Minolta Manual Focus

[SonnarSphere]

yes but unfortunately you quote my error that i just edited from reading the wikipedia.
it is badly explained.. SR is used to describe a family of mounts,
however SR (pre 1961) is incompatible with post-1961 bodies.

unless a lens has MC or MD written on it - avoid it.

the statement all manual focuse lenses are forward/backward compatible is therefore
not strictly correct. a pre-1961 lens may not fit your X-700. an MC or MD will fit.
an A-mount (the mount sony alpha DSLRs use) is a totally different mount..
will not fit an X-700.

confused?..you will be, after another episode of... 'Konica Minolta'.. )

look.. throw the bloody thing away and buy a nikon =D

 

[Josh66]

So then, are Nikon dSLRs the only ones that can use manual focus lenses with no adapter?


(won't affect my decision, just curious.)

 

[SonnarSphere]

lol
trick question ?

you can use old nikon MF lenses actually, on nikon DSLRs without an adapator.
i was joking about throwing it away :0)

 

[Josh66]

i was joking about throwing it away :0)

I don't have one. Thinking of buying one though.

I don't really care if the lenses are compatible with any dSLR (I just thought they were). I already have a pretty good selection of Canon lenses, and I don't think I'll be starting another digital system anytime soon.

Since Canon EF lenses don't fit Canon manual focus bodies, there's no reason to stick with Canon - so I just wanted to explore different options.

The X-700 does sound pretty good though.

 

[SonnarSphere]

helios 44-2 58mm f2 (bluetac & black tape mount). soviet copy of a Zeiss Biotar.

(curves/levels/no sharpening)

 

[Josh66]

lol

Not bad for some putty & tape.

 

[SonnarSphere]

thanks :0)

 

[compur]

So then, are Nikon dSLRs the only ones that can use manual focus lenses with no adapter?


(won't affect my decision, just curious.)

Pentax DSLRs can use MF lenses (K-mount) without an adapter.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

SonnarSphere, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Taping a lens to your camera? And I thought I was hardcore old-fashion with my photo ways....:lmao:

But, to get back to the question. I had to first dig up my cameras and then take out the batteries to makes 100% sure. And it is as I remembered. My SRT202s have fully mechanical shutters. The battery only runs the meter. On the other end my XD-11 is not.

It trips in Bulb and in O (whatever that is, sorry, I don't remember) but that's it.

Never had a single problem with any of my bodies and they went through hell (although looking at them right now, it's amazing how little wear and tear they show) but I would imagine the XD-11 would be the most likely to get one because of all the electronics. The SRT, on the other hand, is the ultimate body in the old-fashioned sense. All it does is hold the film and lens together.

It's built like a tank and if you have a battery in it, Great: you also have a light meter. if you don't, that's ok too. As an old fart, there was a time when I actually knew enough about my equipment to know what settings to use without the help of a light meter. At least, for my kind of photography at the time.

Now, let's talk a bit about lenses. I can't comment on the ones you have because I've never owned a zoom. Once upon a time zooms were frowned upon by the pros because they were too slow and, so, they were basically "amateur" lenses. But Minolta made some beautiful glass. Let's not forget they made lenses for Leica. You probably need to stick with fixed focal length lenses to get those though.

I wish I was ready to sell my film equipment so I could take "advantage" of you but I'm not. I still need to check it out and make sure it is working properly.

I almost forgot: from my research a few years ago, Minolta's non-AF lenses do not work with any of their AF bodies (digital or otherwise.)

 

[SonnarSphere]

SonnarSphere, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Taping a lens to your camera? And I thought I was hardcore old-fashion with my photo ways....:lmao:

Now, let's talk a bit about lenses. I can't comment on the ones you have because I've never owned a zoom. Once upon a time zooms were frowned upon by the pros because they were too slow and, so, they were basically "amateur" lenses. But Minolta made some beautiful glass. Let's not forget they made lenses for Leica.

i can do it very well now. people (even some amateur photogs) dont notice how its mounted. they say 'oh..i am amazed that lens fits on your modern camera' lol

jaja


+1 what you say about minolta. some amazing lenses. can be beautiful color rendition and micro-contrast.

 

[Battou]

Ok, I did not see it asked yet but What exactly are you looking fo body wise...Do you want the large & light feel similar to your digital SLR or do you want the rugged heavy feel of a classic film SLR?


Now I did notice that you said that you saw no particular reason to stick with canon due to incompatability in lenses abd that you where just exploring possibilities. Additionally I did notice that your direction to minolta was based on having some minolta glass loafin around but you have little to no confidence in them and would likely replace them. So my suggestions are based more on the exploration of possibilities than the fact you have some minolta glass loafin around.

You want the feel of your dSLR:

Canon T-90, Canon FD system body One of the last to use the FD mount (last one actually built by Canon I do believe), it pioneered many of the features on your current dSLR.

You want a light but classic feeling film SLR

Olympus OM-1, Olympus OM system body one of the first bodies using the OM mount that earned fame for being the lightest and quietest SLR in the early seventies.

Minolta XG series, Minolta MD system bodies, capable and lightweight bodies, made an for photographers who were interested in auto-exposure, while still retaining the capability for motorised film advance and full manual exposure.

You want a true rugged classic tank like feeling film SLR

Canon F series, Canon FD system bodies, First to use the FD mount. Really big baddass cameras too much to list.

Being an FD shooter my self, I reccomend sticking with Canon and exploring the FD series of lenses. I'm not saying Minolta Glass is bad, but Canons glass was renound for it's quality during that time period and is greately under apprieciated it todays market.

 

[SonnarSphere]

lol

Not bad for some putty & tape.

tessar/flektogon/44-2

czj flektogon 35/2.8

czj tessar 50/2.8

photographed with respective lenses. mirror (reversed image)

 

[c.cloudwalker]

^^^^^^

So, where is the tape? you're just holding the lens there

 

[SonnarSphere]

lol

 

[Josh66]

Now, let's talk a bit about lenses. I can't comment on the ones you have because I've never owned a zoom.

They are autofocus. I thought it was the same mount, but it's not so it's a moot point. Judging by their build quality & max aperture, they are very inexpensive.

I never really planned on using them, they just got me thinking - "hey, what about minolta?"

Ok, I did not see it asked yet but What exactly are you looking fo body wise...Do you want the large & light feel similar to your digital SLR or do you want the rugged heavy feel of a classic film SLR?
[...]

I'm leaning towards rugged, heavy, classic SLR.

I'm having second thoughts about the X-700... One thing I read that just doesn't sit well with me is a silk shutter.
(Probably just being paranoid)

There are a few Canons and Nikons I was considering...


Unless I get talked out of it, so far I plan on going with a Canon F-1.