wfrank wrote:
Phillip, you make me wanna extend my Rokkor terrotory into the 50 for sure. Do you happen to know if there are variants of this lens as it is with the 58/1.2?
There is only one version of the Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50mm/1.4, its the later MC-design with a rubber grip.
wfrank wrote:
Philippe: fun or not, I like the square gear a lot. What lens is that (I assume it's something reasonably wide)?
Leica R 60mm Makro. A killer lens for the NEX considering the price. Is was shot close up, on a tripod, and cropped quite a bit.
Thanks kindly for the info guys. About the R60 I've been trawling for that, just missed a mint deal with extension tube. Have to do something about the lens craving disease very soon.
Small 2 image pano, clouds were nice on the mountains on the drive home from town. 5N + G90, ISO 100, f/8. Resolution is amazing in the original, you could count evergreens on the mountain tops ~ 20 miles away!
sebboh wrote:
honestly, the skopar looks like a winner to me for everything other than low light performance. i think i would choose the contax g 28 and contax g 45 for general use though. looking at the mtfs there's nothing for under $2k that can touch them for resolution (even the modern zeiss zm lenses), and my own use of the 45 certainly bears that out. i think you already ditched the 28mm though because you didn't like the adapter?
as far as the pen vs nokton goes, i suspect you'll find lower CA on the pen but lower contrast and different colors.
my lowlight lens wide open:
...
(pen f 42/1.2)...Show more →
While I admit that is a great shot, something about the bokeh from the 42/1.2 seems 'strange' to me. It seems to have a different, or unique look, maybe just my imagination, but for whatever reason the 40/1.4 is more to my taste. From what I've seen here the color palette of the Pen F lenses is really nice.
CJ, MCO - It's great to wake up to some wonderful colorful images. Very nice.
douglasf13 wrote:
Yeah, you probably want to leave DRO off if you shoot raw. It may lead you to believe that you're exposing shadows more than you really are.
I had never tried it until now, but I can see why it would be easy to trip up with it on and shooting raw. I have it on my custom menu right next to the quality setting, but I somehow never get around to switch over to jpeg, after seeing how it works though (shooting jpg) I think I may try to make use of it in some situations.
Jacob D wrote:
While I admit that is a great shot, something about the bokeh from the 42/1.2 seems 'strange' to me. It seems to have a different, or unique look, maybe just my imagination, but for whatever reason the 40/1.4 is more to my taste. From what I've seen here the color palette of the Pen F lenses is really nice.
oh yes, the 42/1.2 definitely has 'unique' bokeh, which i typically emphasize when i shoot with it as i think it's kinda cool. i much prefer it to the 38/1.8's bokeh, but haven't seen enough from the 40/1.4 (i hear good things though). the 42/1.2 has more normal bokeh at f/1.4 and pretty average/good bokeh at f/2 and smaller.
phillip – more spectacular shots with the rokkor MC PG 50/1.4!
hehe, i usually can identify sebbohs 42/1.2 shots before looking at the description, it has a really individual rendering. sebboh wrote:
there are, however, three other rokkor 50mm f/1.4 lenses. one of which is probably optically identical (MD 50/1.4 with a 55mm filter thread).
I think it is not.
first reason: I own a copy of the early MD Rokkor 50/1.4, its front-lens has a smaller diameter thank the MC 50/1.4.
second reason: There is a german Minolta-Forum www.mi-fo.de, one quote from a user o1af i know for his great knowledge: "Der Nachfolger des MC 1,4/50 wiederum ist das frühe MD Rokkor 1:1,4/50 mm (mit 55 mm Filtergewinde), welches zwar ebenfalls sieben Linsen in fünf Gruppen besitzt, aber dennoch eine Neukonstruktion ist.[...]"
which translates like: "The Successor of the MC 14/50 is the early MD Rokkor 1.4/50 (55mm filter-thread ), which also uses a 7 lenses 5 groups design, but is a new construction anyways."
Phillip Reeve wrote:
I think it is not.
first reason: I own a copy of the early MD Rokkor 50/1.4, its front-lens has a smaller diameter thank the MC 50/1.4.
second reason: There is a german Minolta-Forum www.mi-fo.de, one quote from a user o1af i know for his great knowledge: "Der Nachfolger des MC 1,4/50 wiederum ist das frühe MD Rokkor 1:1,4/50 mm (mit 55 mm Filtergewinde), welches zwar ebenfalls sieben Linsen in fünf Gruppen besitzt, aber dennoch eine Neukonstruktion ist.[...]"
which translates like: "The Successor of the MC 14/50 is the early MD Rokkor 1.4/50 (55mm filter-thread ), which also uses a 7 lenses 5 groups design, but is a new construction anyways." ...Show more →
good to know, i thought i remembered your other rokkor 50/1.4 being a 49mm filter thread version from the NEX pron thread. have you compared the two at all?
sebboh wrote:
good to know, i thought i remembered your other rokkor 50/1.4 being a 49mm filter thread version from the NEX pron thread. have you compared the two at all?
useful links about minolta manual lenses: the rokkorfiles many tests on film Minolta Manual Lens Indext complete! index of all manual Minolta lenses SR System Lenses a great quote collection on Minolta manual lenses, sadly for the non-german-speaking, it is mostly in german , but there are some lens diagrams
afaik there are two optical designs in 50mm/1.4 Minolta MDs,
7 lenses in 5 groups, those are labeled MD Rokkor and have a 55mm thread, the second design is 7/6 and those have a 49mm thread an are labeled either MD Rokkor oder MD without the Rokkor.
As you remember, i used to have a 49mm MD Rokkor which performed really similar to the 55mm MD Rokkor and the MC Rokkor.
I sold it because i don't own any 49mm filters.
, but there are some lens diagrams