Filter Thread: 55mm
Max. Magnification : 1:2
Close Focusing Distance (from the sensor/from the front of the lens): 45cm /27cm
Number of aperture blades: 6
Elements/ Groups: 5/4
i want to thank Marc for borrowing me the lens to write this review!
Image Samples in low resolution
You can find some more samples in this flickr set.
Minolta made three versions of the lens which share the optical design
- The Minolta MC MACRO ROKKOR-QE100mm 1:3.5 was introduced in 1972 and has a metal focusing ring with 550g it is a bit lighter than later versions.
- The Minolta MC MACRO ROKKOR (QE) 100mm 1:3.5 was introduced in 1973 and it has a rubberized focusing ring.
- The MinoltaMinolta MD MACRO ROKKOR 100mm 1:3.5 is the version shown in my pictures.
The differences between the different versions are minor and only cosmetically. Only if you plan to use the lens on a younger Minolta film camera the MD version has some advantages.
For more technical details visit the Minolta SR lens index.
Build quality and handling
Builts quality is excellent, everything is made from high quality metals and feels very solid.
The focusing ring travels around 220° from 45cm to 1m and a further 60° to infinity. The focusing has just the right amount of resistance and is a joy to use. It is a bit hard to focus the lens at longer distances because the focus throw is quite short at distances above 1.5m.
The aperture ring has full stops from f/5.6 to f/16 and no stop from f/3.5 to f/5.6 and f/16 to f/22.
The lens is quite large for a little camera like the Sony Alpha 7 and I prefer to use a L-bracket with it but it is quite possible to use it without. The weight is centered in the middle of the lens which is good for balance.
The front lens is a bit recessed and well protected even without the massive made-from-metal lens hood. Because the lens is very sensitive to flare the lens hood is recommended none the less.
These results are based on the use with a Sony Alpha 7.
The lens is very very sensitive to flare and this can be quite limiting at times
Bokeh is one of the biggest strengths of the lens.
Lateral chromatic aberrations are almost non existent.
Axial chromatic aberrations (“bokeh fringing”) are about average.
f/3.5 and f/5.6: Sharp in the center but midframe and corner sharpness isn’t that good.
f/8:Now the image is sharp to very sharp across the frame. A solid but not great performance.
f/11: The corners improve further
Now lets have a look at the closeup performance, I compared it to my Tokina 2.5/90 which is an excellent lens.
Now I placed the same subject in the corners (back to a7):ouch! I redid the test two times because I assumed that I had make a mistake but with no better results. Based on the infinity results f/8 would probably give better results for the Minolta but you will notice diffraction.
While sharpness is good enough for most applications there are sharper manual lenses out there.
This is a nice lens, the mechanical quality is great and optically it is a capable lens, the only issues I found is the bad flare resistance and below average corner performance (which isn’t that much of a problem in the field). I enjoyed using it.
What I did not enjoy was carrying it: This is a pretty big and heavy lens and I found myself often wondering if it was worth to put it in my bag when there are other lenses which do the same or even more while being lighter.
My Tokina 2.5/90 Macro is much a more versatile lens: It is a lot smaller and a little lighter while being faster (important for portraits), not that sensitive to flare, sharper and easier to focus at longer distances.
So if you already own one or can get one cheaply I am pretty positive that you will enjoy it. But don’t spend too much on it.
- Minolta MC 2.5/100: Not a macro lens but a better portrait and landscape lens. For my everyday photography I would prefer it.
- Tokina 2.5/90 Macro: I think this lens does everything the Minolta does a little better, the only downside is the noticeably higher price
- Almost any manufacturer had a 4/100 Macro lens and these are usually a lot smaller and lighter than this lens. The Minolta MD 4/100 is a bit sharper but I didn’t like the focusing ring.
Images Samples in full resolution
For more Minolta lenses check out my Minolta list.
To learn about manual lenses in general this beginners guide might be helpful.
Latest posts by Phillip Reeve (see all)
- Review: Minolta MD 100mm 1:2.5 - April 17, 2017
- Madeira through the Eyes of a Photographer: Travel-Report - April 12, 2017
- Review: Olympus OM Zuiko Macro 50mm 1:3.5 - March 26, 2017