michelb

What shutter speeds were the 2 pictures taken at ? Silent Shutter ON ? EFCS ON ? Looking at the picture of the singer it appears the white curve does not affect the microphone cable or support below which would be the case if this was indeed a light leak

2 or 4 unless your lenses have SSM or SAM focusing motors built-in

Check your flash contacts at the front of the hot shoe. If one or some of them are torn, they may cause a short and anything can happen. Can't attach pictures to show you an example These come with a protection cover for the flash foot and if lost or unused, these contacts can get torn by getting hooked on a foreign material.

Battery charged ? Do you see anything on the rear LCD screen ? Try removing and re-installing battery first

There is very little info on these even in the books i looked at. See attached a picture of the instructions sheet that came with my FDA-FM1AM and as you can see it shows both the FM1AM and FL1AM and if you look closely, you will notice there are tabs all around and the ones on the right side are a different shape. I don't have a picture of the G screen but my guess is the G screen will have a differently shaped tab on its right side also giving it its differentiation. My M screen has that tab shaped exactly like on the drawing trouble is to see that, you need to remove the original screen from the camera as it is hidden behind the frame that holds it down Let us know if you see a difference

FF lenses will have larger glass elements that can cause additional flare

I don't yet have the HVL-F28RM ( the only Sony/Minolta flash i don't yet own) and before you get into WL with this unit, you need to know the following: - After reviewing the online manual, it appears this unit will only work in the WL Radio protocol which is a totally different matter than the Optical WL that your HVL-F43AM and F58AM are designed for. - From what i can understand from that manual, only flash units that have their model number ending with RM will work in WL with this unit and as a WL remote will only work with either the HVL-F45RM or 60RM unis or M units mounted of the the Sony Radio controllers FA-WRC1M and receivers FA-WRR1 which is not the case with your present units. - As a controller on your body, the HVL-F32M would be just fine with your present units. Or HVL-F43M or HVL-F60M. HVL-F45RM and 60RM can also work but some fiddling in the custom menus of your actual units will be necessary. - Should you go out and buy this unit, i have one worry in that the size of this flash is very small and its flash head is much closer to the lens axis which could end-up generating a lot of red eyes in the pictures of people and this is why i did not rush to get it (awaiting to find a less expensive used one to try) a bit like the flash shown on the left of the following pic (Meike 320s) that was so close to the lens axis that anything with eyes would get weird color/artefacts in the eyes.

Where are you ?

For other than cameras: - Round rotating dials to make phone calls ? - TV remotes with a lonnnnnnnnng cable between your seat and your TV set? For Cameras: - Separate range finder to achieve focus on non existent distance scales of focusing ring on lenses ? - Cameras generating negative images in RAW format that require reversal ? - Screw-in terminal to use traditional cable release ? - A fully automatic bellows system to enable macro beyond 1:1 magnification with most lenses ? - Replacement of TTL flash by on flash sensor ? - User replaceable focusing screens ? - Interchangeable viewfinders ? - Vertical grips that add features like 120 images per second and allows the use of AA batteries ? - Single point autofocus sensor ? - Camera with no Auto or Program Modes ? - Viewfinders that only show shutter speed and aperture ? - Digital back that can be retrofitted to most 35mm cameras of another era ?

The filter thread is still 55mm on the MD ZOOM ROKKOR (X) first version lens . But the lens shade is a screw-in mount on a secondary thread that is a bit larger than the filter thread just like the 40-80 Zoom and the Shift CA lens. The info on the easy pix site only mentions screw-in for all 3 of these lenses but does not provide the info that these are a different size from the filter thread size. As for the 4 versus 6 versions, i can't access the minman site but here is what i know after seeing in excess of 200,000 Minolta SR lenses over the last 8 years 1st version was MD ZOOM ROKKOR 35-70mm 1: 3.5 (also available as ROKKOR-X for the North American market but they are the exact same lenses. (lens no 257 on the easypix site) and this one has the 63-64mm screw-on shade that fits outside of the regular 55mm filter ring 2nd version with clip-on lens shade was called MD ZOOM 35-70 1:3.5 and had different zooming ring and close focus down to 1.3m which was the same as the first version Then came 3rd version with similar markings and features like lens shade etc as No 2 but this time there was a macro Mode button added that allowed close focusing down to 0,8m Much later when MD lenses were being phased out due to the popularity of the AF system, there was a 4th version called MD ZOOM 35-70mm 1:3.5-4.8 that was likely made by a third party like Cosina. Where are the other 2 versions ?

6 versions of 35-70 ? Really ? Are you counting AF in the 6 ? I know of only 4 one of which was not even made by Minolta (the 3.5-4.8 version) The first version of the 35-70mm F 3.5 (MD ZOOM ROKKOR (X)) had similar separate threads for its lens shade of about 62mm but like i mentioned, that shade won't fit on either the 40-80 nor the Shift CA. After revisiting them, this shade won't even fit a 62mm filter by about 1mm. So i guess this one is 63mm which is not a standard filter size. The shade thread diameter on both of my SHIFT CA ROKKOR's are also close to 62mm but they appear to be closer to 64-65mm since they won't fit either on a 62mm filter but by a larger margin than the 35-70 shade. It also won't fit on a 67mm threaded lens being too small. So about 64-65mm here Finally, the shade for the 40-80 is 62mm since i can fit it to a 62mm filter. So i guess what we have here is: -1-62mm (Zoom Rokkor 4-80) - 1 about 63mm MD ZOOM Rokkor) - 1 about 64-65mm (Shift CA Rokkor) My measuring tools are all in storage after i just moved so this is the closest i could get to compare all 3

te rely but here we go. This shade does have what appears to be 62mm threads but the same could apply to both the 40-80 zoom and the 35-70 F 3.5 MD Zoom Rokkor (1st version) but i own all 3 lenses and the shades of all of them can not fit on the other 2 lenses for a reason i can not understand. So your search should be on the actual original shade

Many of those lenses have a character that the run of the mill native lenses don't necessarily have. The same for the craze about vintage lenses that are often even better in some conditions than the newer designs. My collection of over 250 Minolta Rokkor lenses from the MF era is a demonstration of that and i am not alone. I actually bought both my A7R and A7II to get the most out of these and when i have the time, i am having so much fun trying to figure why some spend 2000$ plus on a GM lens when some of these oldies can often provide very impressive results.

Depending on the maximum aperture of your lens, when using a 2X teleconverter your max aperture is multiplied by 2 so a F 5.6 max aperture lens becomes an F 11 lens and any working aperture smaller than F8 is likely going to be a struggle for the AF system of any camera that were designed to work up to about F 8. Anything smaller and most of the time the body won't even find focus and at those aperture settings, the viewfinder gets so dark it will always be a struggle to find correct focus.

No artificial lights source from you (LED's or other) ? A lot of new lights can provide weird artifacts at some shutter speeds Did you try with HDR off ? Can you provide more details on your settings ( Fixed ISO ?, shooting mode ?, preferred aperture and shutter speed ? WB setting ?, or any picture effect setting in place Watching the home listing through the link you provided, it appears to me this shooting is showing the poor quality of paint or uneven paint applied on the walls and ceilings. The worse artifacts seem to be when there are reflections so the camera is probably recording those details and enhancing the effect by some setting you may have set by mistake.