have to take it off the camera to reach it). But as you say, it’s very nice to use! Super smooth aperture ring.
First of all, nice find for $25 :) Both of those sound like third party lenses for the Minolta mount. If you end up keeping the camera, I'd ditch the lenses and go for a nice Minolta prime, should be even more impressive in build quality - not to mention optical quality!
THis may be of some interest? In the days of film cameras, I did not own a Minolta camera. Howevever I did use a Minolta El Rokkor lens on a Durst Enlarger for printing in monochrome. Minolta lenses for enlargers were very good indeed.
I own approx. 15 Minolta lenses. Even the cheap ones have a decent quality. So you can't go wrong with Minolta lenses. Astonishing is the quite similar color rendering. Minolta was one of the few companies which applied the lens coating by themselves. Therefore you can create with Minolta lenses easily a set (especially for video) which won't cause you a lot of adjustment work in post.
Thanks, Harald. Great to hear from someone who knows their Minolta lenses! The point about a consistent look for video is important and overlooked by many.
Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:06 Adapting Minolta to Mirrorless 3:15 Minolta Lenses: Quick Overview 5:10 Generations of Minolta Lenses 9:55 Finding Bargains Online 10:34 Lens Recommendations (Forgot to mention in the video: the table of 30 lenses contains the absolute best Minolta lenses -- not just the best value ones. According to my experience and reviews from all over the web)
Great video and love the Minolta SR lenses you have there! I bought mine 10 years ago when the mirrorless market was just beginning and not many cheap native lenses were on sale. I use them on a Micro Four Thirds system. Over time I added these to the collection (I use the 50mm F1.4 and the Macros the most). MD Rokkor 45mm F2 MD Rokkor 50mm F1.4 49mm thread MD Rokkor 50mm F1.4 55mm thread MD Macro Rokkor 50mm F3.5 with 1:1 MD Macro 100mm F4 with 1:1 MC Rokkor 135mm F2.8 MD Rokkor 200mm F4 I just could not justify/afford buying the 50mm F1.2, 85mm F1.7 or the 100mm F2.
@@lensvana I managed to buy a collection from a deceased estate. Included was a 16mm fisheye, 28mm, 50mm, 55mm, 58mm, 85mm and 135mm. I sold the fisheye as it didn't suit my style of photography and have bought a 50mm macro, 100mm and a 200mm seperately. Nearly all are in very good condition, but my 55mm has the aperture stuck at f1.7.
@@stephenreynolds6414 That's a really nice set - the classic focals between 28 and 200mm. And I see you're a member of the 55mm stuck wide open club :) I really like my 100 macro, it's just a bit bulky with the 1:1 adapter so I'm more inclined to leave the adapter for home use
Minolta named them MC and MD to differentiate that the MD lenses worked on Shutter Priority and Program AE cameras such as the Minolta XD series and Minolta X-370, X-700, X-GM series, etc. MC came first, MD afterward. Yes same lens mount, just a differentiation for the aforementioned bodies.
Exactly! This was a VERY important difference back in the day (I had a X-700 myself). This is also the reason why the mounts are called "Minolta MD" resp. "Minolta MC", e.g. on third party lenses. YES, they WERE called like that.
It is ironic you say NOT to call them MC and MD lenses, then that is in your title and text! That does not refer to the mount, but the model of the lens and it shows that on the front of EACH LENS. Just because people confuse it with the mount does not mean they are not still MC and MD lenses! They still ARE MC and MD lenses, they just happen to share the same SR mount. They are still MC and MD lenses, with key differences as you show. The MC lenses were first coordinated by Leica to standardize the coatings to make them more uniform, which is why I still prefer the MC lenses over the newer, cheaper and smaller MD lenses which used plastic instead of metal, yet they did have improved coating over the older MC version of the same lens. They came in three versions for the MC lenses and I love them.
He did not say that the lenses should not be called MC or MD, that is what Minolta called them. It is the mount type which is used by both of these series of lenses which he says should be called SR mount.
Back in the day I didn't like Minolta MC glass, course I've been a big colour slide film shooter, and those lenses are giving a greenish - yellow tint, which was impossible to avoid, especially with Kodak Ektachrome films. However, these days, all those colour problems are easy to avoid, in various ways...
@@lensvana I have several and for different reasons. MD 35 F2.8, MC Tele rokkor 135 PF F2.8, MD 75-150 F4, MC 58 F1.4, MD 45 F2, MD100 F2.5, MC 200 F3.5
Pyramid stones were poured. That's why they fit so well together and are all different seizes. In natural sandstone the shells are layered horizontal because they were deposited that way. In the pyramid stones shells are pointing in all directions.
i'm just waiting for a kit i bought on ebay with a SRT-200 and the 50mm f/2 starred on the sheet, plus a 35mm f/2.8 (the 90$ on the sheet is more than the whole kit so that's probably a bargain!) , a 135mm f/3.5 that's not featured on the sheet and a pmz 80-200mm f/4.5 that i can't find anything about on the internet, do you have any thoughts on those last two?
Hey that's a great deal! The 135mm F3.5 from what I hear is a good performer from F5.6, but even wide open can be used for portraits. It's tiny and lightweight which are the main advantages. The 80-200 I'm not sure about, I know there were lots of those made by third party manufacturers in those days - it won't blow you away but could be a versatile tool at F8 in good light
@@lensvana i only own the 16-50 kit lens of my old sony a3000 and i was needing a film slr anyway (and minolta slr is a great cost-benefit at that) so that's still 4 lenses for a good price, i guess i'll have to see what the third party 80-200 can do (i guess bird photography will put it to a harsh test for this), but i'm still really satisfied with that purchase and i have high hopes for when it arrives! i'll let you know about the 80-200 when i get it
Mine was the k-100 in the mid 80s on a trip to Florida. I picked up a minolta x-700 I have been shooting it ever since. It's only 2 ft from me now. I have never had a problem with it or the lenses apsalutly love and still shooting with it.
Excellent... I ❤ Minolta!! In mid 70's Minolta work with Leica!! Leica R3 y R4 = Minolta XE y XD... I think that Minolta was the great japanese undervalued brand!! His lens are awesome... 🔥
Do you recommend leaving the aperture open, closed, or other when not in use? Or opening and closing lenses that aren't being used on a regular basis? Thanks.
Great question, I've tried to research this myself. Some recommend keeping it closed down to minimize pressure on the springs. Others say it really doesn't matter too much. In any case, the consensus is that they should all be used at least once a year
I haven't tried this, but apparently M42 lenses work with an appropriate adapter. Still, I don't see the reason when there are so many great cheap Minolta SR lenses
Great video! Do you have any experience with the newer 28mm f2.8? Or how the Vivitar macro lenses stack up to the Minolta (Specifically the 90mm f2.5 or f2.8 zoom)? The Vivitar 2.5 has incredible reviews but seems pricey, but the 2.8 macro zoom is about the same price as the Minolta macros.
@@jaxmanf Thanks for watching! I haven't tried the 28mm F2.8, but I have heard great things and it probably should've been in the table. Also, if you ever resell, it's far easier to resell a 2.8. I have tried the 58 F1.4 and can recommend that one - I'd go in that direction from the 50/1.7, unless you really need a 50mm specifically. From what I've read, the 50/1.4 isn't worth it over the 50/1.7 (but nothing beats personal experience - with prices as they are today, you could just try them all!)
Im waiting on my minolta to come and its coming with a 50mm f2. I want to buy another lens but do you think i Should i go with a 50 f1.4 or a 28mm 2.8 ? Or a 35mm 2.8 ?
I started with a SRT and got a few lens that I really like. I see you also shoot on a aps c, do you still enjoy the lenses with the crop factor? I’m torn between getting an xt1 or a first gen a7. I like the controls on the fuji and simplicity but I’ve seen people say that legacy lenses look better on full frame.
It's an interesting discussion. On one hand, using APS-C with older manual lenses may be better for overall sharpness, but that's not why we shoot these older lenses. I also like the controls of the XT1, but for pure legacy lens use I'd go with the A7 Mark I. For example: with lenses such as the old Soviet Helios series, the "swirly bokeh" effect will be more pronounced on full frame. Ultimately, you can't go wrong with either camera.
