Minolta SRT 200
I just got a Minolta SRT-200 from a thrift store here in town. It is in excellent shape; just two very small dings on the body.
It came with a Minolta 50 f/2 and a Beck 135 f/2.8. I have never heard of Beck, but the lens seems to be made very well so hopefully it will be a good performer.
The camera works well; all shutter speeds work and the meter still works.
I am looking for a good wide angle lens to use with this camera. I have never used Minolta cameras before, so I am unsure of which lenses were made, how much they cost nowadays, etc. How much should I expect to pay for a good 24mm or 28mm lens?
You could look up KEH, at least you'll get a ball park figure.
Thanks, Jeff. I got a Viv 28 2.8 for $9. Seems to be pretty fair; I have a Viv 28 2.8 for Nikon too. It's not a bad lens at all.
If you have never had experience with Minoltas, check out the "Rokkor Files".
Here is the URL http://rokkorfiles.com/
Thy heart -- thy heart! -- I wake and sigh,
And sleep to dream till day
Of the truth that gold can never buy
Of the bawbles that it may.
I checked out this site guitstik, and it seems the guy that runs that site really loves Minolta. Reading it you'd think they didn't make a bad camera or lens during the 70's or 80's.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I used Minolta srts for decades. The bodies were good and rugged. Not as rugged as the Nikon F, but I always got good service out of them. The Rokkor lenses are top notch. The only problem was that the management got set in their ways because profits were good and let the others get ahead of them. Hence Canon and Nikon pushed them out of the market.
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
It's an OK site and at least consolidates some Minolta info. The reviews can be brief and coverage isn't all that great on common focal lengths.
Originally Posted by guitstik
Minolta/Rokkor lenses are cheap enough that I'd skip offbrand lenses altogether.The MD 28/2.8 is usually a bargain and an OK lens for the money.
I'm not looking to build a complete Minolta kit; this camera I got cheap and I just want to have it in instances where using my Nikon F100 would be too much, either due to weight, environmental factors, etc. In those instances, it makes sense to me to keep my lenses as cheap as possible.
It's a stunning camera in excellent condition, but I got it mostly to use when I need a rugged manual focus camera that doesn't care if I have batteries in it, and isn't as computerized as an F100 so there's less to break if it gets humid.
A pretty SRT 101+58/1.4 brought me back to photography in the mid 90s--proof of an obvious soft spot for the brand's early stuff. Just be aware that its meter was built to run on the now-banned 1.35v PX 625 mercury cells. Explore the archives for current workarounds. Check the condition of the foam on the mirror bumper and especially at the hinge on the back--prime source of light leaks. Otherwise, shoot it till it breaks.
Originally Posted by brofkand
I've already replaced the light seals (they were totally gone), and got a Wein battery. Meter works perfectly. Shutter speeds are accurate. A testament to how well the camera was taken care of: it was found in a consignment shop inside a classic 70's camera bag. The filters in the bag were still in their case wrapped in their original plastic. The manual, bill of sale of all repairs, even the original UPS shipping label was in the bag.
I am looking to replace the leather soon as well. Still debating if I want a cheap pleather or if I want to go with a nice sheet of leather.
I want this camera to look like the day it came out of Minolta's factory. The only thing wrong with it are two very small dents in the top plate. No idea how to get rid of those.