Minolta SR-mount Lens Info (Rokkor, MD, MC, Celtic, ...)

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
I've amassed a collection of SR-mount glass, mostly Rokkor lenses but a few Minolta Celtic, Kiron, etc.
I use many of them on my E-M1 with a cheap Fotga MD->Mu-43 adapter (Amazon link) and/or the ZY Lens Turbo II focal reducer.

This thread is for discussion and comparison of all SR (aka MD) mount lenses and adapters.
My initial goal is to post some comparison shots of similar lenses before I sell some of them off. Feel free to ask questions or discuss other SR issues.


Here are some links to other sites with lots of good information:
The Rokkor Files - Minolta Lens History
The Rokkor Files - Minolta Lens Reviews
Minolta SLR Lenses
Objektive (Swiss-German; use Google Translate)
MINOLTA Manual Lens List (a very extensive table summarizing lens history)
Minolta SR mount Archives - phillipreeve.net

--
Here's a page about compatibility with LT/LTII focal reducers, however I have found it to be very incomplete and a bit confusing so I don't take it very seriously. For example, it says the 58/1.2 is not compatible with the LTII MD-NEX but does not mention that the PG version (see below) works fine on the LTII at least for mu-43.
ISTM that only the lenses with protruding rear elements, and possibly the long-pin and/or double-pin meter couplings can be incompatible. For example, I had an early 28/3.5 with 2 pins, one very close to the center; it seemed like it might have hit the LTII glass were I to have mounted it.
List of Incompatible & Confirmed compatible Lenses | Mitakon Lens Turbo | Flickr
I deleted my Yahoo account long ago due to security concerns so I haven't posted in that thread.
 
Last edited:

rloewy

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
May 5, 2014
Messages
5,491
Real Name
Ron
I have several of these as well, Celtic 28mm f=2.8, 45mm f=2, 50mm f=1.7, 58mm f=1.4, 135mm f=2.8 and 200mm f=3.5 as well as some 3rd party lens. Some real good value for money options in these.
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
Let's start with the ubiquitous 135mm lenses... I have many f/3.5's and one Rokkor f/2.8, as well as a couple other brands.
Note there is also a 135/2.0 which is very rare and now potentially worth $$$$.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Note all the Minoltas above have hoods (integrated or reversing). From left to right above,
Titar
135/3.5, probably T2 37x0.75mm mount + SR adapter - note: I am giving this one away for free (plus shipping) (without adapter)
MD 135/3.5
MC Tele Rokkor QD 135/3.5 + reversible hood
MD Tele Rokkor-X 135/3.5
MD Celtic 135/3.5
MD Tele Rokkor-X 135/2.8 (1977 version; later versions were lighter and possibly smaller)

--
2.8 lenses only:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The Minoltas and Vivitar above have integrated hoods. From left to right above,
MD Tele Rokkor-X
135/2.8 (same as in previous pictures) (1977 version; later versions were lighter and possibly smaller)
Vivitar 135/2.8 Auto Telephoto, m42 (Pentax) mount (rubber focus ring is badly cracked hence the rubber bands). I included this mainly for a size comparison, although the flange distance is also different.
Tamron Converto 135/2.8, probably T2 37x0.75mm mount, + SR adapter; see Showcase - Tamron 135mm f/2.8 CONVERTO for some samples and other info. This one feels much heavier than the others, and is front-heavy.

Edit: Here's some new pics of 135/2.8 Rokkor and Celtic lenses:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

Apollo T.

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Messages
495
Location
Northern, New Jersey
I use my Minolta and rd party glass with adapter from Fotodiox. This adapter works well and was <$25. I also have an adapter from Fotosy <$20 that I haven’t used yet. This feels a bit less tightly mounted.
Aside from this I really don’t have much to contribute.
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
Now for the 200mm's... I currently have some f/3.5, 4, and 4.5 lenses, and I previously had a f/5. I believe a Minolta 2.8 was also made, and probably the Vivitar Series 1 f/3, but I haven't seen them in person.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

From left to right above:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5, integrated hood.
MC Tele Rokkor-PE 200/4.5, integrated hood.
MC Celtic 200/4. no hood.
I also have the MD f/4 which is the same size but has an integrated hood.


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Tele Rokkor-QE 200mm f/5
A very long lens, but light-weight.
Note the Pre-Set aperture rings.​
 
Last edited:

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
A couple comments for anyone who might use an SR-mount film camera:

1. the oldest Minolta SR lenses (without MC or MD in the name) don't may not have any meter coupling, and thus usually have the 'pre-set' aperture rings. This is also true of the Titar and Tamron Converto lenses above.

Lenses that do have coupling (starting with the MC series) support cameras with stop-down metering (and permit convenient focusing wide-open before stop-down).

2. MD Lenses (with green lettering in the highest f/numbers indicating they) work in Program mode on later cameras (such as the X-700). There is an extra aperture tab on these lenses (I'm not sure why the first tab wasn't enough).


Note none of this matters when adapting the lenses; you'll have to stop-down manually if you want to focus wide-open.
In some ways the pre-set rings could make that easier although I find them a bit fiddly/confusing.
 
Last edited:

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
58mm:
The Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 are somewhat legendary for creamy bokeh and are considered (slightly) sharper than the 1.4's; they now go for $350-600USD in working condition. They have 8 aperture blades.
There were 3 versions over time, changes were cosmetic except probable newer coatings.
There is a lot of info on them at Google Translate (Google Translate of a Swiss German site).

The f/1.4 versions (at least 2 versions over time) are common as at least one version was a 'kit' lens for awhile; nonetheless is is still very good especially for $50-60USD. They have 6 aperture blades.
I don't see a large difference vs. the 1.2... there is a difference but it's not a big one imho.

Note all of the 58's seem to be extremely prone to oil in the aperture blades. See Aperture not closing - Minolta 58mm f1.4 for info on DIY repairs, or expect to spend near $100 in the US for shipping, insurance, and the CLA.

Here's some pics of the MC Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1.2:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

More links:
Showcase - Minolta 58mm f/1.2 Rokkor MC
The Rokkor Files - Ultimate Normal Lens Challenge
Minolta MC Rokkor 58mm 1:1.2 Review - phillipreeve.net

Showcase - Minolta 58mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PF
 
Last edited:

dwig

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
717
Location
Key West FL
A couple comments for anyone who might use an SR-mount film camera:

1. the oldest Minolta SR lenses (without MC or MD in the name) don't have any meter coupling, and thus usually have the 'pre-set' aperture rings. This is also true of the Titar and Tamron Converto lenses above.
Actually, the original Minolta-made SR mount lenses often have auto-diaphram. A few were pre-set, but most were auto diaphram. The early versions, made for the Minolta SR-1 have a longer pin than later samples. These long-pin lenses will not fit any bodies other than the SR-1.
Lenses that do have coupling (starting with the MC series) support cameras with stop-down metering (and permit convenient focusing wide-open before stop-down).
While MC lenses were always auto-diaphram (e.g. "convenient focusing wide-open befoe stop-down:), the auto-diaphram feature was common in the earlier non-meter coupling models. The MC lenses provided full aperture metering; stop-down metering wasn't required. With TTL metered Minoltas, stop-down metering was only required with manual lenses, pre-set lenses, the original "SR-1" lenses, and when using uncoupled extension tubes or bellows.
2. Lenses with green lettering in the highest f/numbers indicates they will work in Program mode on later cameras (such as the X-700). There is an extra aperture tab on these lenses (I'm not sure why the first tab wasn't enough).
These are the MD lenses.
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
Here's 2 versions of the 58mm f/1.4:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Auto Rokkor-PF at left; the others are both the MC version.

Lots of samples from these at Showcase - Minolta 58mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PF
 

blumoon722

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
336
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Real Name
John
Minolta MD Rokkor-X 17mm 1:4
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Vorchek

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
66
Location
Arizona
I have a battery of SR lenses, ranging from 8 to 400, and with adapters—including a Speedbooster—they still form the majority of my kit. Most of them perform beautifully. Two are notably problematic: a Sigma 18/2.8 and a Rokkor 35/1.8. Wide open, both give me what I call “mushy” results. Not soft, not “glowy,” but a kind of muddy mistiness. The Sigma is the worst offender, really unusable at 2.8. Tinkering in software doesn't seem to resolve the issue. I've wondered what is going on to produce such a result. As I recall, the Sigma had that flaw on the Minolta as well. Too bad, because it is an interesting lens.
 

Vorchek

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
66
Location
Arizona
Re: Sigma 18/2.8
As I wrote earlier, a rather interesting lens, of curious design; rectilinear, but with the look of a fisheye about it.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Unfortunately I get poor results from it wide open. Take a look at the following pictures, shot back to back, the first at f2.8, the second at f8. Both were adapted to M43 with the Speedbooster.
Dead Horse Ranch State Park, AZ
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I continue to wonder what accounts for such a difference. Anyway, stopped down the lens is perfectly good.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
507
Location
El Paso, TX
Re: Sigma 18/2.8
As I wrote earlier, a rather interesting lens, of curious design; rectilinear, but with the look of a fisheye about it.
View attachment 619074
Unfortunately I get poor results from it wide open. Take a look at the following pictures, shot back to back, the first at f2.8, the second at f8. Both were adapted to M43 with the Speedbooster.
Dead Horse Ranch State Park, AZ
View attachment 619076
View attachment 619077
I continue to wonder what accounts for such a difference. Anyway, stopped down the lens is perfectly good.
How about using a simple adapter and forgetting about the SpeedBooster? Decent results then?
 

Vorchek

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
66
Location
Arizona
It is not a Speedbooster issue, nor one of adapters in general. Indeed, I recall the problem, to some degree, on the Minolta.
 

shwaz

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
48
Location
Jersey
This is cool. I inherited an old Minolta camera and recently realized it has some pretty decent primes, I just ordered an adapter for my em5ii.



Rookie question here @barry13 , I know with m43 native lenses the effective mm is doubled such that a 20mm lens looks like 40mm. Is the same true using old lenses like this with an adapter?

edit: I think I googled my answer, would you be so kind as to confirm?
adapters still effectively double the length;
speed boosters such as this metabones will not.
 
Last edited:

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
This is cool. I inherited an old Minolta camera and recently realized it has some pretty decent primes, I just ordered an adapter for my em5ii.



Rookie question here @barry13 , I know with m43 native lenses the effective mm is doubled such that a 20mm lens looks like 40mm. Is the same true using old lenses like this with an adapter?

edit: I think I googled my answer, would you be so kind as to confirm?
adapters still effectively double the length;
speed boosters such as this metabones will not.
Hi, if you compare the field of view for a native 20mm lens to an adapted one, they are the same.
The focal length (optics) never changes.

Crop-factor comparisons are only useful if you want to know what a picture from another format would look like with the same lens or focal length, e.g.
20mm on Full Frame is Ultra-Wide Angle, but on mu-43 it's about normal.
50mm on Full Frame is about normal, and on mu-43 it's a short telephoto.

But ANY 20mm lens is a 20mm lens on ANY system, and will work like any other 20mm lens.
 
Last edited:

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
And now for a zoom lens, the venerable Minolta MD 35-70mm f/3.5 -- there were 3 versions of this lens; the first is reportedly the same as the Leica version.

Pictured here is the final version, which has a 0.25x Macro capability. A review is online at Minolta MD Zoom 35-70mm 1: 3.5 - Review - phillipreeve.net:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,407
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
100mm: Several models and various revisions were made, including: 100mm f/2.0, f/2.5, and f/3.5, as well as f/3.5 and f/4.0 Macros.

Here's the Rokkor-QE 100mm f/3.5:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Lots of image samples for this one at Showcase - Minolta Rokkor-QE 100mm 3.5 lens
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom