Autofocus lenses for X570

[mike_shaffer]

I use an old X570 minolta and love it. It is of course a manual focus

camera but there are some situations where I would like to have an

autofocus medium zoom (like family get togethers with fast action

indoors and out). I seem to remember years ago that someone was

making zoom lenses in MD mounts that had an IR autofocus system built

into the lens. Does anyone rembemer anything about these lenses and

where one could get one?

 

mike

[bacsa]

I don't know, but I bet it would be cheaper for you to get an old used af body with an af zoom.

[jim_foley4]

Vivitar made at least one lens like that but I don't remember the specs. I don't know how good or fast they really were. Also one of the Minolta bodies had a focus assist built in. I think it was the X-600. Also of limited value. They both show up now and then on e-bay.

[fmueller]

These lenses occasionally show up on eBay and tend to be inexpensive. See eg. item number 3820001872. For some reason a lot of them seem to be in the Netherlands. Maybe they were more popular there than elsewhere. AF speed is rumoured to be VERY slow.

 

For the price of a used X-600 at KEH ($310-339), you can almost get a brand new Maxxum 7 ($399 at B&H) or two Maxxum 5 ($149.95). IMHO this reduces the appeal of the X-600 to the collector's market alone.

[jason hopper]

Mr. Mueller's advice is spot on. I briefly had this Vivitar 75-200/4.5 AF: mostly plastic/lightweight, low contrast, not real crisp focus, AF kept searching/chattering. Shot one roll to see if it worked, and passed it on (it came as part of a used Minolta 'X-' camera set mid/late-90's), only lasting impression about it was that I wasn't going to use it.

[michael_linn]

I use mainly manual focus also. When I am at a family gathering, I get out my Maxxum 5000 which I bought on e-**y for $18. It uses AAA batteries and uses a standard flash and can use any dedicated flash which works on your 570 (unlike later Maxxums). I got a brand new Vivitar 28-80 zoom for $39. Best of all, the autofocus is reasonably quick and the controls are simple- basically an on-off switch with the rest of the controls I never use under a sliding cover. That's great for me because I don't have to relearn a complex camera on the rare times I use it. The zoom lenses for manual focus cameras were very bulky with slow autofocus. They are mere curiosities now.

[mike_shaffer]

Thanks for the input. I figured that they must have had some problems since they apparently didn't catch on. The Maxxum 5000 is an interesting idea. I didn't realize that any of the maxxa used the X series flash. That is a big plus.

 

Another option that I am thinking about is picking up a 70's vintage fixed lens rangefinder like the Hi-Matic or Canonette (sp?). Those might be easier to focus quickly in low light and are probably available at a pretty low price.

[ujwal]

Yes Mike, getting a Maxxum 5000 or the Maxxum 7000 is a good idea.

Getting a Maxxum 9000professional is even better idea.

 

The fixed lens RF cameras of the 70's are good performers. I have read a lot about the Minolta Himatic 7sII and it's supposedly a very sharp little gem and the bokeh is beautiful! but 7sII's don't come cheap even on ebay. A less expensive is Canonet these are pretty good too get the QL 17 model. I have a canonet 28 and is very easy to use but the lens isn't what you'd call Razor sharp,and it isn't very compact either. Check out the Konica 35Auto and Olympus 35RC as well.But the canonet is not a bad camera at all! the metering is pretty good and is pretty easy to focus.

 

But in prints larger than 6x4 the difference between my Minolta 50mm 1.7 and canonet is evident. It's hard to believe but my 28-70 Minolta is way sharp than the 40mm lens on the canonet 28! BTW, In 6x4 prints there is no way to tell the difference between my 50mm and the 28-70mmm zoom.

[ujwal]

Yes Mike, getting a Maxxum 5000 or the Maxxum 7000 is a good idea.

Getting a Maxxum 9000professional is even better idea.

 

The fixed lens RF cameras of the 70's are good performers. I have read a lot about the Minolta Himatic 7sII and it's supposedly a very sharp little gem and the bokeh is beautiful! but 7sII's don't come cheap even on ebay. A less expensive is Canonet these are pretty good too get the QL 17 model. I have a canonet 28 and is very easy to use but the lens isn't what you'd call Razor sharp,and it isn't very compact either. Check out the Konica 35Auto and Olympus 35RC as well.But the canonet is not a bad camera at all! the metering is pretty good and is pretty easy to focus.

 

But in prints larger than 6x4 the difference between my Minolta 50mm 1.7 and canonet is evident. It's hard to believe but my 28-70 Minolta is way sharp than the 40mm lens on the canonet 28! BTW, In 6x4 prints there is no way to tell the difference between my 50mm and the 28-70mmm zoom.

Here is a photo taken by canonet28 printed at 6x4 on Kodak color paper. The film Orwo 100 is pretty grainy as you can see.<div></div>

[roger_smith4]

I actually think the Canonet is a pain to focus in low light as the yellow focusing area is very small. My X-700 is much, much quicker. With the Canonet I just end up estimating distance on the distance scale and set the focus that way.