|
esanchez Registered: May 08, 2005 Total Posts: 1154 Country: United States |
I just picked up this bad boy, what do you guys think |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
Yes, a good deal, for sure. |
|
esanchez Registered: May 08, 2005 Total Posts: 1154 Country: United States |
cogitech |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
No. I have not photo-documented the process. In fact, I want to redo mine with a new adapter (I've been waiting forever for a new shipment of adapters) because I screwed up on the first go around and the lens ended up with the focusing scale, etc. on the bottom when mounted on the camera. I should have stayed away from the port till I was finished |
|
mrladewig Registered: Dec 20, 2005 Total Posts: 2591 Country: United States |
I'm still kicking myself for this mistake over the summer. At my local flea market, a fellow had some minolta gear including the Rokkor-X 35/1.8 and Rokkor-X 85/1.7. He was asking $20 for the 35/1.8 and I suppose I could have gotten the 85/1.7 for about the same, but didn't need the lenses and was out of cash and needed to stop by the ATM. I looked them up at KEH afterwards and immediately kicked myself. |
|
Ed Sawyer Registered: May 08, 2007 Total Posts: 1991 Country: United States |
I was watching that one. It's a nice example but not a spectacularly cheap price. Id' say about market value generally. |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
Ed Sawyer wrote: ![]() (Thank Antony from Rokkorfiles for these, but he also notes; "It is noted, however, that since first publishing this page it has been brought to my attention that Minolta literature exists from late in the MC era that shows the MC lens having the same structure as the MD. Accordingly, we can reach the conclusion that this change was made as a progressive upgrade actually during the production of the MC lens.") So, when you get an MC, you don't really know which one you are getting The original MC, BTW, has the best bokeh as tested by Antony: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/85mm%20page%203.htm |
|
Ed Sawyer Registered: May 08, 2007 Total Posts: 1991 Country: United States |
What, are those prices in Canadian dollars? ;-) |
|
Andrew Gough Registered: Jun 10, 2005 Total Posts: 1783 Country: Canada |
tough call, the reviewer claims that 85's rated are as follows: |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
Andrew Gough wrote: |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
All of these are the MC 85/1.7 wide open on 5D: ![]() 100% ![]() ![]() 100% (ISO 1600, unfortunately): ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The MC 85/1.7 could most accurately be described as a very "rich" lens, IMO. |
|
Andrew Gough Registered: Jun 10, 2005 Total Posts: 1783 Country: Canada |
Looks like I get to keep the MC version as well! |
|
cogitech Registered: Apr 20, 2005 Total Posts: 10967 Country: Canada |
Yes. There are a couple of surprises, particularly compared to the 58/1.2 conversion. It is not difficult, but quite different. |
|
Ed Sawyer Registered: May 08, 2007 Total Posts: 1991 Country: United States |
That is some smooth wide-open bokeh, no doubt. Almost as good as EF 85 1.2L I'd say. |