price check

sorry, konica is on the left and minolta is on the right.

minolta scale is distance (feet/m) and aperture is further up towards the glass.

also filter size for minolta is 40.5 while konica is 46.

the hex is small; the minolta is tiny.

oh and they both have red dots😉
 
Last edited:
back alley said:
sorry, konica is on the left and minolta is on the right.

minolta scale is distance (feet/m) and aperture is further up towards the glass.

also filter size for minolta is 40.5 while konica is 46.

the hex is small; the minolta is tiny.

oh and they both have red dots😉

...but no where near as tiny as the tele-elmarit. I compared the Hex 90 to Randy's tele-e the other night. Big difference. 😱
 
My Tele-Elmarit is 2 5/16 inches long (excluding the mount) and just under 2 inches at its widest point. According to my kitchen scale, it weighs 340g.
 
back alley said:
according to the lens info in the box the 90/4 is 51x60mm and weighs in at 250g.

that's 2 x 2 and 3/8 in and weighs 8 and 13/16 oz.

anyone know the hex and tele elmarit info?

Hex tech data sheet that came with my lens says: 55mm max. dia., 69mm from front of lens to the reference plane of mount (probably a little longer), 330g

:0

EDIT: I just measured the "true" length: 3 1/16" including mount; 2 7/8" excluding mount
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, well, I just compared the Minolta to the Thin TE and they appear to be the same size sitting next to each other although they have a subtly different base (area closest to the M mount). Holding them, they feel like they weigh about the same (I kept trading them back and forth between my hands and couldn't tell any difference that way). Looking straight into them, the outer lens on the TE looks wider than the Minolta (it is f2.8 versus the f4) but the lens barrel doesn't look to be wider looking at it from the side. So, in an very unscientific analysis, they look to be about the same to me.

-Randy
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom