Minolta MD/MC lens and what Sony Alpha work best

[bobmax48]

I have a bunch of Minolta MD/MC lens purchased before 1984.  Also I have a few Nikon DX lens.  I am wanting to buy a Sony Alpha camera but want to know if these lens will work.  Mostly I shoot landscapes and closeup of textures.  Being a video editor I probably will want to use the camera for video too.  Do the Minolta lens work in full frame?  Which of the Alpha 7 series cameras would be best with the lens?

[Phillip Reeve]

I have a bunch of Minolta MD/MC lens purchased before 1984.  Also I have a few Nikon DX lens.  I am wanting to buy a Sony Alpha camera but want to know if these lens will work.  Mostly I shoot landscapes and closeup of textures.  Being a video editor I probably will want to use the camera for video too.  Do the Minolta lens work in full frame?  Which of the Alpha 7 series cameras would be best with the lens?

Could you give us a list of your lenses? Then it would be easier to give an recommendation.

It would also be helpful to know if you want to use it for video primarily and how important resolution is for you.

 

For information about several Minolta lenses check out this article: Manual Minolta LENS RATINGS

For information about adaption lenses check out this article: MANUAL LENSES ON THE SONY A7 – A BEGINNERS GUIDE

[Max the Dog]

The MD lenses will work.  I've used them on a NEX7 and and A7r with 'suitable results'.  Some of the MD lenses are great values in the Imatest/cost ratio.  The 50 1.7 as an example.  I had the 50 1.2 - it was fuzzy and never got really great.  The 1.4 was ok. I had the MC 28mm 2.5 and kept it just for the way it treated flare in many situations. 

 

In most situations they stayed on the shelf and never got taken out.  New lenses are much better these days.

 

If you're just entering photography again I'd rec the APS-c  A6000 for bang for the buck.  If you need full frame and you're going to get serious I would consider Nikon or Canon until Sony fixes the 11+7 bit compression problem.   It might cost a little more vs the A7 but it will be worth it in the long run. 

[rob_sk]

The A6000 is great bang for the buck and the lens that are available are great. The APS-C lenses have dropped in price now and are very affordable. I have used several of the older Minolta lenes with great success on both the A6000 and my A mount sony's

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Austerror]

I didn't see anyone mention the need for adapters.

 

The MD/MC lenses will need an adapter to fit on the A7/E mount cameras.  I have used a variety of MC/MD lenses on my Nex-7.  They work very well.  I also got one of those speed booster adapters so that it is 'full frame' equivalent, sort of. They are also neat.

 

There is a section of this forum with results from using these old lenses. Results vary of course, but some are outstanding.  I bought my old lenses for cheap and I have been very happy with their performance.  Some are super sharp, some are not so much.  It depends, some of these lenses are 30+ years old!

 

Telephoto and manual focus is tricky though.  The A7 Mk 2 has an advantage here over the A6000.

 

I don't use MD lenses all the time.  Mostly I use AF as I often take photos of moving subjects.   For the price however, they are great for learning photography. If you are good at MF (which I am not), then you could use them 100% of the time...

 

EDIT: Yes the MC/MD lenses are full frame.  The Nex-7 is APS-C, which is why I got the speed booster adapter.

[bobmax48]

My lens are Minolta 100 mm Macro, 35 mm, 21mm, and Vivatar 200. Nikon lens are Sigma 180 mm Macro, 18-70mm, and 10-20mm. Right now I will mostly be shooting stills but would expect video to be a decent amount of the camera's usage. The A7s would be fine if I also had another camera for stils, i don't want just a 12 meg still image.