Did some lens tests today Minolta and Konica

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by homebrewdude, Feb 24, 2013.

  1. homebrewdude

    homebrewdude Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Sep 26, 2012
    The lineup
    Panasonic 25mm/1.4
    Olympus 45mm/1.8
    Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm1.4
    Minolta MD 50mm1.4
    Konica 55mm 3.5 macro
    Konica 57mm1.2
    Minolta MD 85mm/2.0
    Minolta Rokkor-X 50-135mm
    Minolta MD 35mm/2.8
     
  2. homebrewdude

    homebrewdude Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Sep 26, 2012
    Could not see much between the 25mm and 45mm lenses.
    These were the best for sharpness and contrast in the center.

    50mm/1.4 Rokkor-X and MD versions were the same wide open.
    Stop down to 2.8 and the MD was better.

    58/1.4 and 57mm/1.2 were the worst lenses. About as bad as the 50-135mm zoom. This was visible 1:1 on the screen

    55mm Macro was poor wide open, stopped down nice.

    35mm/2.8 and 85mm/2.0 were a bit soft wide open. Stopped down they were close to the best lenses.
     
  3. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    There are variations between lenses.. depending on condition, build date, etc.

    Also using a crop sensor has an effect as opposed to APC or FF.
     
  4. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    Nice set of lenses! The Minolta 50-135/3.5 is not too good indeed wide-open, but stop it down to f/5.6 or rather f/8 and it's very good. I use it on my NEX-6 and it's excellent all the way into the corners at f/8. I have two samples and they're very much alike. In short: don't write it off yet! Oh yes, and focus at f/5.6 for best results, I never focus nor take pics at f/3.5.
     
  5. homebrewdude

    homebrewdude Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Sep 26, 2012
    The point of doing the test is to show that the current Panasonic and Olympus lenses have better resolution and contrast then the older lenses.
    There is no real reason to use an adapted lens, unless it does not exist in the format yet.


    But I do think I want a lens for video, since manual focus works better, and older lenses are easier to manual focus.
    Problem is old zoom lenses are not fast for light...
     
  6. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    In my experience there can be several reasons to use legacy lenses. You mention one, MF for video.

    For me the reasons to use legacy lenses besides native ones are:
    1. Manual focus is much easier when doing macro. When shooting mushrooms I preferred the Minolta MD Macro 100/4 over the PL45 for that reason. Much easier to pick a focus point and assess sharpness distribution.
    2. Image quality! My Minolta MD Rokkor 50/1.4 beats everything native I have had in sharpness across the frame. The longer Minolta lenses I have are generally superb. Focal lengths below 50mm are more problematic.
    3. Colour rendition. I often prefer the lush colours of Minolta lenses over those of the native lenses.
    4. Lower contrast. For instance, sometimes the contrast of the Panny 20/1.7 is too much, I still regret having sold the Minolta 20mm.
    A lot of people enjoy the feel and handling of MF lenses, but honestly I couldn't care less. If native lenses offered the same traits, I'd switch in a heartbeat because not having to operate an aperture and focussing ring makes life a whole lot easier :smile:.
     
  7. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Um, you realize none of the lens you tested are in the same focal length as the natives, right? The Minolta 45mm compares very well to both the Oly and Pana. I would be interested to see a shootout between the 58mm 1.4 from Minolta and the 60mm Oly. Also the 24mm 2.8 vs the 25mm 1.4.

    Just because you don't see the use in MF lenses doesn't mean there is no point, and I would compare strong lenses in those focal lengths to the ones from m43, instead of just some random ones at different lengths.
     
  8. manzoid

    manzoid Mu-43 Regular

    137
    Jun 9, 2011
    I think the pro's and con's of legacy lenses has been discussed at length, so I know I am not adding anything new, but i think cost is a major reason for amateurs such as myself to use old lenses.

    A fast 50 can be had for under $70 pretty easily, and a good 55mm macro plus 1:1 tube for less than $100. Round it up to $200 and compare that to a $300-400 45mm from oly and a $500 60mm macro. So $200 compared to at least $800. I suspect the native lenses would be smaller, lighter, better optically and easier to use than most legacy options, at least in the price I mentioned, but 4x Better? I'm not so sure.

    Besides its a cheap way to experiment with lenses and make sure the costs of the new ones are justified. Also if down the road you buy an apsc or fullframe mirrorless, the legacy lenses are still usable.
     
  9. homebrewdude

    homebrewdude Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Sep 26, 2012
    58mm 1.4 from Minolta and the 60mm Oly
    60mm Olympus runs circles around the 58mm/1.4

    50mm/1.4 is sharper then any native lens?
    I am not seeing this wide open.
    Maybe stopped down.

    I am comparing the Olympus 45mm vs Minolta 50mm
    Let me try stopping them down.

    I need to look at Video also.

    I was just shooting some video of my son with my new 25mm/1.4.
    It does not have the issue with hunting that my 20mm/1.7 has..
     
  10. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    Fighting words in this subforum :biggrin:

    For me its about the costs, getting another dial, and becoming more involved in the creative process :thumbup:
     
  11. rklepper

    rklepper Mu-43 Top Veteran

    733
    Dec 19, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Robert
    Were you going to share some of the lens tests here? Not sure a verbal description of any test tells us anything. Thanks.
     
  12. manzoid

    manzoid Mu-43 Regular

    137
    Jun 9, 2011
    You make some additional good points.

    I like the way MF forces me to more carefully think about which exact point I want in focus, and the manual aperture shows me my depth of field and how the out of focus areas will come out in real time.
     
  13. homebrewdude

    homebrewdude Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Sep 26, 2012
    The OMD does not seem easy to manual focus with older lenses.
    With the native lenses the screen zooms in and focus is easier.

    Can this be turned on with older lenses?
     
  14. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    I use Key Line filter trick to manually focus on the Olympus bodies. Works really good especially if you shoot RAW.
     
  15. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    I'm looking to do more shooting with MF lenses- especially the 35mm Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon and 50mm Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar. These two lenses have a certain character, and bokeh that is beautiful. I paid a premium and CLA'd them for performance, and will work around the challenges of MF for the gain in IQ.
     
  16. manzoid

    manzoid Mu-43 Regular

    137
    Jun 9, 2011
    Don't know the OM-D specifically, but on my E-PL2 I push a button with a magnifying glass that zooms. The magnification factor can be selected by pressing info then up or down. Also the portion of the frame being magnified by the box can be moved around using the direction buttons as well.
     
  17. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Samples? If you are comparing edge sharpness, I would agree without even seeing pictures. The 58 is known for a dreamy look around the edges, but center sharpness should be equal wide open.

    Spatulaboy did a test on 3 different 45mm (Oly, Pan, Minolta), and 95% couldn't tell the difference.