Minolta Maxxum Lenses

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by RBrickston, Sep 21, 2007.

  1. RBrickston

    RBrickston Guest

    I'm in the market for a DSLR and just noticed an ad for the Sony A700 that
    says that the camera will take all 15 million Minolta Maxxum lenses made
    from 1985 on. Are this lenses in any quality comparison to what a similar
    lens for a a D300 or 40D would take?
     
    RBrickston, Sep 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. "RBrickston" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I'm in the market for a DSLR and just noticed an ad for the Sony A700 that
    > says that the camera will take all 15 million Minolta Maxxum lenses made
    > from 1985 on. Are this lenses in any quality comparison to what a similar
    > lens for a a D300 or 40D would take?


    I'd guess that the fixed focal length primes are fine, but in my experience
    they're quite rare, very expensive or both, apart from the Minolta 28 f2.8
    AF. I've got two "consumer" Minolta zooms, and they seem OK on slide film
    on my Dynax 7 film SLR. How they would stand up to the scrutiny of digital
    I have no idea.

    --
    M Stewart
    Milton Keynes, UK



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     
    Malcolm Stewart, Sep 21, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RBrickston

    RBrickston Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > In article <>,
    > RBrickston <> wrote:
    >
    > > I'm in the market for a DSLR and just noticed an ad for the Sony A700 that
    > > says that the camera will take all 15 million Minolta Maxxum lenses made
    > > from 1985 on. Are this lenses in any quality comparison to what a similar
    > > lens for a a D300 or 40D would take?

    >
    > RB-
    >
    > I purchased the Sony Alpha 100 because I already had a collection of
    > Maxxum lenses, along with two film SLR bodies. I believe the Minolta
    > lenses are on a par with lenses from the other major brands. Some may
    > be better, some may be worse. The kit lens is probably above average.
    >
    > If you don't already have a film SLR with lenses that would be
    > compatible with a DSLR, then you will probably find any of the major
    > brands (Pentax, Sony, Nikon, Canon) will be satisfactory. Most of the
    > discussions here are biased for one brand or the other, and there is a
    > lot of hype to sort through.
    >
    > My favorite is the Pentax *ist-DS, but I don't have a large collection
    > of Pentax AF lenses. I wasn't impressed with two Canon zoom lenses used
    > with my old EOS 300D, but the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens is quite sharp.
    >
    > Fred
    >


    I was considering the Sony A700 and found that compatible Minolta Maxxum
    lenses are both numerous and dirt cheap on Ebay.
     
    RBrickston, Sep 22, 2007
    #3
  4. RBrickston

    RBrickston Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > RBrickston <> wrote:
    > >
    > > I'm in the market for a DSLR and just noticed an ad for the Sony A700 that
    > > says that the camera will take all 15 million Minolta Maxxum lenses made
    > > from 1985 on. Are this lenses in any quality comparison to what a similar
    > > lens for a a D300 or 40D would take?

    >
    > Actually, since the Sony A700 is an antishake camera, you should
    > consider how it compares with other cameras with image stabilization. A
    > recent test did just that. Here is what they found:
    >
    >
    > Olympus, Pentax K10D and Sony had good camera-based sensor-shift image
    > stabilization with Sony being best.
    > Pentax K100D was significantly poorer.
    >
    > Canon and Sigma had good lens-based image stabilization.
    > Nikon has the best and the worst lens-based image stabilization with the
    > Nikon 80-400mm F4.5 the worst and the Nikon 18-200mm F4.5 the best.
    > The best Nikon lens was the only lens tested that was better than Sony
    > sensor-shift image stabilization. The other Nikon lens was
    > significantly worse. The other lenses with lens-based image
    > stabilization were comparable to the sensor-shift camera-based image
    > stabilization.


    I've never used a image stabilized camera, learning about camera shake
    from the Kodak Brownie days of adolescence, which stood me well in my 35mm
    era. So I haven't given it much thought as a deciding factor. However,
    those Maxxum lenses are dirt cheap on Ebay (hence my question), but maybe
    you get what you pay for in this case. Thanks for the heads up on another
    factor to maybe consider.
     
    RBrickston, Sep 23, 2007
    #4
  5. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Stephen Henning
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > RBrickston <> wrote:
    > >
    > > I'm in the market for a DSLR and just noticed an ad for the Sony A700 that
    > > says that the camera will take all 15 million Minolta Maxxum lenses made
    > > from 1985 on. Are this lenses in any quality comparison to what a similar
    > > lens for a a D300 or 40D would take?

    >
    > Actually, since the Sony A700 is an antishake camera, you should
    > consider how it compares with other cameras with image stabilization. A
    > recent test did just that. Here is what they found:
    >
    >
    > Olympus, Pentax K10D and Sony had good camera-based sensor-shift image
    > stabilization with Sony being best.
    > Pentax K100D was significantly poorer.
    >
    > Canon and Sigma had good lens-based image stabilization.
    > Nikon has the best and the worst lens-based image stabilization with the
    > Nikon 80-400mm F4.5 the worst and the Nikon 18-200mm F4.5 the best.
    > The best Nikon lens was the only lens tested that was better than Sony
    > sensor-shift image stabilization. The other Nikon lens was
    > significantly worse. The other lenses with lens-based image
    > stabilization were comparable to the sensor-shift camera-based image
    > stabilization.


    This is similar to what I saw published in January. In their tests,
    Sony beats 4 other technologies. See

    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml

    What is the source for your data?

    Thanks,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Sep 24, 2007
    #5
  6. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    RBrickston
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > I've never used a image stabilized camera, learning about camera shake
    > from the Kodak Brownie days of adolescence, which stood me well in my 35mm
    > era. So I haven't given it much thought as a deciding factor. However,
    > those Maxxum lenses are dirt cheap on Ebay (hence my question), but maybe
    > you get what you pay for in this case. Thanks for the heads up on another
    > factor to maybe consider.


    What I saw published, is that Minolta 50mm 1.4 of '97 was considered
    (well, at least by one review ;-) (one of) the best 50mm dSLR lens as
    far as the optic quality goes. The quality was judged to be
    comparable to best rangefinder lenses... It is on the expensive side
    of 50mm (but comparable to others 1.4) though. [Myself, I do not use
    50mm, so can't contribute personal experience...]

    Of course, a lot of things could have been changed in the last 10
    years.

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Sep 24, 2007
    #6
  7. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Bill Tuthill
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > > This is similar to what I saw published in January. In their tests,
    > > Sony beats 4 other technologies. See
    > > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml
    > > What is the source for your data?

    >
    > Thanks for asking, that was my question also. However, the link above
    > did not lead to anything relevant that I could see.


    True [I hit a wrong pasting key].

    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/msg/fcf6733d451859dc?dmode=source

    > > What I saw published, is that Minolta 50mm 1.4 of '97 was considered
    > > (well, at least by one review ;-) (one of) the best 50mm dSLR lens as
    > > far as the optic quality goes. The quality was judged to be
    > > comparable to best rangefinder lenses... It is on the expensive side
    > > of 50mm (but comparable to others 1.4) though. [Myself, I do not use
    > > 50mm, so can't contribute personal experience...]

    >
    > I own it, having been disappointed by the Minolta 50/1.7, and the 50/1.4
    > is indeed a great lens. Very sharp in focus, with in-focus rendition
    > rolling off smoothly into pleasing bokeh. Before owning it I had used
    > the Leica-designed Minolta 70-210/4 with extension tube for macro pictures,
    > but the 50/1.4 (with extension tube) was so much better that I switched
    > despite the shorter working distance.


    Thanks. And I see now what I wrote is not clear in the context.

    What I wanted to say is that the 3 major "wide range of cameras"
    companies (Minolta/Nikon/Canon) ALL had some lenses of stellar
    quality, and all had their dudes (just look at xi line of lenses, if
    you know what I mean :-[). So when buying Minolta lenses on EBay, one
    needs to investigate first...

    [And do not discount Minolta just because they were spending a lesser
    part of their budget on advertisement. This just meant that what they
    (IMO) had a better features/price ratio than the competitors.]

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Sep 24, 2007
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alan Browne
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,301
    Alan Browne
    Dec 17, 2004
  2. True211
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    504
    Alan Browne
    Feb 19, 2005
  3. Siddhartha Jain

    Minolta Maxxum 5D - New dSLR

    Siddhartha Jain, Jul 15, 2005, in forum: Minolta
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    1,021
    Alan Browne
    Jul 23, 2005
  4. JBBrown

    Maxxum 28 AF Flash / Maxxum 5D

    JBBrown, Mar 11, 2006, in forum: Digital SLR
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    643
    Alan Browne
    Mar 11, 2006
  5. John Doe

    What lenses for Minolta Maxxum 5

    John Doe, Sep 15, 2004, in forum: Minolta
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    644
    Peter
    Sep 18, 2004
Loading...