19 thoughts on “Minolta”

1. I have that gem. Second version. Mint condition.

   Excellent lens. I use it like my third eye and hand.

   All the things are taken with this lens and it makes them better.

   Reply

2. Hello Phillip,

   first of all, thank you very much for your great site and contents on the Sony A7 and using it with old manual-focus lenses.

   I started photographing with a Minolta X-700 and used it regularly until 2008. I own three prime lenses, the “kit lens” 50/1,7, a 135/2,8 and a very nice 200/2,8. I rarely see reviews of this 200/2,8, any idea why? And, you only make comments on the 50/1,4 and the 50/2, is the 50/1,7 much worse?

   I am still “used to” do manual focusing, however with a “Schnittbildindikator” on the “Mattscheibe”, so I have no idea how easy it will be for me to use the techniques described for the A7 (shimmering pixels, focus magnifying, focus peaking). Do you have experience with old manual SLRs and their focus methods?

   Back when I bought these lenses it was a purely emotional decision and I always wondered if I could ever use them with a “digital body”. Now, with the A7/A7II this comes true and I seriously consider buying one. My budget is very limited, the “cheapest option” is to buy an A7 body only, not even getting the kit lens (28-70/3,5-5,6). On the other side, from your review I conclude that the IBIS that the A7II offers could come in very handy when using the 200mm lens. So maybe I continue saving some money or look out for a used one.

   Best regards,
   Peter

   Reply

   1. From the stuff I have read the 1.7 is a bit weaker, never bothered to test one since I already have far too many 50s.
      The MD 2.8/200 isn’t that common and it suffer from a lot of CA which made turned off my potential interest in it.

      I have very little experience with manual SLR’s but I have shot maybe a dozen films with them. Based on this little bit of experience I would say that it is easier to focus a manual lens on a a7.

      The a7ii is without doubt the nicer camera and if you can afford it I would go for it. That doesn’t mean that the a7 is bad, I still use mine after 2.5 years.

      Reply

3. Phillip – thanks always for your inspiration. I had the 50 1.7 just out of college and kept it. Recently, I picked up an adapter and the Minolta Rokkor-X MD 50mm 1.4. I’m still learning the lens but it seems rather sharp at 2.0 and 2.8 and still bokeh-interesting. For those interested, here’s my first pic at what I think is 1.4. https://www.flickr.com/photos/31844136@N05/28791238152/in/pool-rokkor

   Reply

4. Hi,
   I’ve got the opportunity to buy 3 very special Minolta lenses, namely, the MD 7,5 Fisheye, the 35mm 2.8 CA Shift and the 200mm 2.8 AF APO. Any thoughts on these lenses? I’ve read your new review about the 200mm and it sounds promising (just need to find an adapter first to try it).
   Thanks!

   Reply

   1. I don’t know the Fisheye or the Shift lens so I can’t give you an opinion on them, sorry 😉

      Reply

      1. No problem! If I’m going to buy these, any interest to test one?

         Reply

         1. probably not, have tested too many rare and expensive lenses lately 😉
            But thanks for the offer 🙂

            Reply

   2. If you buy the 7.5mm fisheye, please contact me with your thoughts Bartolomedia. Getting an adapter for it is tricky because it must focus past infinity. – I’m in the U.S. Midwest.

      Reply

5. Philip, my interest started when I was 16 with a Kodak Vigilant 620, my first commissioned work was class photo for year book, paid .50 for it. (I’m 63 now) I’ve run the Sony line-up to the A77, now have an A7 too. After researching even more I found your site and started into the Manual Lens adventure. I’m having a blast, I’ve picked up a MD 2.8 24mm, MC 2.8 28mm, MC 1.7 50mm, MC 1.9 55mm, MC 2.8 135mm, and a MD 3.5-4.5 28-85 all for less than $200. The colours are awesome. Spring is around the corner and I will get busy and test my abilities. Thank You for all your time and research

   Reply

6. Hello,

   I have an MD II 135/3.5 lens that shows a light blob in the center of the image barely visible at f8 but clear at f22. My MD III and MC X versions of this lens do not have this problem nor any 2.8 or any other lens I tried. I remember having read about this kind of problem (with the filter stack?) but can’t remember where, I think it was here. I may have missed the obvious but I can’t find anything about it here or elsewhere. Did you ever encounter this problem?

   Reply

   1. Don’t have that specific lens but it sounds more like a hotspot problem for me where the sensor reflects light from the lens which then is reflected back to the sensor, causing the issue. If that is the case you can’t do anything about it.

      Reply

7. Thanks Phillip, I think that’s it, searching for sensor reflection hotspot gave some answers, this one gives an explanation: http://thesybersite.com/minolta/sensor-reflection/

   Reply

8. Is it possible to use the same mount for a sony a6000? Or it needs a different mount?

   Reply

   1. a7 and a6000 use exactly the same mount and adapters.

      Reply

      1. Cheers, thanks didnt expect such a wuick response.
         By the way the link on here for the http://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-minolta-mc-rokkor-50mm-11-4/ does not work for me for some reason

         Reply

         1. Strange now it works

            Reply

9. Hi Phillip,

   Thanks for your great work and share! Sony has released the LA-EA 5 adopter, we can finally use those old A mount Minolta and Sony lens on A7! Do you want to review more A mount classical lenses like 16mm fisheyes, 35G, 85G, 16-35 ZA, and 500AF! That would be great if we can see those old lenses back to today!

   Thanks again!

   Reply

   1. To be honest I don‘t really see a good reason for me to review them, since I would have no personal use for them.

      Reply