Phillip Reeve wrote:
I just did the comparison and the 55 has a little less detail but noticeably less SA while the 58 has a little more detail and much less contrast.
My Canon nFD 1.4/50 makes both look pretty weak.
that agrees with my experience – though i would add that the 58/1.2 performs more noticeably better towards the outer zone (both wide open and stopped down) than the 55/1.7 and even surpasses the canon at the image edge (though never in contrast).
I have both the Canon nFD 1.4 and the Minolta 55mm 1.7 and the Canon is razor sharp at F2... The minolta jumps from 1.7 straight to 2.8 but the Canon is sharper I believe.
esanchez wrote:
I have both the Canon nFD 1.4 and the Minolta 55mm 1.7 and the Canon is razor sharp at F2... The minolta jumps from 1.7 straight to 2.8 but the Canon is sharper I believe.
yes, no question. the canon is almost certainly sharper even at f/1.4 than the rokkor 55/1.7 at f/2. i was commenting that rokkor 58/1.2 is sharper than the canon at the very edge of the frame though the canon is clearly sharper near the center at wide aperture.
Just picked up a Minolta 35-70mm f3.5 based on comments I've seen on the web. Some basic testing against my Canon FD 35-70mm f4 shows the Canon wiping the floor with that lens at infinity (all focal lengths and apertures, but significantly at 35mm), even if the Minolta puts up a good decent performance for a zoom. A little surprised to be honest! I'll have to test more at closer range, but I guess I expected it to be at least as good. Glad now that no one bought the Canon when I had it on eBay for $10...
trogdon wrote:
Just picked up a Minolta 35-70mm f3.5 based on comments I've seen on the web. Some basic testing against my Canon FD 35-70mm f4 shows the Canon wiping the floor with that lens at infinity (all focal lengths and apertures, but significantly at 35mm), even if the Minolta puts up a good decent performance for a zoom. A little surprised to be honest! I'll have to test more at closer range, but I guess I expected it to be at least as good. Glad now that no one bought the Canon when I had it on eBay for $10...
which version of the minolta (and the canon)?
my copy of the minolta (the one with macro ability) seems to pretty much outresolve the a7 sensor across the frame at all focal distances at infinity from f/5.6 on. if the canon can do better that's very impressive.
sebboh wrote:
which version of the minolta (and the canon)?
my copy of the minolta (the one with macro ability) seems to pretty much outresolve the a7 sensor across the frame at all focal distances at infinity from f/5.6 on. if the canon can do better that's very impressive.
Are you sure? At least at 35mm my copy does not perform that well. It still performes remarkably well for a zoom and had noticeably better corners than the Zeiss 4/24-70 but I wouldn#t say that it outresolves the sensor in the corners at 35mm. At 50mm and 70mm the corners are indeed great.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
Are you sure? At least at 35mm my copy does not perform that well. It still performes remarkably well for a zoom and had noticeably better corners than the Zeiss 4/24-70 but I wouldn#t say that it outresolves the sensor in the corners at 35mm. At 50mm and 70mm the corners are indeed great.
well, just two corners – my copy is a bit decentered, but i figured the better corners were representative of optimal performance. perhaps not though?
sebboh wrote:
well, just two corners – my copy is a bit decentered, but i figured the better corners were representative of optimal performance. perhaps not though?
decentering sucks. I just shot a pretty extensive test of several 85s among them MC 1.7/85 and MD 2/85 just to notice that the 2/85 is severely decentered
sebboh wrote:
so now that you've used both, how do you feel about the 85/1.7 vs 85/2?
Thanks to the new notifications function I found your question which I had overlooked before.
The 2/85 is small and very sharp but the bokeh turns me off. The 1.7/85is much softer at f/1.7 but still good enough for portraits and it feels nicer, mostly because of the super smooth focusing ring. Bokeh1 by reevedata, on Flickr
Personally I will stick to my 2.5/100 when I want Minolta rendering for portraits and stuff. Bokeh is better at portrait distances than that of my Bokina and it has a longer focus throw and is lighter. I should really use it more often.
