Show us your SLR ..... WHAT?

p.giannakis said:
You have the "Hills and Valleys" version of the 58f/1.4. It is a very interesting lens although quite unpredictable. I have taken some great shot a with it and other times flare seems to mess up everything.

View attachment 4870791
If you ever come across the MD 50f/1.4 grab it. It is a much more consistent lens, sharp from f/1.4 and handles flare better.

View attachment 4870792
Click to expand...

The third-generation MC Rokkor 50mm 1.4 (rubberized focusing ring), is also a highly regarded lens.

- Murray
 
Optically, the MD lenses are definitely the ones to favor. When it come to mechanics, obviously the older, non plastics versions are better. As long as prices of Minolta gear are on the lower side, they are worth buying and using IMO.
 
santino said:
Optically, the MD lenses are definitely the ones to favor. When it come to mechanics, obviously the older, non plastics versions are better. As long as prices of Minolta gear are on the lower side, they are worth buying and using IMO.
Click to expand...

A number of the later, more compact MD lenses had optical formulas simplified (fewer lens elements than before). If I recall, this was more the case with wide-angle lenses. Also, my MC 100mm 2.5 lens has six elements, while the MD version had five.

This wasn't always the case, as Minolta offered an MC 135mm 3.5 with four elements, while all of the MD 135s had five.

I was never sure if this was for light weight, lower cost, or if they actually performed better than previous versions with more lens elements.

- Murray

PS. I could look up specific examples, if needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom