I've got my new lens today. After spending months of reading and research, I settled with this. Its a Minolta MD ROKKOR-X 50mm 1:1.4 MF only. Before you guys ask any questions about compatibility, I gotta say that this lens ROCKS!!! I got it off eBay for GBP40 shipped from the States. Since its f number is so small...the amount of light it took in is phenomenal. Its a lot heavier than my bog standard 18-55mm Nikon ED lens. Its full metal-built lens feels very solid and tough. I haven't exactly got it to fit on my D60 yet but i took it for a test in 'another' way. I'm still waiting for my adapter though to perfectly fit on my D60.
Since Minolta had experience in making lens that rival Nikon or Canon, I think its a no-brainer to buy this one especially with an 1:1.4 standard. A Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4 would set you back for about GBP220 for the AF version and about GBP330 for the AF-S version. Of course, in photography, what you for is what you get. But the Minolta defies that theory, partly because it quite old and it doesn't have any AF or AF-S function but I gotta hand it to ‘em, these are nice colours. But some pics are blurry due to the stupid freakishly strong wind which UK is always 'feymes' for...sigh...I used an extremly high shutter speed (1/800) to catch it. Enough said, look at the 'another way' pictures. I'll post a real picture test after i got my adapter.
The method used to take most of these pics is the reverse-mount method. How do you reverse-mount? Ideally, you need to have two lens of any type. Mount one in the way how you normally mount a lens and the other attached to it in reverse. Try to look it up on google. These pics are still noob-ish so I need more work…hehe…
So what do you think?All these are taken with this lens too...
2 comments:
I started with Minolta in the early 1970's and switch to Nikon after I quickly outgrew Minolta. I really hate to break it to you, but Minolta lenses DO NOT rival Canon, and especially Nikon. Compred to equivalent Nikkors, Rokkor-X lenses are soft, especially in the corners, and have issues with ghost and flare. Nikon's coating technology was light years ahead of Minolta, with the exception of a few of the wide angle Rokkor-X's. And some of their thinking was back-assward as well. I had a 300mm f/4 IF Rokkor -X, that although it was passable optically, it had NO TRIPOD SOCKET!!! Why? Because Minolta though that the IF made the lens so light and compact, that there was no longer a need for a tripod socket. To this day, that kind of thinking baffles me. Nikon did make some decent bodies, but they were never a contender for pros or serious amateurs because their lenses were not up to Nikon or Canon standards.
Oops, in my previous thread, I stated that "Nikon did make dome decent bodies.....". That should have been MINOLTA did make some decent bodies. Their lenses, however, kept them out of any serious running.
Post a Comment