Minolta pictures

[Sparrow]

my daughter’s first go with a “proper” camera a x700, I got her the camera 28, 50 and 135 filters hoods and the proper flash for less than £100

 

[Dan Grisez]

XG-7, Rokkor 45mm f2, Fuji Superia 400

XG-7, JCPenney 80-200 f/4.5, Fuji Superia 200

 

[zuikologist]

The 45/2 is cheap and cheerful, but surprisingly good. Great colour.

 

[Dan Grisez]

Thanks! I love the 45/2. It's one of the best lenses Minolta made IMHO. I bought it and the broken XG-1 that it was attached to for $7 on eBay. Not too shabby!

 

[Sparrow]

I have to say the colour shots do have a common "look" ... and I don't normally subscribe to the signature thing. An understated elegance, a refined coolness a bit like the f2.8 summaron in a lot of respects

 

[rolleistef]

Could you please explain a bit more about the unique look? What is different? Thanks (for some reason I have several minoltas)

Somehow, Minolta didn't go the same way as Nikon or Zeiss for the look conferred to the pictures by the lens, their are much "softer". Not softer in a negative way (even even I don't shoot slides 😉, but closer to what we actually see.
In a word they have a style, a signature. It may mainly be due to the in/out focus transition.
If you take a Zeiss lens, the transition is nearly "brutal", which is the base for a "razor" sharp picture. As if it had been clearly cut.
On the other hand, Minolta lenses are not meant to be razor sharp. They are sharp, no matter for that, but still leave a pleasant soft, elegant effect, soft as would be velvet. Maybe a more precise word would be "tender". Bingley's wedding photograph perfectly illustrate what I mean.

 

[ronnies]

XG-1 with MD 50mm f/2, Tri-X. This camera and lens cost me £5 in a charity shop.



Ronnie

 

[monochromejrnl]

Minolta XE-7, MC-Rokkor 50/1.4 shot on Kodak Gold 100

 

[Uncle Fester]

Minolta XE-7, MC-Rokkor 50/1.4 shot on Kodak Gold 100

I have this same setup and I find it to be an incredible combination. I got a bunch of "Bargain" grade Rokkor glass from KEH about 3 years ago for under $150.00 US. There wasn't a bad lens in the bunch. This stuff cost a fortune back in the '70s when it was new. The MC Rokkor 58mm f1.4 PF is a sweet lens too.

 

[slm]

Minolta Himatic E - I really like this camera

Cheers
Steven

 

[monemmer]

Cologne train station, SRT Super, 24mm MD, Neopan SS

 

[shadowfox]

Gear: Maxxum 7 + 24-105mm AF at 24mm.
Film: Expired Scott (3M) branded film; dual-toned in Lightroom.

 

[Bingley]

Here's one more w/ the X700 and Rokkor MD 85/2, on Portra 400NC:

 

[sig]

Somehow, Minolta didn't go the same way as Nikon or Zeiss for the look conferred to the pictures by the lens, their are much "softer". Not softer in a negative way (even even I don't shoot slides 😉, but closer to what we actually see.
In a word they have a style, a signature. It may mainly be due to the in/out focus transition.
If you take a Zeiss lens, the transition is nearly "brutal", which is the base for a "razor" sharp picture. As if it had been clearly cut.
On the other hand, Minolta lenses are not meant to be razor sharp. They are sharp, no matter for that, but still leave a pleasant soft, elegant effect, soft as would be velvet. Maybe a more precise word would be "tender". Bingley's wedding photograph perfectly illustrate what I mean.

Thanks, I knew there was a reason for my Minolta gas tendency.

 

[camera.bear]

Minolta MD lenses on Rebel XT

 

[Den]

hi-matic 7s

 

[Fujitsu]

Some real sweet pictures in this thread. Keep em coming!

 

[Riverman]

Minolta X700 50mm f1.7 and 28mm f2.8
This Minolta was my first camera.
Kodagu, India; Cambridge, UK; Havana, Cuba (All 1999)
Geez. 11 years. How time flies....

 

[Dan Grisez]

Another one...
XG7 with 28mm KMart Focal f2.8 and Fuji Superia 200 or 400 (can't remember)

 

[rolleistef]

Hi-Matic F - My university in Bologna ("Alma Mater Studiorum")
X-? and 50/1.7 Rokkor - An evening on Seine-side.