I Was Outbid!!!

I remember when I was 16 and a couple of my friends on the school newspaper had Minolta SRT systems. I was jealous - all I had was my grandfather's Leica IIIa with a 50mm Summicron.

Enjoy your SRT. Its a darn good camera.


This is a great forum. I haven't posted much, but I learn a lot from reading those that do.
 
Hi Colyn,

colyn said:
I would have to disagree. I've used both and find the Minolta far better. The Zenitar is poorly constructed and suffers badly from distortion..
Click to expand...
I wonder if one should really worry about distortion when using a fisheye. The whole point of using a fisheye is getting a distorted image.

Philipp
 
rxmd said:
I wonder if one should really worry about distortion when using a fisheye.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I once owned a poorly-designed fisheye that had so much pincushion distortion that the images came out looking normal, so I had to send it back.

Same thing happened with a soft-focus lens I bought; it was so defective in manufacture that it resolved 90 lp/mm across the full field, making it completely useless.
 
J, buy that KEH Rokkor before I do!!!!

Like mentioned, money back no questions asked return policy. I bought a BGN 50 Summilux from KEH, was paranoid the entire time waiting for it to arrive. I opened the box, the lens barrel is brassed, but the glass is perfect. No guarantee that this lens is the same, but it is a safe bet, not a gamble.
 
JeremyLangford said:
So any item bought from KEH can be sent back no matter what for a full refund? And I would just pay shipping?
Click to expand...

From:

http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/AboutUs.aspx

"What We Offer
Outstanding customer service. We strive to make your experience with KEH one which will leave you feeling as if you were the most important and appreciated customer on the planet. As the 1994 national winner of Inc. magazine and MCI’s Positive Performer award for superior customer service, we look forward to continuing to fulfill our service ideals and practices in the 21st century. Our 14 day no-hassle return policy and 60 day warranty on all used equipment allows you to buy with confidence. Your satisfaction is our primary goal."

Call them to confirm and fully understand how the policy works: (404) 892-5522
 
Hi jeremy,

I purchased a Canon 50mm f/1.2 BGN lens from KEH. I've been very impressed. It's much better than I expected, based on the rating. On the oather hand, their prices aren't the best. If you keep trying on ebay, you will likely get a better "deal" than you will at KEH. But I don't necessarily find this to be true for all products. I've seen some of their camera bodies priced competetively with ebay. I'd say one of the primary advantages of KEH is when you get tired of waiting on your item to come upj on ebay. You just want to buy the thing, even if it isn't the best deal.

I also recommend the Rokkor lens over Zenitar.
 
That's funny about "only having a Leica III".

I just bought some Minolta lenses from Keh and the lenses are fantastic. One was an older model MC Rokkor 135 f2.8. I just love it! The grease must be a little dry 'cause it makes a whisper of a sound when you turn it. Probably has the original grease from the '60s, so I am not complaining.

One thing about these lenses from Keh was that they arrived with the glass incredibly clean. Amazingly clean. I wish I knew how they cleaned the glass at Keh.
 
Last edited:
crawdiddy said:
Hi jeremy,

I purchased a Canon 50mm f/1.2 BGN lens from KEH. I've been very impressed. It's much better than I expected, based on the rating. On the oather hand, their prices aren't the best. If you keep trying on ebay, you will likely get a better "deal" than you will at KEH.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree. Based on the 14-day return and 60-day warranty? My adage is, and a few others I know, if you can't get it for 20% less expensive at least on eBay then get it at KEH. It's reputation, warranty and return are EASILY worth it.
 
The 16mm won't go cheaply on ebay either. It is not a common lens and holds a pretty consistent value. There are not too many 16mm lenses out there.
 
Ok. Id like to clear this up.

One of the main reasons that I though a new Zenitar might be better than an old MC Rokkor fisheye is because of this chart comparing all the Minolta 16mms.

http://members.aol.com/xkaes/1628.htm

As you can see, year after year Minolta kept changing their design, and the weight and size kept going down pretty dramatically. When I saw that chart, I figured that this meant that the lens was going through some important improvements. And that made me start to think that maybe the newer model fisheyes must be better.

Besides that, I am just worried that the grease and stuff might start to go bad and dry up or something.
 
According to that page the 16 Rokkor when through the same changes all MC and MD lenses went through in the 1970s. You will note that their was only one optical change in the lens, and that the first optical design was borrowed by Leitz for the Leica R 16 Elmarit, pretty good certification of it's quality. Minolta, like all of the manufactures, continually improved the coating on their lenses in the 1970s. Most of the small changes noted on this page simply are the result of a new coating being used. The later lens will be less flare prone, but that doesn't change the optical quality of the lens. As with any superwide you will have to be careful with placing very bright lights in you frame. By the late 1970s, with the change to the MD line of lenses Minolta began a process of making their lenses smaller and lighter. This resulted in some optical formula changes. It is not necessarily true that these optical changes resulted in better performance (some did, some didn't), just that they accomplished the goal, smaller and lighter. They also changed from using a very solid all metal construction to using more modern materials, plastics.

You can call to find out what the writing on the front ring of the lens is and that will help determine what version of the lens it is. I wouldn't worry though. If it is a first version then it is the same vintage as your 101, 1966, the year all good things, including me, were born.
 
Besides that, I am just worried that the grease and stuff might start to go bad and dry up or something.
Click to expand...

Hey, and be careful about saying old things drying up around here. Our membership isn't getting any younger you know. ;)

My youngest M or LTM mount 50mm lens is my summilux from 1966. It will need a CLA some day, but I won't be trading it.
 
peterm1 said:
I have often had the exerience where I bid on something till I get to the point where I am in front but think I am paying more than I want. Then when I am outbid at the last moment I can breathe a sigh of relief and know that I am not having to suffer buyers remorse. Is this perverse?
Click to expand...
Same goes for me. I like say, " What was I thinking? sigh."
 
Not really a shame dee with all the wonderful old Minolta camera bodies around. They're so cheap too. Collect them all. Garry's Camera will do a CLA on a Minolta body for only $50. Looks like you are in the UK tho.
 
Last edited:
Im worried that a month after I buy an very old MC 16mm f/2.8, the grease or any other thing used to make a lens will go bad. Or maybe there might be dust inside the glass.

These are the things I would't have to worry about with a brand new Zenitar.

But I really have no idea if those things are real problems with MCs. Im just trying to make the best investment.
 
JeremyLangford said:
Im worried that a month after I buy an very old MC 16mm f/2.8, the grease or any other thing used to make a lens will go bad.
Click to expand...

So, after 35 years you'll buy it JUST before it binds up, eh?

Firstly, as we've been mentioning, there's a 60-day warranty from KEH so in the highly unlikely event that a month after you buy it there's a problem they will either refund your money or fix it.

Second, this a possible concern of buying any older equipment though I must say with over 40 cameras and even more lenses myself, most over 20 years old, some as old as 70 years, the benefits far outweigh the possible negatives.

But maybe older cameras and lenses are not for you if this truly bothers you. Though I'd say you have a better chance of the Zenit having some mechanical problem in the first few years than you would the internal lubricants "going bad" on the Minolta lens....

You seem to be searching for reasons to buy a new Zenit. I'd go with that then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
>>>>>Or maybe there might be dust inside the glass.

Do a google search on dust in lenses. Unless it's really heavy it will likely not the images in any way that you'd notice.

Heck, I'd even bet a new Zenit has a few specks in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom