Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,483   Posts: 1,571,214   Online: 1102
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    My son picked up a mint 135mm f:2.8 MC Rokkor (with mint original case) about a year ago that has become his favorite lens. He often uses it with extension tubes, and I've seen the results from it on the old Velvia 50 at large projection sizes alongside the same subjects shot on the Zuiko 90 Macro and the 100mm f:4 Macro Elmar. It does a very fine job in this company, and was a huge bargain at the $50 he paid for it.

    He also picked up an SRT 101 with MLU in excellent condition today, only needs light seals and mirror pad, meter is working fine, no evident wear on the film pressure plate, for $20. I'd have bought it if he'd turned it down, and I don't shoot Minoltas myself.

    Lee

  2. #12
    naaldvoerder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    590
    Images
    26
    You might want to consider the MD 85/2.0. A lovely lens and stil nice and small.

    I use it on my X700

  3. #13
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    All of the suggestions are good, but he is talking about an AF Auto Focus Camera, the MD lenses will not fit without an adapter, and the adapter negets the benefits of a good lens, I have a couple of them and then degrade the image quality a great amount..

    The MD lenses will not fit on his camera.

    Dave

  4. #14
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Minolta made some of the finest lenses ever made... it would be a waste of time and money to buy anything else.

    Any 'G' lens would be superb, but more expensive. An 85 to 100 is a fine choice.

    .
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  5. #15
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell
    Minolta made some of the finest lenses ever made... it would be a waste of time and money to buy anything else.

    Any 'G' lens would be superb, but more expensive. An 85 to 100 is a fine choice.

    .
    Well, I can't say buying anything else is a waste of time and money, I have some extrememly good lenses for my Minoltas that were not made buy them and have severed and continue to serve me very well, but for ease of use and to be non-confusing, I would get the Minolta glass, good stuff.

    Dave

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    471
    Images
    24
    I love my 135mm and will never rid myself of it. It is also the old double crossed X version that has contributed to Minolta's myriad problems. I shoot with a 600si and 7. My top favorite lenses are the 50mm f/1.7; the 135mm f/2.8; the 28-135mm f/4-4.5 (a beast of a heavy lens, but wonderful) and for traveling my 35-70mm f/4 and 70-210mm f/4. Neither of the last two are extremely fast, but they are stellar performers. My $.02. Luke
    Luke

    To create one's own world in any of the arts takes courage.

    Georgia O'Keefe

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    471
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by melmoth
    Hallo all,

    I am strongly thinking along the lines of a 135mm telephoto and something for portraits, maybe 100/105mm? I am not really into sports so a long telephoto is not an immediate concern. My budget is not limitless but it is not the main worry.
    M.

    I have heard, and have long wanted to try the Minolta 85mm f/1.4 (any version). It is purported to have an excellent bokeh and is noted to be a bright and crisp portait lens. I would have to move out if I spent the $600 for this lens (used). Of course, I continue to save with the hope the penny jar will fill eventually. Luke
    Luke

    To create one's own world in any of the arts takes courage.

    Georgia O'Keefe

  8. #18
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,026
    If you're going to buy a lens for portraits and general shooting I would suggest you consider a 100mm lens to me this will give the most " bang for your buck " these are usually quite compact in size and most are capable of focusing close enough to use indoors for head and shoulder shots in fairly small rooms, yet are still very useable as a general telephoto outdoors giving twice the image size of the standard 50mm lens

  9. #19
    joeyk49's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    Images
    26
    If your not as cheap as I am, I would warn you away from the cheaper model Sigmas. I've had a couple that I picked up at VERY reasonable prices, but turned out to be quite dull, even dogs. At first I thought it was the AF function, but I soon learned it was the glass. Even when I focused manually, the image just wasn't very sharp.

    I shoot a 450si with a Sigma 28-105 IF that I picked up for a song...Well the damn thing vignettes at 28mm and is not very sharp at all. I've been quite disappointed and shopping for a replacement...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin