Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,553   Posts: 1,544,964   Online: 758
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    268
    I would agree that the 58mm f1.4 lens is better for portraiture than the later 50mm f1.4 lenses, but IMHO, the 50mm lenses are superior for everything else. However, I could see the argument that the 58mm lens makes a better compliment to the 45mm f2 than does the 50mm. But, if you actually plan on using the lens at f1.4, the 50mm lens is sharper and contrastier than the 58mm at f1.4 - however, those advantages might be disadvantages for portraiture.

    I actually got the best of both worlds. I found a 58mm f1.4 lens that has a busted diaphragm, so it is only useable wide open - or as a loupe. That lens cost me $2.

  2. #22
    mweintraub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    518
    Thanks everyone!

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    121
    My two favorite Minolta lenses are the MC Rokkor-X 50/1.4 PG and the 58/1.4. I find the 50/1.4 to be amazingly sharp while the 58/1.4 lends its own unique look to pictures and it's quite sharp as well. I sold two 50/1.7 lenses in favor of keeping the 50/1.4; it performs better overall IMHO. As far as bodies, I personally keep an SR-T 102, XE-7, and XD11, with the XD11 getting the most use.

    Andy

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    My SRT 101 came with the MC Rokkor-PF 1:1.4 f=58mm. Best performer in the crowd. Many years ago

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    625
    I'm going to go against the grain here and tell you to closely test the pancake lens before you use it for anything important. I had one, and it performed poorly at the edges of the image, even lagging behind at f5.6. It's far behind the best Minolta lenses.

    The MC Rokkor-PG 50/1.4 is probably sharp, but the bokeh is not very good. On the other hand, the 50/1.7s that I have tested are sharp and have excellent bokeh. I have an MD Rokkor-X that gives bokeh that's just as good as the vaunted 85/1.7, which I also have (and like).

  6. #26
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,854
    Images
    5
    I have an MD 50/1.7, which is very sharp when given the opportunity to prove itself. If I were to get another normal lens, I think that I might skip over the 50/1.4, which is only half a stop faster, and go for the MD 50/1.2. Has anyone used it? How bad are the aberrations wide open, and how far does one have to stop down to get rid of them?
    Charles Hohenstein

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    121
    For some interesting reading and informative tests of lenses, especially the Rokkor 50s, check out the rokkorfiles.com.

  8. #28
    mweintraub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    518
    rokkorfiles.com Does not cover all the lenses I have. Went there first.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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