Auto Focus in my user experience and opinion is THE WORST thing to ever get implemented into Photography. I will say I have found the Auto Focus Abilities of the old 35mm Film Cameras from decades ago to be less of a pain, but any of these new age Digital Cameras, it's the worst in Point and Shoots and Mobile Devices (smartphones, tablets, etc). With manual focus, there's no waiting, there's no weird things you have to do with your hands or pieces of paper behind the foreground object to get it to focus, there's no shaking around devices to hope it eventually focuses, and there's none of that bullcrap of it going into focus then suddenly deciding to go back out of focus. Auto Focus is HORRIBLE! Manual Focus is and will always be the absolute best and most reliable choice.
@@shtngro yep, the same can be said with Konica. In 2003 Konica merged with Minolta to become Konica Minolta Ltd. In 2006 they created a partnership with Sony and six months later sold the company to Sony. So Sony are a very good fit for Minolta lenses.
eBay is a great place for Minolta lenses and cameras (AFFILIATE LINKS):
$35 Bokeh king (55mm F1.7 PF): ebay.us/ZIv9JJ
Another great bokeh lens: ebay.us/6FeGPD
$100 macro for everyone (50mm F3.5): ebay.us/CPqWyj
Nah. Bokeh king is the 58mm f1.2 Rokkor PG.
Thank you for a very well put together video on Minolta lenses. I came across a Mark 2 prime 58 mm 1.4 for the incredible price of $3 at a local Goodwill.
I've heard of crazy Goodwill deals but I think you win with that one! Thanks for watching :)
Great Video on some very underrated lenses! I’m using many Minolta and SR Third Party Lenses on my Pentax DSLR’s and Lumix Mirrorless.
One astonishing Zoom Lens I got recommended in Ireland by another Photographer, who used manual Minolta Lenses on his Canon 5D, is the 35-70mm 1:3.5, I’ve got the MD Zoom with built-in Macro up to 1:4 and the standard MD Zoom Rokkor.
Also witht Third Party Lenses like Tokina, Sigma and Exakta I have made very good experiences.
One of my favourite lenses on my Lumix is a MC Exakta WW-Macro 1:2.8/28mm with a damaged filter thread, which makes outstanding pictures at night.
Thanks for watching and for sharing your experiences with these old school lenses :) The 35-70mm has a great reputation, one day I shall try it out for myself.
Got the 24mm 2.8, 50 f1.4 and 135mm f2.8 Fun to play around with before, even better with mirrorless.
Nice!! The 135mm is a really fun focal length
Great video! Since last year I also really start to appreciate Minolta lenses! They're amazing!
Thanks! Yes they are :)
Having used Minolta since the SR1 and an early SRT101 I have purchased and used quite a few MC and MD lenses and now use them on digital bodies. I would suggest that looking for SR, MC or MD lenses not be the driver unless you already know the lens details. Some MC lenses were better than the MD versions and also the other way round. So if purchasing now, pick a focal length and then look at reviews on both versions and look at flicker images of the lens when used on your camera body. Or, simply buy the cheapest lens and see if you like it and then look for a better quality one if you feel you need to. Minolta lenses can take a lot of abuse so heavy wear and some scratches on the body should not unduly affect image quality. Dings and dents should be treated with caution, they may be perfectly functional but conversely may cause operational or image problems. A lens that has a lot of wear on the barrel rings is often one that has been used a lot and it has been used a lot because its a good copy, a great example. As with any lens check the glass is clean and has no scratches or separations
Thanks for sharing your experience and advice!
You're preaching to the choir here. One of my favorite pictures I've ever taken was with a cheap 55mm f/2 lens I picked out of a junk bin for 1 USD. Over the last 20 years I've added a few more. Easily disassembled and cleaned.
I love Minolta lenses. I have got 28 f2.8, 50 f1.4, 35-70 f4, 100 mm macro and the 70-210 mm (beercan). Plus a Tokina 135 mm
That's a great set! I really like the 50 F1.4, 100mm macro, and I've been using the 35-70 f3.5 a lot lately too.
I thrifted a Minolta camera + 2 lenses for 25 bucks a couple weeks ago. One of the lenses was a Sigma zoom lens that doesn’t zoom without a lot of force. The other was a 135mm macro lens that basically has two focus rings. When you focus all.the way in then the part that extended out can also be turned to focus even closer. Unfortunately it’s very soft and the aperture ring does not work without moving the tab on the back by the mount (have to take it off the camera to reach it). But as you say, it’s very nice to use! Super smooth aperture ring.
First of all, nice find for $25 :) Both of those sound like third party lenses for the Minolta mount. If you end up keeping the camera, I'd ditch the lenses and go for a nice Minolta prime, should be even more impressive in build quality - not to mention optical quality!
THis may be of some interest? In the days of film cameras, I did not own a Minolta camera. Howevever I did use a Minolta El Rokkor lens on a Durst Enlarger for printing in monochrome. Minolta lenses for enlargers were very good indeed.
I own approx. 15 Minolta lenses. Even the cheap ones have a decent quality. So you can't go wrong with Minolta lenses. Astonishing is the quite similar color rendering. Minolta was one of the few companies which applied the lens coating by themselves. Therefore you can create with Minolta lenses easily a set (especially for video) which won't cause you a lot of adjustment work in post.
Thanks, Harald. Great to hear from someone who knows their Minolta lenses! The point about a consistent look for video is important and overlooked by many.
Also made their own glass. The only big Japanese camera manufacturer to do so.
@@johnnymarinarasauce Nikon also did.
Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
1:06 Adapting Minolta to Mirrorless
3:15 Minolta Lenses: Quick Overview
5:10 Generations of Minolta Lenses
9:55 Finding Bargains Online
10:34 Lens Recommendations
(Forgot to mention in the video: the table of 30 lenses contains the absolute best Minolta lenses -- not just the best value ones. According to my experience and reviews from all over the web)
Great video and love the Minolta SR lenses you have there!
I bought mine 10 years ago when the mirrorless market was just beginning and not many cheap native lenses were on sale.
I use them on a Micro Four Thirds system.
Over time I added these to the collection (I use the 50mm F1.4 and the Macros the most).
MD Rokkor 45mm F2
MD Rokkor 50mm F1.4 49mm thread
MD Rokkor 50mm F1.4 55mm thread
MD Macro Rokkor 50mm F3.5 with 1:1
MD Macro 100mm F4 with 1:1
MC Rokkor 135mm F2.8
MD Rokkor 200mm F4
I just could not justify/afford buying the 50mm F1.2, 85mm F1.7 or the 100mm F2.
Thanks for sharing! I also tend to use the Macro ones a lot, since autofocus really isn't important there. I have both of those macros you listed :)
Superb presentation ! Viva Toronto ! Congrats BRO !
THANKS! :)
Love my collection of Rokkor lenses. I have 9 including the 50mm macro with the 1:1 adapter they are all excellent to use.
Nice! I've managed to snag most of mine in mint condition from Japan - easily my favorite adapted lenses.
@@lensvana I managed to buy a collection from a deceased estate. Included was a 16mm fisheye, 28mm, 50mm, 55mm, 58mm, 85mm and 135mm. I sold the fisheye as it didn't suit my style of photography and have bought a 50mm macro, 100mm and a 200mm seperately. Nearly all are in very good condition, but my 55mm has the aperture stuck at f1.7.
@@stephenreynolds6414 That's a really nice set - the classic focals between 28 and 200mm. And I see you're a member of the 55mm stuck wide open club :) I really like my 100 macro, it's just a bit bulky with the 1:1 adapter so I'm more inclined to leave the adapter for home use
Minolta named them MC and MD to differentiate that the MD lenses worked on Shutter Priority and Program AE cameras such as the Minolta XD series and Minolta X-370, X-700, X-GM series, etc. MC came first, MD afterward. Yes same lens mount, just a differentiation for the aforementioned bodies.
Exactly! This was a VERY important difference back in the day (I had a X-700 myself). This is also the reason why the mounts are called "Minolta MD" resp. "Minolta MC", e.g. on third party lenses. YES, they WERE called like that.
That was such an informative video thank you so much. Excellent presentation and excellent organisation in the way you presented the details.
Thanks for watching and for your kind words!
Their flashmeters (for both flash & ambient light) are superb, I have three IVs.
It is ironic you say NOT to call them MC and MD lenses, then that is in your title and text! That does not refer to the mount, but the model of the lens and it shows that on the front of EACH LENS. Just because people confuse it with the mount does not mean they are not still MC and MD lenses! They still ARE MC and MD lenses, they just happen to share the same SR mount. They are still MC and MD lenses, with key differences as you show. The MC lenses were first coordinated by Leica to standardize the coatings to make them more uniform, which is why I still prefer the MC lenses over the newer, cheaper and smaller MD lenses which used plastic instead of metal, yet they did have improved coating over the older MC version of the same lens. They came in three versions for the MC lenses and I love them.
He did not say that the lenses should not be called MC or MD, that is what Minolta called them. It is the mount type which is used by both of these series of lenses which he says should be called SR mount.
MCIII lenses are incredible. I have a 28 f2.5 and a 200 f4 that are from the MCIII gen and I LOVE them
Thanks for all the input!
Back in the day I didn't like Minolta MC glass, course I've been a big colour slide film shooter, and those lenses are giving a greenish - yellow tint, which was impossible to avoid, especially with Kodak Ektachrome films. However, these days, all those colour problems are easy to avoid, in various ways...
The lenses have different names (auto rokkor, MC, MD depending on the generation) the mount is common for all and is called SR
What's your favourite SR lens?
@@lensvana I have several and for different reasons. MD 35 F2.8, MC Tele rokkor 135 PF F2.8, MD 75-150 F4, MC 58 F1.4, MD 45 F2, MD100 F2.5, MC 200 F3.5
I dig the Vostok "scuba dude" at about 09:00!
Nice catch! :) I think there's an overlap between camera and watch enthusiasts...
Pyramid stones were poured. That's why they fit so well together and are all different seizes. In natural sandstone the shells are layered horizontal because they were deposited that way. In the pyramid stones shells are pointing in all directions.
Joseph DAVIDOVITS
Interesting hypothesis!
@@lensvana Lime stone, not sand stone. th-cam.com/video/znQk_yBHre4/w-d-xo.html
So helpful! Thank you!
Thanks for stopping by!
i'm just waiting for a kit i bought on ebay with a SRT-200 and the 50mm f/2 starred on the sheet, plus a 35mm f/2.8 (the 90$ on the sheet is more than the whole kit so that's probably a bargain!) , a 135mm f/3.5 that's not featured on the sheet and a pmz 80-200mm f/4.5 that i can't find anything about on the internet, do you have any thoughts on those last two?
Hey that's a great deal! The 135mm F3.5 from what I hear is a good performer from F5.6, but even wide open can be used for portraits. It's tiny and lightweight which are the main advantages. The 80-200 I'm not sure about, I know there were lots of those made by third party manufacturers in those days - it won't blow you away but could be a versatile tool at F8 in good light
@@lensvana i only own the 16-50 kit lens of my old sony a3000 and i was needing a film slr anyway (and minolta slr is a great cost-benefit at that) so that's still 4 lenses for a good price, i guess i'll have to see what the third party 80-200 can do (i guess bird photography will put it to a harsh test for this), but i'm still really satisfied with that purchase and i have high hopes for when it arrives! i'll let you know about the 80-200 when i get it
@@soupslicer136 Nice! Hope you enjoy your new film slr kit :)
Thanks for your help 🙂
Thanks for cleaning up the mount names. It’s been confusing as hell.
my first camera was srt200 with 45mm f2.
Mine was the k-100 in the mid 80s on a trip to Florida. I picked up a minolta x-700 I have been shooting it ever since.
It's only 2 ft from me now.
I have never had a problem with it or the lenses apsalutly love and still shooting with it.
I bought the md adapter and it does work with md but not mc
That's strange - which Minolta MC lens doesn't work with the adapter?
Excellent... I ❤ Minolta!! In mid 70's Minolta work with Leica!! Leica R3 y R4 = Minolta XE y XD... I think that Minolta was the great japanese undervalued brand!! His lens are awesome... 🔥
Thank you and I agree! The colors for me are the best part :) Everyone should try a Minolta lens if they can
Nice job!🙂 Thanks a lot. Why can’t I open your documents? Thanks.
Thank you! Do you mean this spreadsheet: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EiNFpKFCOlnk_kPe-ywniFLIzm3AHjSV9Oy7PRWnF-M/
@@lensvanaYes. Thanks 🙂
Very good contents!!! Thank!!!
Thank you!
I got an MC Lens but I can't put it on my xg7, IS it normal ?
That's not normal - it should fit. Which lens do you have?
So this confirms that if you use an MD adapter you can use MC lenses too, if i'm not mistaken ?
Yes! Exactly the same :)
Do you recommend leaving the aperture open, closed, or other when not in use? Or opening and closing lenses that aren't being used on a regular basis? Thanks.
Great question, I've tried to research this myself. Some recommend keeping it closed down to minimize pressure on the springs. Others say it really doesn't matter too much. In any case, the consensus is that they should all be used at least once a year
Can we use other mount type lenses on a Minolta srt with a adaptor?
I haven't tried this, but apparently M42 lenses work with an appropriate adapter. Still, I don't see the reason when there are so many great cheap Minolta SR lenses
@lensvana you're right.
Very valuable, thanks!
Great video! Do you have any experience with the newer 28mm f2.8? Or how the Vivitar macro lenses stack up to the Minolta (Specifically the 90mm f2.5 or f2.8 zoom)? The Vivitar 2.5 has incredible reviews but seems pricey, but the 2.8 macro zoom is about the same price as the Minolta macros.
Also, look like a lot of people recommend the 50mm f1.4, but is a noticeable upgrade if you already have the 50mm f1.7?
@@jaxmanf Thanks for watching! I haven't tried the 28mm F2.8, but I have heard great things and it probably should've been in the table. Also, if you ever resell, it's far easier to resell a 2.8.
I have tried the 58 F1.4 and can recommend that one - I'd go in that direction from the 50/1.7, unless you really need a 50mm specifically. From what I've read, the 50/1.4 isn't worth it over the 50/1.7 (but nothing beats personal experience - with prices as they are today, you could just try them all!)
Im waiting on my minolta to come and its coming with a 50mm f2. I want to buy another lens but do you think i Should i go with a 50 f1.4 or a 28mm 2.8 ? Or a 35mm 2.8 ?
I think you should shoot a couple rolls with the 50/2 first! But if you really want to get another lens, a 28 always works well with a 50
I will. Thanks for the reply!
I always thoight that , "MC" meant Multi-Coated ?
Usually yeah it does
Do hoy recomended the 80 -200 3.9 MD Lens?
Haven't tried that one - I'd stick to the prime lenses to be safe!
You know why those Minolta lenses are awesome cuz they had a contract with Leica , German company to make lenses for the back in the day
I started with a SRT and got a few lens that I really like. I see you also shoot on a aps c, do you still enjoy the lenses with the crop factor?
I’m torn between getting an xt1 or a first gen a7. I like the controls on the fuji and simplicity but I’ve seen people say that legacy lenses look better on full frame.
It's an interesting discussion. On one hand, using APS-C with older manual lenses may be better for overall sharpness, but that's not why we shoot these older lenses. I also like the controls of the XT1, but for pure legacy lens use I'd go with the A7 Mark I.
For example: with lenses such as the old Soviet Helios series, the "swirly bokeh" effect will be more pronounced on full frame.
Ultimately, you can't go wrong with either camera.
He sounds like Carl Sagan!
You sound a bit like Carl Sagan.
He's a great person to sound like!
Auto Focus in my user experience and opinion is THE WORST thing to ever get implemented into Photography. I will say I have found the Auto Focus Abilities of the old 35mm Film Cameras from decades ago to be less of a pain, but any of these new age Digital Cameras, it's the worst in Point and Shoots and Mobile Devices (smartphones, tablets, etc). With manual focus, there's no waiting, there's no weird things you have to do with your hands or pieces of paper behind the foreground object to get it to focus, there's no shaking around devices to hope it eventually focuses, and there's none of that bullcrap of it going into focus then suddenly deciding to go back out of focus. Auto Focus is HORRIBLE! Manual Focus is and will always be the absolute best and most reliable choice.
It's hilarious that people take Minolta lenses and put them on digital Sony cameras and Nikon cameras lol
Sony bought Minolta...so...
@@shtngro yep, the same can be said with Konica. In 2003 Konica merged with Minolta to become Konica Minolta Ltd. In 2006 they created a partnership with Sony and six months later sold the company to Sony. So Sony are a very good fit for Minolta lenses.