Minolta lenses kick ass!

My first camera, after years of longing to return to photography, was a Minolta X370s. It was a very good camera, and the lens, though slow, was quite good: a 35mm f3.8-5.6 IIRC. My only beef is the focusing system/screen: for some reason it was difficult for me to focus well. I attributed the problem to failing eyesight and took a turn into Nikon street. But I have fond memories of my Minolta system... :)
 
I own two Minolta cameras:

Minolta 7sII with Rokkor 40mm 1.7 lens, and
Srt 101 with 58mm 1.4 and 35mm 2.8 lens.
Also, I've used, for several rolls, Minolta maxxum 600si with Sigma zoom 28-70mm lens.

I wouldn't make a review of the bodies and the lens, but on that how I feel shooting with the cameras:

- with SRT 101, I really feel the camera, the sound, the weight, it feel very solid. Also, 58mm 1.4 lens are very attractive and soft:
4598537701_b76626f4b1_z.jpg


- with 7sII, I don't feel the same level of shooting like I have with SRT 101, maybe it is the very quite shutter, maybe because it's smaller and lighter, and also it's RF against SLR, which might be a good fact.
40mm 1.7 lens is not as soft as MC rokkors, but really nice and sharp:
4798612013_3a7a22ec7a_b.jpg


- with 600si - it's big, is very automatic, it's not light, It's a good solid but very plastic camera which I didn't like it much. However, I made my very first wall print with it, and 25sec exposure, with 3times pull proces :) :
4295694976_8b4abcfc2d_z.jpg


In the end, every camera has its own job to do:
SRT 101 with 58mm 1.4 it's very nice for portraits and people;
7SII is brilliant for street shooting.
600si, is good for sport/wedding photos I guess, etc..
 
In the late 60s, the STR series of Minolta was carried by many pro photographers. When I was shopping for an SLR in 1970, I considered it. But thought it sort of lacking in features to the Nikon (or even Canon, but Canon accessorized all their features for more money). At any rate I chose a Yashica TL Super, the poor man's Nikon.

I have an SR T 101 and MG-1. The meter of the 101 isn't working, but I rather like the MG and the Minolta lenses I have. The Minolta lenses were always known as good, but Nikon and Canon were preferred, probably for their support.
 
Two things happened in the 1970s that ended Minolta's early success with the SRTs in the professional SLR realm -- mismanagement in the marketing (and some aspects of the design) of their rather excellent XK/X1 professional series, which in 1972 offered interchangeable screens and a sophisticated auto-exposure system; and then the reliability problem in the cameras: Minolta was always way out front in electronic innovations but the cameras electronic systems proved a little delicate. They were first with pro-level auto-exposure (I believe) and first with combined aperture/shutter priority system (XD-11) and first in auto-focus (Maxxum). The glass is simply unbeatable at the going prices of the premier Japanese SLRs. But the overall business minds were never as shrewd as the competition.
 
I love my minolta lenses too :)

I am always suprised by the quality of the 35 2,8 .

I use a 28 3,5 too wich is really good (I read a lot of critics on it, maybe I have a good one)

considering the cameras, the srt is fantastic, the XD7 is very nice mith aperture/speed priority, and the SR7 is the one I love the most ( I changed the condenser of it and replaced it with a SRT condenser so that I have a bigger finder) because of is funny (yet accurate) meter
 
Last edited:
I wanted a point-n-shoot for the wife, so I bought her a black XE-7, and had it completely overhauled. It melds perfectly with my vintage (highly coveted) SRT/M system. In fact, sometimes, -I- use it. You really can't go wrong with their -earlier- stuff. Their lenses blow away Nikon glass IMO. What matters is the image.
 
Happy to see Minolta getting some love here. Thanks Riverman!. An SRT 101 was my first camera, way back in 1974. Second camera was a well used XK in the mid 80's. I am still useing it and Minolta continues to be my main SLR users (altough I have branched into Nikon and Pentax as well). People talk about the tremendous reliability of Nikon, but it seems like about half of the old Nikons out there have dead meters. Never had meter problems with Minolta.

As for glass, an MC 100/2.5 was my second lense, still have it and it is still one of my favourite lenses.

I confess to now having a small army of Minolta lenses and SRT bodies. Sometimes the price is so cheap I can't pass them up.
 
essentially there's no way to adapt a Rokkor lens to anything EXCEPT the m4/3 mount without have to use some cheap piece of glass that utterly undermines the image quality.
Click to expand...

Not entirely correct. I use Rokkor on my standard 4/3 camera without any glass in the adapter and I suspect Canon can use them as well.

I have an SRT101. Beautiful camera. I love the TTL match needle meter in it. It's big, reasonably solid and smooth.
I also have the X-700 and while I should love it, I just can't feel it. I don't like led meter lights much and I can't seem to focus well with it either.

Most of all, I absolutely love the dreamy creamy quality of the MC 58/1.4 opened up on my e-520. It just oozes character for an slr lens. Probably depends on the copy though.
 
One of the finest photographs that I have ever seen was taken with the "humble" Minolta SRT 101, W. Eugene Smith's masterful Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath, one of those rare photographs that has transcended both art and photojournalism, and has changed the world in its wake.

This photo has haunted and inspired me since the first time that I saw it in Life Magazine in 1973. Mr. Smith paid quite a high price for his work in the Minamata photo-essay, as explained in the linked article.
 
sparrow6224 said:
Doug,
The SONYs take only the Minolta AF lenses. The Rokkors need an adapter which multiplies the image in order to reach infinity (I might not be saying that right, but essentially there's no way to adapt a Rokkor lens to anything EXCEPT the m4/3 mount without have to use some cheap piece of glass that utterly undermines the image quality. Anyway as a result of the SONY's using them, the better AF Minolta lenses have risen sharply in price in recent years from what I have noticed.
Click to expand...

You can convert the md/mc lenses to eos mount, but it is permanent and involves a great deal of diy. There are also a MC/MD mount that replaces the eos mount on the camera side, of course not very handy when it comes to using your EOS lenses

http://www.nanoer.com/md_eos_conversion.html
http://digitalrokkor.altervista.org/why.html
 
Last edited:
I've always loved and still extensively use my Minoltas - SRT201, X370, X700 and a bunch of MC and MD lenses. Just workhorse cameras and wonderful lenses.

Minolta and Leica did collaborate as noted and the wonderful MD Zoom Rokkor-X 35-70mm f3.5 and MD Zoom 70-210 f4 lenses were issued as Leitz lenses.

Minolta never had the same recognition as Nikon or Canon because they didn't pursue the professional market.

After all the innovation and quality gear, it's a shame Minolta is no longer in the business (same for Konica). I think Minolta's failure to make autofocus and digital cameras compatible with the MC/MD lenses was their downfall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom