Jump to content

Recommended Posts

http://

And

http://

Bought this lens , brand new, out of the shop, years ago, in Osnabrük Germany.

Initially it was on a minolta  XE 1, but that died in the  1980s

Apparently the Minolta  XE 1 was the worst ever, camera, to repair  ??   So I was told, Anyway the lens is still going strong & I recently had it refurbished for  £ 200.  

Anyone interested ?  Make me an offer !

Remember !  This is a  Rare Lens !   Only made for a year or so, but the replacement was never as  sharp or as good in low light !

Edited by Wally The Confused
additional info
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Wally,

You certainly are confused.  The Minolta 85mm f1.7 is, as you say, a great lens -- I have one -- but it is not rare, and was made for many years.  But it is pretty expensive.  There were actually three versions of the 85mm f1.7 lens, but the optics were always the same:

http://www.subclub.org/minman/8517.htm

Minolta also made 85mm lenses with f2.0 and f2.8 apertures.  One was a soft-focus lens with adjustable spherical aberration.  All of them are winners, and selling prices range from $100 to $500 depending on the model and condition.

Good luck with your sale -- and feel free to use any information from my Minolta website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Thanks for the reply , I've been away  a while , but the info I have slightly contradicts your comment, sorry .

Even after the new MD lenses were introduced, Minolta continued producing the MC model for some time. When it was finally updated to an MD design, it was only available for a short time before being withdrawn from sale in favour of the new and much smaller 85mm f/2. As a result, it is a rare lens and commands a premium price over the more common MC version. Photo: Robert Hoehne
   
 

Despite it's similar appearance to the MC lens, the MD lens actually has a slightly different optical formula to most of the 85mm MC lenses in existence. The change in optical construction occured in 1978, immediately prior to the commencement of the MD production which began in 1979. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to determine if a MC lens is of the earlier construction or the later, as both are identical in appearance. 

The MD version of this lens was in fact only manufactured for one year before being superceded by the new f/2 design. As a result, it is highly sought after. It will certainly be interesting to determine if the change in optical formula contributed to a noticeable improvement in performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, the length of time a lens is in production is not the important factor.  It's how many lenses were made during its production that make a differencce.  Given the common appearance of the MD 85mm f1.7 on EBAY shows that it's not a rare lens at all -- but people (especially sellers) love to throw around the term "rare" loosely -- making it pretty meaningless.  My favorites are "very rare" and "exceedingly rare".

On the change in optical formula of the MD version, I'd like to see your source.  Just because it's on the WEB does not make it true, and even if there was a change of some sort (which seems odd for a lens that was going to be discontinued) that does not mean that it makes any difference in its results.

It seems odd that neither Dennis Lohmann, nor Red Bailey (long-time Rokkor experts), nor I have ever run across any reference to this "mystery" or supposition.

But who knows?  Maybe it's true.  Minolta was always making minor tweeks to its lenses -- but you'd never be able to determine if one lens has the "change" or not.  So it makes no difference -- unless you are a seller trying to convince a buyer that they are getting a "Mona Lisa".

Edited by XKAES
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wouldn't believe everything you see on the ROKKORFILES.  Much of what is on there is stolen.  I should know, because he's taken much from my much older MINMAN website.  I'll just give you one example.  The Minolta SR-1 had a lot of changes during the many years it was produced,, but Minolta just referred to all of them as simply the SR-1 -- although the user manuals changed with the cameras.  To keep things understandable and help avoid confusion, I broke the major differences into five groups of significant changes and labeled them the Model A through Model E.  These are strictly my designations, not Minolta's -- but the ROKKORFILES uses the exact same designations.

Who knows where he "got" his info on the 85mm f1.7 -- not from me or Dennis Lohmann or Red Bailey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

The 58mm MCRokkor f/1.4 or f/1.2 are great portrait lens on ASP-C Sonys. You can usually pick up the f/1.4 for around $50 or less and the f/1.2 for ~$300. Sometimes you can find good glass on non working SRT-101/102 Minoltas for really cheap money. I always search for the camera and not the lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mlhm5 said:

I always search for the camera and not the lens.

I've found some great lenses that way too -- like a Tokina 24-200mm AF zoom on a Maxxum 5 for $20.  I sold the camera for $40 and kept the lens.

Edited by XKAES
Link to post
Share on other sites

From my records, Minolta made about 8500 85mm F 1.7 lenses bearing the MD badge. The MC-X version was slightly double that. So these are not that rare. I just saw an ad for a Limited Rare MD 45mm F2 lens ( Minolta made over a million of these) so the word rare is often used in a bizarre way.

Seeing that the OP has a MD ROKKOR-X version and that he appears to have bought it from Europe is kind of unusual since the ROKKOR-X versions were to be sold exclusively in America. So in Europe, this lens naming was rare. 

I think the confusion about a reworked version may come from the fact that during the MC-X era (1972-76), Minolta made numerous changes to their lens line-up. First they changed the lens Mount Index dot which was initially painted like their previous series of lenses but after about 1 year, they replaced this with a slightly larger diameter plastic bead. This change happened around the introduction of the X-1, XM, XK bodies. Then they removed the small Stop Down Levers that were on most lenses up to now around 1975 since their SR T and XK/XE bodies were now boasting a Stop down mechanism. Then a little later Minolta even removed the lens formula (in this case PG) designation from the lens markings. This may have caused people to believe there was some kind of modification to the lens when it was only a marking  change. Also around 1973-74 they decided to provide a different marking for lenses sold in America ( at least USA and Canada) to identify lenses sold on the grey market that was often cause for confusion with consumers buying a great deal they could not get repaired under warranty. Same applies to Bodies starting in the same era where  X-1 was for Asian market, XK for American market and X-M for rest of the world, then SR T 102 in America, SR T Super in Asia and SR T 303 in rest of the world.

So you could find all of the following with their respective front markings:

- MC-II: MC ROKKOR-PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with SDL) This type has the hills and valleys metal focusing ring

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR-PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with SDL and Painted Lens mount index changed around 1973-74)

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR-PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index changed around 1973-74)

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR-PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with No SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index )

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with No SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index and no more PG lens formula index)

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR-X PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index, Orange colored ROKKOR-X marking for the American market)

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR-X PG 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with No SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index, Orange colored ROKKOR-X )

-MC-X: MC ROKKOR 1:1.7 f=85mm ( with No SDL and Plastic Bead Lens mount index and no more PG lens formula index, Orange colored ROKKOR-X)

-MD-II: MD ROKKOR 85mm 1:1.7 ø55mm

-MD-II: MD ROKKOR-X 85mm 1:1.7 ø55mm (Orange colored ROKKOR-X again for the American market)

-MD-II: MD ROKKOR-X 85mm 1:1.7 ø55mm (White colored ROKKOR-X ( iguess orange paint was getting too expensive) )

It was then replaced with the MD-II MD ROKKOR (X) 85mm F 2

There was no MD-I version of this lens and the same with a few lenses with large apertures ( 35mm F 1.8, 58mm F 1.2, 300mm F 4.5) since they had issues with the speed of the aperture mechanisms closing down for what was  a last minute check on XD/XD-7 and XD-11 bodies requiring stopping the lens down just prior to the shutter opening to ensure accurate exposure. Some late MC-X lenses may have had the modified aperture mechanism causing the confusion that there was an updated version but the optical formula seems to indicate there was no change.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • I'd suggest you start by running a simple test.  Take pictures of a typical scene/subject and each of the JPEG settings your camera offers.  Then compare them in the output that you normally produce.  You may or may not see a difference.  I normally shoot at the highest JPEG level and save that file -- but make a smaller file (lower resolution) for normal/typical use. There's plenty of editing that you can do with JPEGs on your computer -- depending on your software -- and there are features in your camera that can help out, as well.  That depends on your camera.  Put them together, and it might meet your needs.  For example, your camera probably has several bracketing features that will take the same shot with different settings with one press of the button.  Then you can select the best JPEG to work with on your computer.  I frequently use this feature to control contrast.
    • If you set up some basic presets in your processing software and use batch processing, you don't need jpeg at all. I shoot RAW only, use (free) Faststone Image Viewer which will view any type of image file to cull my shots, and batch process in Darktable. I can start with 2000-3000 shots and in a matter of a few hours have them culled, processed, and posted. A handful of shots, say a couple hundred from a photo walk, are done in minutes.  This saves card space, computer space, and upload time.  The results are very good for posting online. When someone wants to buy one or I decide to print it, I can then return to the RAW file and process it individually for optimum results.  I never delete a RAW file. Sometimes I'll return to an old shot I processed several years ago and reprocess it. I have been very surprised how much better they look as my processing skills improved.  
    • If you're only publishing small-sized photo's or viewing on a phone / computer screen, 12-ish MP should be more than enough for your needs. Since with JPEG, the ability to 'fix' stuff on the computer is very limited anyway, you're not giving up much except the ability to crop/recompose after taking the shot. If you tend to crop often or might print large, shoot fine quality instead as JPEGs don't take up a lot of space anyway. I tend to shoot RAW+JPEG. After a trip/shoot, I download my photos to my computer and quickly scan through my JPEGs to select my keepers. The JPEGs are fine for 90% of my needs but at times there are one or two 'WOW'-shots that I might one day print large. I'll edit the RAW of these photos to my hearts content, generate a JPEG, then delete all RAWs to clear up space.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...