p.1 #2 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
It will never autofocus, if that's what you're asking, but you can use it manually. Per the Alt Forum FAQ, Canon EOS register distance is 44mm, while the Minolta is 43.72mm. That's like a .011" difference, I don't think anyone would be able to make a glassless adapter that focuses to infinity. You could buy a cheapie adapter on eBay and try it out.
May 18, 2013 at 07:07 PM
Guest
Guest
p.1 #3 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
Minolta mount also uses mechanical lever to control aperture, so you won't be able to use that (the lens will be stuck in either wide open or fully stopped down position). In addition, this lens doesn't seem to be very good, so I wouldn't bother unless you get it for free.
p.1 #5 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
You seem to know what you're talking about so let me ask you this: I was given a 50mm Minolta f1.2 prime lens and I was wondering if it would be worth buying an adapter ($50+) to put it on my DSLR EOS Rebel T3/1100D? The Canon prime 50 is like three or four times that price. I know the Canon lens would be better but I never use auto-focus, I'm a control freak and like everything manual. TIA
Jun 11, 2013 at 10:19 PM
Guest
Guest
p.1 #6 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
This sounds like a good idea, especially since that lens is fully manual (don't think Minolta ever made an AF 50/1.2...) so you'll lose nothing. However I have no experience with adapting alt. lenses, so maybe you'd be better off asking about the exact adapter model - and any caveats - on the Alternative forums: http://fredmiranda.com/forum/board/55
p.1 #7 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
Barrie Lester wrote:
I was given a 50mm Minolta f1.2 prime lens and I was wondering if it would be worth buying an adapter ($50+) to put it on my DSLR EOS Rebel T3/1100D?
As Snopchenko said, you should re-ask for details on the Alt forum, where all the (mount converted) Minolta Rokkor fans hang out.
Some short answers: yes, the Minolta fast primes are absolutely worth putting on your camera. However, what you want is a mount conversion (where you remove and replace the Minolta mount with a Canon EF mount), not an adapter attached to the Minolta mount (which will either prevent you from focusing at longer distances, or add cheap cruddy glass elements that will wreck the image quality). Also, nailing focus at wide apertures through the viewfinder will be very difficult --- the focus screen is not designed to let you see where the actual (very thin) focal plane of a fast lens is; you'll need to be content with live view focusing when shooting at ~f2 or wider.
p.1 #8 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
Barrie Lester wrote:
You seem to know what you're talking about so let me ask you this: I was given a 50mm Minolta f1.2 prime lens and I was wondering if it would be worth buying an adapter ($50+) to put it on my DSLR EOS Rebel T3/1100D? The Canon prime 50 is like three or four times that price. I know the Canon lens would be better but I never use auto-focus, I'm a control freak and like everything manual. TIA
I will +1 to the go hang out on the Alt forum .
but I will also add my 2 cents (for what its worth)
dont use an adapter, the mount conversion will be much better (alt forum will help loads here)
As said MF will not be easy . and it will be even harder using the VF of a rebel series camera .Reasons:
Crop camera VF's are much smaller the FF VF's - and the The penta mirror rather than the Penta Prism that the the Rebels have is ven smaller (sort of like looking thru a keyhole) .
The rebels dont have user replaceable screens in the VF. most other (although not the 7D or 5D3) higher end bodies do , which means you can fit the hi precision screen .
next , crop body (and i shoot a crop body ) . your talking about a 'Fast 50' , I think you would be much better served by using it on a FF body , unless you want it as a portrait shooter (85mm on FF is the classic Head & shoulders length and 50 on a crop is very close to the same FOV) .
My personal choice if your going to the trouble of converting a fast 50 is to get hold of a older FF body like the 5D mk1 and fit the 'S' screen to it .
p.1 #9 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
Do a search for a guy named Jim Buchanan. Jim machines custom conversion mounts that compensate for the register distance and allow the Rokkor lenses to mount on Canon. He can tell you if your lens is worth the effort or not. Very talented and a nice guy as well. He's located north of L.A.
p.1 #10 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
I've bought several MC and MD Minolta lenses for Alt purposes. Nothing expensive or elegant.
I can confirm that you will not be able to mound them and focus to infinity on any Canon EOS bodies, unless, as Michael said, you do a mount conversion (expensive), or use the cheapie tele-converter type adapters (not recommended -- I tried them, just to see).
That said, these Minolta lenses work great on M4/3 with a simple, cheap adapter (no glass). But when all is said and done, even there I mostly prefer my Canon FD 50/3.5 Macro, 24/2.8 and 35/2.8 lenses. Tried a Canon FD 50/1.4 and was blown away how sharp it was!
Unless you are going to use on mirrorless cameras, I'd avoid most of the everyday Minolta glass. Now, the 58/1.2 is another matter. . . for connoisseurs!
p.1 #11 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
The Minolta MD 50/1.2 prime is a fine lens. Manual focus aside it will give the EF 50L a run for its money. If you are going to use it on a EOS body then have the lens mount converted and do not bother with any adaptor that includes a glass element. That cheap glass element becomes the week link in the optical chain. I have three Minolta lenses converted to my EOS cameras: 21/2.8, 35/1.8, and the mighty 58/1.2. Love them all...
p.1 #12 · Converting Minolta bayonet mount lens for Canon
Gunzorro wrote:
you do a mount conversion (expensive)
Getting a mount conversion professionally done by Jim Buchanan is actually often surprisingly inexpensive --- similar in cost to buying Canon's cheapest 50/1.8 lens, but you end up with a much nicer optic. Also, mount conversion often adds to the value of a lens, and makes it easier to re-sell if you decide you don't like it. If you already have a lens like a Rokkor 50/1.2 that sells for several hundred dollars, paying for mount conversion is a very cheap way to get an awfully nice piece of fast glass for your camera.
