[EXPIRED] FT: Pentax 50/2 and Minolta 50/1.7 Rokkor-X

Discussion in 'Expired Listings' started by dixeyk, Aug 19, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Rating - 100%
    74   0   0

    Aug 9, 2010
    Clearly no one was interested in buying any of the lenses I had for sale and I can't really complain as I was selling them (and if they were so great I would have kept them right?). What I am trying to do is get rid of some stuff I just won't use and get stuff that I will use.

    So how about this, I have...

    A nice clean Canon 50/1.4 that hasn't gotten a lot of use and isn't likely to make it on to my EPL1 because I already have more 50s than I can shake a stick at. It is a lovely lens and as far as I can tell fairly well thought of in the m43 community. TRADED!

    I have a Canon 135/2.8 that was pretty nice on my AE1 but just sits around right now. Like the 50/1.4 I am not inclined to add yet another type of lens to what I already have. I'm sticking with OM, M42 and Konica. TRADED!

    I have a little Pentax 50/2 M and while I realize it isn't a Super Takumar it is a pretty cool little lens.

    Minolta Rokkor-X 50/1.7 in pretty nice shape. The rubber strip on the focus on the ring is a bit loose but it can be corrected. Its a nice lens that is sharp when stopped down and quite a nice bokeh. There is dust on the rear element but it doesn't appear in photos.

    Konica Hexanon 52/1.8 that I got off of a Konica T2 in a lot. I haven't had time to test it out on my m43. The lens is clean and in good shape. TRADED!

    So the remaining lenses are are all the equivalent of runts of the litter. They are all quite good but not spectacular (although the Pentax 50/2 often punches above its weight class). I'd be willing to do a 2 for one trade for something. If not, I am perfectly happy to keep the Pentax and throw the Minolta back on the film body.




    Anyone?
     

    Attached Files:

  2. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Rating - 100%
    74   0   0

    Aug 9, 2010
    Anyone?

    Okay, the 135/2.8 isn't a bad lens. It may not be as good as the Hexanon or Super Takumar 135s but it is 2.8 as opposed to 3.5 and FWIW it is a decent lens that I am willing to make a deal on (meaning open to all sorts of trade possibilities). The Pentax 50/2 is also an ignored little 50 that quite honestly I will have no problem hanging on to if no one goes for it.

    Anyone have a Russian lens they want to trade? Anyone want to do a 2 for 1 trade? I can throw in a Minolta Rokkor 50/1.8 and a Hexanon 52/1.7 (both working and clean) if someone wants to propose a 1 lens for 4 trade (I realize the Rokkor and Hex aren't high value lenses but they are both pretty sharp).
     
  3. gcogger

    gcogger Mu-43 Veteran

    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0

    338
    May 25, 2010
    UK
    Real Name:
    Graeme
    You're under-selling the lens :)

    I own the Canon FD 135/2.8 and the Super Tak 135/3.5, and did some quick comparison tests recently. They're very close, both wide open or stopped down, but I'd say the Canon is slightly better all round. It's a little sharper in the centre, even at f/2.8, than the Super Tak is at f/3.5 and a little sharper still at the edges of the u4/3 frame.

    The Canon is a little heavier, but shorter than the Super Tak, and the Canon FD adapter is another 1/4 inch shorter than the M42 adapter. The Canon also has a (slightly useful!) built-in hood. All that makes it a slightly better choice, for me, in a compact camera bag.
     
  4. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Rating - 100%
    74   0   0

    Aug 9, 2010
    I appreciate the comment...I just want to get rid of it so I am willing to let it go and I'd really rather it got to someone on the board. I always thought it was nice on my AE1P (didn't so much like the camera though).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.