Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Minolta Rokkor Survival Guide

The same problem exists with one of my Contax lenses and the Metabones: I can't use it with the 18mm.

So, rather ask them what about Minolta SR glass before buying that adapter.
 
Just to clarify a couple of things I was curious about:

-There is no current MC/MD to EOS EF adaptor that works well (like the Fotodiox because it has a glass lens inside that can interfere with quality), so the best bet is sending it in to someone to professionally modify?

-The MC lenses with the knuckled rings (the ones made in the late 1960s) are generally radioactive, and will need UV light treatment over a period of a few days?
 
Last edited:
That Italian guy from digitalrokkor used to offer some parts and descriptions to modify certain lenses by yourself. I don't know if he is still active.

No, most of them are not radioactive, the only one I personally encountered was an early 58mm f1.2. If these are yellow, they need the UV treatment.
 
Like Uli said the early models of the 58mm 1.2 are radioactive.
Also the very first variant of the 85mm 1.7 is.
And ALL of the 28mm 2.5 are radioactive. Even the new one with rubber waffle focus ring.

I'm not 100% sure but I think that's the only three Rokkor lenses that used thorium glass.
 
Steve Sherrick said:
The benefit is I could also then use my M42 Takumars. But if there are better options let me know. I want to maintain infinity and not have a glass element in the adapters.
Click to expand...

If you already have a nikon mount then there are M42 to Nikon adaptors you can use with the Takumars.

Freya
 
I finally bought the Zhongyi Turbo II which arrived yesterday.
Mechanically competent and I could fit my lenses. Very tight.
Easy to operate.
Looks good as the "lens" is smaller than adapter, hence give a more compact camera (almost looks like a Rangefinder).
First impression is that lenses are lighter/faster
Actually, lenses become macro as the actual distance is much smaller than indicated on the focusing ring (about half)
Great to have real wide angles with A 6000.
Got a few spectacular pictures.
Remaining question mark is the quality of the pictures with various lenses. Will take time.
 
Is the better close focus a backfocus issue, or can you still get infinity per the focus marks? I am interested in this adapter myself.
 
I can still get infinity.
Ref speed, I did the test with 5 lenses and I always got a 2/3 stop improvement between no glass adapter and with Zhongyi speed boaster (note this is not a precise measurement, just looking at the impact on speed at constant ISO and at full aperture.
Went to a wedding in Belgium and used the MD-1 50mm f1.4 at the party last night with 3200 ASA. Gave me some 1/30s speed and did some great pictures at full aperture, but... a lot were out of focus or people moving too fast, still very nice in really very dark conditions.
 
Last edited:
Ronald Widerberg said:
Hey guys, does anyone have experience with the Shapeways DIY MC/MC-EOS conversion? Below is the link. Sounds promising.
http://www.shapeways.com/product/DVR72F6E3/minolta-md-to-eos-ef-flange?li=shareProduct
Click to expand...
I'm interesting in the shapeways conversion pieces. I've got a reasonable set of primes but don't really have a grand or two for converting them and cine modding. The two E mount adapters do me just fine for my own camera but I cant exactly get them on a red ATM.

-edit-
Just found this site offering pre machined mounts that look fairly good and at a reasonable price. Probably try one of these out. Can switch to a better adapter on my A7s, the metabones is just a touch off and isn't secure

http://www.leitax.com/Rokkor-lens-for-Canon-cameras.html
 
Last edited:
Yeah, unfrotunaterly that mount only works for the 58mm 1.2, not sure why, but it does. I've got 17-135mm and it will only fit the 58mm 1.2 ;(.... Unless someone else has a fix for it..
 
Just got a Rokkor 40mm f2 Leica-M lens (same design/build as HIGHLY regarded Leica 40mm f2...made via partnership btw Rokkor and Leica!)...very curious how it performs on a Canon EOS M3!

BTW...this lens is TINY!!!! Apparently one of smallest Leica M mount lenses ever!!!
 
I#m curious to read about your experiences with that one, Nick!
 
Yes, I tried one and hoped to use it by adjusting back focus on a RED, but the range is not enough.

The seller clearly states that you won't reach infinity with most lenses, you can use them for macro, though.

The flange distance of Minolta SR is shorter than EOS – that is the main reason these great lenses are still relatively cheap. But now with the Sony A7 cameras that's gonna change, I suppose…
 
Sorry, you got it wrong: it's too long, not too short.
 
I'm selling a Minolta MC 21mm 2.8 in very good condition.
Shipping all over Europe from Germany.

It's an amazing wide angle lens which is much cheaper than the Contax Zeiss 21mm.

PM me if interested.
 
Comparison 200 f/4 and 200 f/2.8. I have now had them for a while:
- 200 f/4 plusses:
* focusing ring easier
* lighter 580g versus 700 g
* more discrete (55mm versus 72mm)
- 200 f/2.8:
* min focus is only 1.8 meter (versus 2.4-2.5 for f/4) good for close picture (gros plan in french)
* 8 blades versus 6 blades makes better bokeh/off focus
* lighter with less depth of field at 2.8 allows to isolate subject

Very happy with the quality (sharpness, contrast) of both...even with Minolta 300S double focal which gives a 400 mm f5.6 weighing less than a kg. I now reach for the 2.8 when I want a 200mm.

Mind you, the 2.8 cost me over 200€
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top