Minolta SRT 101 shot from 1984

Just a girl at the beach. The lens was the justly praised 135mm Rokkor 3.5 MD. From the nice grain, I'd say this was Tri X film.

 

Great shot, Royall. Tri-X (whether vintage, middle aged like 80's, or latest version) has a classic look that I like. Much less grain with current version, but still nice. Back in the 80's my dad and I shared a bulk loader, usually with Tri-X and sometimes Plus-X. Always processed in D-76 1:1. I have a Rokkor MD 135mm f 3.5 and I agree it is a good performer. Minolta also sold one in Celtic trim (slightly less sophisticated coating and exterior) that sold with kits which included the SRT 200 with f 2 lens and small flash plus bag.

Great shot, Royall. Tri-X (whether vintage, middle aged like 80's, or latest version) has a classic look that I like. Much less grain with current version, but still nice. Back in the 80's my dad and I shared a bulk loader, usually with Tri-X and sometimes Plus-X. Always processed in D-76 1:1. I have a Rokkor MD 135mm f 3.5 and I agree it is a good performer. Minolta also sold one in Celtic trim (slightly less sophisticated coating and exterior) that sold with kits which included the SRT 200 with f 2 lens and small flash plus bag.

 

 

Mike, my favorite of the Minolta lenses is the 85mm f2.0 MD. It renders color with uncanny beauty, quite aside from being sharp. Just having that lens on a camera gives me a thrill.

I've got the Celtic and it performs, much to my original surprise, very well. Good photo BTW.

That is a nice photograph. It has a sort of carefree feel about it which is just so lacking in today's world. I've spent a few hours today photographing roses, an annual event that utilizes a variety of lenses, but one I use frequently is the original Rokkor-QD MC135/3.5, with extension rings. Beautifully constructed with 4 elements in 4 groups, it's reputed to be a little less sharp than the final manifestation of the 135mm f/3.5 Rokkors, the MD and Celtic with their 5/5 configuration, but I suspect the difference is largely academic. The old MC is sharp enough for my requirements, and excels at producing images with very accurate colour and pleasant OOF backgrounds, two features that are important in botanical photography. Here's a sample from this afternoons session with a Sony ILCE-7R. A pleasing performance from a 50-year-old lens!

 

I bought my first SLR (from stock at family camera shop) in March 1978: Minolta SRT 201 with 50mm f 1.7 MC. I borrowed Celtic and Minolta lenses from stock from time to time to try them out. Usually had Tri-X in the camera.

A few samples (some may have been posted in past years) Tri-X for all images.

Celtic 135mm f 2.8 MD

not a Minolta, but a Tamron 85-210 f 4.5 (first lens I bought to use with my 201)

with 28mm f 2.8 Celtic

I borrowed the 28 so much that my parents gave me one for Christmas.

On several occasions, I used equipment-closet Minoltas on digs. Despite the "tragedy of the commons" aspect of such items, they all worked fine. I confess they weren't very exciting, but that wasn't the point.

 

Minnolta's Maxxum, on the other hand, was way ahead of the other marques when it was introduced. I have several of those.

I was a Minolta user for many years, because my wife's brother gave me an XD11. Later I went autofocus with a 500si as my 30 year service award. It did everything it said on the box, slowly and noisily, not Minolta's best. I replaced it with a used 7xi, what a revelation, so much faster and more responsive. It was criticised for its button / LCD based control system, but I found it quite intuitive. You had to ignore some of the hi tech gadgets like eyestart ( tape over the contacts) and auto standby zoom - whatever that did, with the power focus xi lenses.

 

My all time favourite is the XE1, the subject of my post some years ago:

 

LINK --- --- --- Minolta XE1 and Steam Toys

 

Although it's an aperture priority automatic/manual camera, hence the post being in Modern Film Cameras, the whole style, build quality, smoothness and weight are pure classic, with just enough automation to make photography a pleasure, without any kind of complexity or gimmicks getting in the way.