Is this lens worth buying?

[JeremyLangford]

I have a Minolta SRT-101 with an 50mm f/1.7, a 35mm f/2.8, and a 16mm f/2.8 fisheye.

I feel like I need something in between my 16mm and my 35mm. Something that is wider than the 35mm lens but doesn't have the distortion of the 16mm. I feel like this could finish off my SLR kit.

I was thinking either a 28mm or a 24mm. I think I will have to stick with an f/2.8 because the larger aperture ones can get pretty expensive.

I went to ebay and found this. It caught my attention because it is Buy It Now for $30 with shipping.

http://cgi.ebay.com/MINOLTA-MD-MOUN...oryZ3323QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Why is it so cheap and would it fit on my SRT-101? Is it a good lens?

 

[xayraa33]

excellent late MD Minolta lens , I paid over 60 dollars a few years ago at the Toronto camera show for one like this.
these have better lens coating than the Rokkors but not as sturdy in build.
I prefer this lens to my 28mm Rokkor lens for colour work.
I would nab it if I were you.

 

[JeremyLangford]

so its just as good as a Rokkor optically?

 

[xayraa33]

so its just as good as a Rokkor optically?

better in some ways.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Jeremy, these lenses are cheap because the Minolta line for which they were made is discontinued and gone. Make sure to buy the right ones; if I remember correctly, MD and X mounts are compatible. If your SRT is either X or MD, you can buy lenses with either denomination and you'll be fine.

I used to have a Minolta X370s... like eight years ago. I learned a lot with it, but I never really liked the focusing screens, so I sold it, as a system, for just $300 (camera body, 35-70 and 70-300 zooms, along with a 28 f2.8 third-party lens, flash and leather case for the camera body). That was a steal... and it went all the way to Alaska! 😱

 

[Seele]

The SR T series would work correctly with any lens with MC or MD coupling, the "X" only refers to those for the American market.

 

[ravid905]

If you want to learn about Minolta manual focus gear the best sites I can recommend are The Rokkor Files: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/
and MINMAN: http://members.aol.com/manualminolta/. On them you will find out the differences between each generation of lens and mounts as well as the different bodies and their features.

 

[rolleistef]

Take it. It's amazing how fun a 28mm can be! Your Minolta will get really close to a RF. Well, it's even better with an automatic camera. If you can find a XD or a X500 take one, you wont regret your 50$....

 

[JeremyLangford]

Take it. It's amazing how fun a 28mm can be! Your Minolta will get really close to a RF. Well, it's even better with an automatic camera. If you can find a XD or a X500 take one, you wont regret your 50$....

I have an XG1 but I feel like I learn a lot with a fully manual camera.

 

[awilder]

Go for a 24/2.8, it's a much better fit between your 16 and 35 than a 28/2.8. Heck, you can probably get a Kiron 24/2 if you look hard enough for the same price or less than a Minolta 24/2.8.

 

[JeremyLangford]

Go for a 24/2.8, it's a much better fit between your 16 and 35 than a 28/2.8. Heck, you can probably get a Kiron 24/2 if you look hard enough for the same price or less than a Minolta 24/2.8.

Too late. I already snagged a 28mm f/2.8. That is a good point about the 24mm being more in between my 16mm and 35mm. But the truth is that I rarely used the 35mm because it is one of the really old rokkor lenses without the rubber grip and the focusing movement isn't really smooth at all. It focuses really slow for some reason.

So maybe I will start using my 16mm, 28mm, and 50mm. Does that seem like a good range of prime lenses? I am trying to finish my SLR setup and find out what lenses I like most for when I can eventually get a good Rangefinder setup.

 

[rolleistef]

Good! I'm sure you'll like it very much. But the advantage with a 28mm is that you can use it as a "snapshot" lens. Once you've learnt enough with the SRT go to the XG1 and click away!
Seems to be a good range of primes. The 28 and the 50 are the two lenses I use most and you can do pretty much everything with them (except maybe portraits with the 28, except if you like special effects...) I don't know about the 16 though. It seems you need to work with your environment as a whole...

 

[shadowfox]

Good lens, I disagree that 24mm is better.

With 28mm I never seen any objectionable distortion, but with 24mm, I have to be extra careful. Besides, you already have the 16mm if you want distortion, yes?

An example from my MD 28mm/2.8 (the rokkor version):

 

[venchka]

Ok, so you get two schools of thought: Buy a 28mm lens. Buy a 24mm lens.

Can't decide? Go for both! They're cheap. I love 24mm lenses. I'm learning to love 28mm lenses after decades of avoiding them.

 

[xayraa33]

Can't decide? Go for both! They're cheap. I love 24mm lenses. I'm learning to love 28mm lenses after decades of avoiding them.[/QUOTE]

right on.
I could not agree more.

the Rokkor and Minolta MD 28mm lenses are some of the best of their type from any maker.