45mm f2 Rokkor MD

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by yunus_emre_demirel, Feb 7, 2003.

  1. I am new to photography and i found a minolta x-700 with 45mm f/2 MD
    rokkor lens in mint condition and good price. I could reach a lot of
    information about minolta X-700 body but i couldn't find any
    information about its lens. The only information that i know Rokkor
    45 f/2 MD lens is a pancake lens.What can you tell me about these
    lens,its advantages and disadvantages ? Where can i use it properly ?
    What is the difference between 50mm and 45mm lens? Thanks for any
  2. I own that lens and a couple of X-700 bodies, and it is needle sharp. In fact, it's one of the finest lenses made, in my view. At 45mm, it is still considered a "normal" lens, and is about 10% wider in angle than the more popular 50mm normals.
  3. Easily the best value in a pancake lens. Most of the others - Pentax, Olympus, Nikon - are grossly overpriced compared with their performance. The Minolta version may be a bit plasticky but the glass is fine.

    Overall Minolta is a great system to get into. Not only were the Rokkors of excellent quality but their bargain line of Celtic lenses were outstanding values as well.

    Some folks will argue that the 40-45mm focal length is actually closer to a "normal" lens for the 35mm format but the difference is negligible. Enjoy it for its own merits.
  4. The Rokker 45mm is the second sharpest lens I own, right beind the Micro Nikkor. But it is 1 to 2 stops faster, and has a smoother quality (because of the four element Tessar type formula?)to the images than the Micro Nikkor. Great all around lens, suitable for just about everything, except portraits for which you will need something longer, ie. 85-135mm. A real gem of a lens that more people should try. Gary Gilliam Sumerduck VA
  5. I am not sure what you mean with a "pancake lens". It is 30,5 mm long, the 50 mm f/1.7 MD lens is 36 mm.
    The formula is 6 elements in 5 groups modified Gauss-type.
    The main differences compared to the 50 mm MD lenses are:
    Close fucusing distance 0,6 m instead of 0,45 m.
    Single coating instead of multi coating.
  6. I am a long time user of Minolta equipment. The Rokkor lenses and metal bodies are great buys. However, my casual tests indicate the 45mm is slightly soft in the corners vs the MC 55 f/1.7. I highly recommend the MC/MD 58mm f/1.2. The 58mm is Leica-like in sharpness at f/3.5 and displays butter smooth out-of-focus imaging.

    Rokkor X lenses offer incredible value with their low price, high build quality, excellent coatings, neutral to warm color imaging, and balance between sharpness and Bokeh. Check out the Leica forum to hear users discribe the new asp lenses as harsh.

    Some Minolta lenses have weaknesses. I sold a MD 35mm f/2.8 and replaced it with a Rokkor-X 28mm f/3.5 due to moderate barrow distortion. Other than distortion, the lens was very crisp and works well in most situations. I also ditched a $300 MD 85mm f/1.7 and a MC 100mm f/2.5 because a $50 Rokkor-X 135mm f/3.5 with 4 lenses in 4 groups was sharper. For inside available light shots the 58mm is much easier to use than the 85mm or 100mm.

    If you build up a lens line consider the MC/MD Rokkor-X labled lenses with the 55mm filter ring. Perhaps the reduction of the diameter of most MD mounts trade off increased vignetting/distortion for a marginal sharpness gain.
  7. The other GREAT thing about that Minolta 45mm f2 Rokkor MD is that it was never marketed as an UPSCALE pancake lens, but rather, as a cost and weight reducing option on the low end Minolta SLRs. As a result, they were very common, and can be found for around $20 separately on the major auction site, and they are very cheaply available on bodies like your X-700.

    It's a great lens that costs and weighs nearly nothing. What's not to love about that? For me, it fits perfectly between 28mm and 90mm focal lengths as my favorite primes, and I prefer the focal length to 50mm.

    You can pretty much use it properly anywhere that a normal lens is useful.
  8. It is really nice to read the solid comments given by users of Minolta 35mm gear, a family of cameras and lenses that are -far and away- some of the best values found today.

    I've been using Minolta for about 3 years, switching over from Pentax, with a X-700 body, a XD 11, and several SRT-series bodies and lenses. All are good, but an especially lovely and sweet 101 has my heart forever.

    You did well Yunus, and you'll be able to outfit that X-700 for a fraction of what you'd spend an almost any other 35mm camera. Minolta still supports it too- I sent mine to Minolta in California and it was totally rebuilt/serviced for $126. Again, amazing!

    The XD 11 I got last week. A friend gave it to me after trying to trade it and its 50mm 1.7 Rokkor X for a zoom lens. The shop didn't want it, claiming no market exists for that camera anymore. A set of batteries and its working perfectly. It does have a bit of mirror slam though...more than the others? I think so.

    My sharpest Minolta lens? Easy, the MC Rokkor PG 50mm f/1.4 that came on my favored SRT-101. Amazing lens, truly amazing and special.
  9. I owned and used an X-700 and an X-300 with Rokkor 50mm f1.4, 135mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8 and your 45mm f2 'pancake' lenses.

    I had a great deal of pleasure from this system over many years.

    I now use Contax SLRs and Carl Zeiss lenses. It is fair to say that these only represent a small overall upgrade in quality from the excellent MD/MC Rokkor lenses in my opinion.

Share This Page