Minolta MD Zoom Rokkor 100-500mm F/8

[vince-p]

<p>This is a fairly late lens in the MD-Rokkor history, introduced I believe in 1980 or 81. Does anyone know anything about it, specifically how it performs? Thanks.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Photozone.de rates it pretty much mediocre performance both wide open and stopped down, with similar performance on both the long and wide ends. Not particularly resistant to flare and vignetting. Build quality is also rated pretty mediocre. I don't necessarily trust their numbers, but I wouldn't open the wallet too wide for one.</p>

[vince-p]

<p>That's funny I looked at photozone and the longest Minolta MD zoom they listed was 70-210. Where are you finding it?</p>

[SCL]

<p>This is their link to older lenses: http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylens.jsp</p>

[Mike Gammill]

IIRC, there was an APO version that was much better. Beyond 300mm secondary chromatic abberation hurts image quality

so APO lenses have an edge here.

[carbon_dragon]

Remember that one place where lenses have gotten much better is zooms. It looks like it's pretty good for the age. Never

had one myself.

[LenMarriott]

<p>Vince, I don't know what happened to my previous post so I'll try again. It appears that there were actually five different versions of this lens. Check it out<a href="http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/"> here</a>. Best, LM.</p>

[LenMarriott]

<p>Oops!</p>

[vince-p]

<p>Len, many thanks, that clarifies Mike's post. It now becomes clear why some are available for less than $200 and others more than $800.... not that this doesn't happen sometimes without reason.....<br>

And thanks Stephen for the link to the older lens ratings. I'm wasting mucho time with it now.</p>

 

[scott_murphy5]

<p>Woof woof...........it was a dog.</p>

[jay_elias]

<p><em>I have the lens in question and I don't feel that it is a dog at all. Yes it is heavy but not unmanageable in the least. I </em>have not had any issues with it whatsoever.</p><div></div>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>Years ago, I owned a copy of this lens for a short while. I had a SRT at the time that I used to try it out. My experience with it was that it was just a so-so performer, and awkward to use. Even though it's not very heavy, it's so long, and a push-pull at that, and slow with a miximum f/8 aperture. Just a pita to use. Yes, it has a tripod mount, which is almost a requirement with this lens. It does tend to draw crowds, though, if you're into that kind of thing.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.fotografie-boerse.de/upload/4612.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> </p>

[peggybair]

I have this lens and have shot with it adapted to my Sony A7RIII: 1/640th sec. ISO 1250 @f8 at about 480mm. The copy I have is incredibly sharp and easy to use with the focus assist of the Sony. I think it's a disservice to say this lens is a so-so performer. It is capable of delivering absolutely eye-popping sharpness. The image below has been cropped in quite a ways on the FF Sony and the details are all there. These lenses are fairly rare and vary rather widely in price on Ebay. The lens originally was quite costly for its day so it's not a cheap lens. Mine is a 1977 or 78 MD model - used with a Fotodiox adapter here. Yes, push/pull was something that was common back in the day but if you understand this about the lens, it's not an issue. The push/pull is quite smooth, it's just different.

[JDMvW]

Kadlubeks Objektiv-Katalog lists the two versions referred to above. The "Apo, Macro" version has a different grouping of the elements.