Minolta lens' fit Sony DSLR Camera?

[peterblaise]

<p>.</p>

<p>Let me expand and clarify an earlier comment: "... <i>not even going to talk to you about how bad a SINGLE LENS CORRECTIVE DIOPTER is <b>[as found in cheap teleconverting adapters]</b> for any camera. Search this site <b>[for lens adapter discussions]</b> it has been explained so many times before</i> ..."</p>

<p>Janet, bottom line, SCAN YOUR FILM! Otherwise, you loose something precious from the original Minolta SR/MC/MD/X-600-series lenses when trying to use them for digital capture:<br>

- automation - they become manual stop down metering and focus (we got used to focusing with wide open bright aperture but focus shift becomes even more critical with flat digital sensors)<br>

- TTL metering and or open aperture metering - again, we have to stop down to meter, possibly making the viewfinder darker, loosing the ability to confirm if our subject is still in focus, let alone framed accurately<br>

- automatic aperture actuation - we have to close and open the aperture ourselves, closed for metering and exposure, open for framing and focus, though I'm learning that closed for focus often elminates unsharpness<br>

- angle of view compromised - we loose as much as 50% or more of the scene the lenses originally captured for us</p>

<p>And for what? We found we could sell them off to colelctors, take some cash and move on. Buyers are:<br>

http://www.keh.com/<br>

http://www.cameta.com/<br>

<a href="http://www.usedcamerabuyer.com/">http://www.usedcamerabuyer.com/</a></p>

<p>Then enjoy a whole new generation of photographic joy and automation once again. Remember Minolta never really paid much attention to the SR-MC/MD/X-600 lens line in over 25 years now! One modern superzoom may thrill you, then you can start collecting lenses to recover the range you were hoping to have, only fully automatic:</p>

 

<p >- <strong>83mm f/1.76</strong> </p>

<p >- <strong>46mm f/2.9</strong></p>

<p >- <strong>100-334mm f/4.1-5.8</strong></p>

<p>Let us know what you do, and ignore our cross-smiping - we all have our own preferences. Choose what makes sense for you and dive in! Share some pictures!</p>

<p>.</p>

[robert_paul1]

<p>dan Mar- Your reply <strong>may</strong> directly answer the question that Janet asked, but you fail to provide the best answer for her inquiry. You say that <strong>'Cost'</strong> is the "only reason to use thos (sic) lenses" But that's a given. However, my people ask that because they have old MF lenses. But, once they learn that the lenses cannot be used without an adaptor, and that they will have to use 'stop-down' mode, they will look at other options. You still have not told Janet the steps needed to use the lenses in 'stop-down' mode.</p>

<p>Your answer is like someone asking you what's the "shortest way from Point A to Point B?" You answer that the <strong>shortest</strong> way is over the high mountain pass on a very narrow winding road that is prone to landslides. That person takes that route and their car is hit by a falling road. Later that person sees you again and tells you what happened. I happen to be standing close by and offer that the person should have taken a different route that is on a safe wide scenic highway that takes a couple minutes longer. The person, who had asked for directions, then turns to you and says "Why didn't you tell me there was a different way to Point B?" You reply, "You asked for the <strong>shortest</strong> way, and I assumed that you were trying to save time, otherwise, you would have asked for the <strong>best</strong> way."</p>

<p>Janet said that she was a <strong>novice</strong> , so this should have been an indicator that she was not that informed about photography. With this in mind, the answers given to her OP should be tailored to offer her the <strong>best</strong> answer, and not merely a <strong>correct</strong> answer.</p>

[peterblaise]

<p>.</p>

<p>"Novices" are very often told to avail themselves of the most manual system they can get their hands on so they can MANUALLY master the basics of framing/composition, focus, aperture choices, shutter speed choices, ISO choices, then after capture, what to do in the darkroom or lightroom to make their preconceived image happen on paper - all without falling into modern pre-made factory automatic decisions. </p>

<p>There is no good, better, best. Only appropriate for ... and specify. </p>

<p>So Janet, tell us more. </p>

<p>What do you think will please you now? </p>

<p>We've explored everything from:</p>

<p>- using your existing lenses AND camera and scanning your film to digital,</p>

<p>- adapting your lenses to new digital cameras (with serious compromises),</p>

<p>- replacing your lenses and camera with all new. </p>

<p>We even challenged you to survive a mountain crossing and the inevitable unavoidable deadly avalanche that I ALWAYS experience when crossing mountains (not!). (The provider of THAT analogy can put your hammer down now, no need to repeat, we get your point, and we KNOW your preference for Janet!)</p>

<p>So, Janet, whaddyathink?</p>

<p>.</p>

[bjmarkowitz]

<p>"Well, unfortunately the days when you could catch a Minolta AF 50 1.7 for $50 or less are pretty much over... expect the one in Brian's link to go for $100 or more by the time it's done. There are still some bargain Minolta AF zooms to be found for less than $50 though"<br>

Paul, HOLY S!!!...I can not believe the 50 1.7 it went for over $130. You were right. Now when I bought that lens not 5 years ago, I bought it for $42 on Ebay. Cannot believe that it has shot up that much. I guess people realized that quality glass is quality glass, and with a 1.5x crop factor and anti-shake technology, that becomes a decent portrait lens.<br>

Dan, I think the one thing that does not make sence with your position about using old mc/md glass on the olympus is, if your going to spend the money on a new DSLR, chances are you want your old glass to be able to take advantage of the new technology, the autofocus, the new metering systems, etc. Otherwise, keep the film camera and develope onto cds. </p>

 

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Well, I guess we're paying the price in the used maxxum lens market for Sony's success with the A200/A300/A350 combo at attracting new users. There's clearly a lot more of us shopping for the better used lenses with alpha mount!</p>

<p>On the subject of the adapters with a corrective element, I'm a happy user of the Canon FD-to-Maxxum and Nikon AI-to-Maxxum versions. Personal experience on a fair number of different manual focus lenses has convinced me that accusations of inherently substantial distortion/loss of quality with these adapters are greatly exaggerated. Here's a recent sample shot with a manual focus Tokina ATX 100-300 f4 in FD mount adapted on my A100. For more and larger size examples check out <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=803575">this folder</a> in my PN portfolio. many of the pix there were taken with this kind of corrective element between lens and body.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[rdm]

<p><strong>Peter Blaise Monahon.</strong> Well said :)</p>

<p>robert paul~"However, my people ask that because they have old MF lenses"... my people ? hahaha, cute :)<br>

I was also going to correct you on alot of things you got wrong about what I said, from either misreading what was written or interpreting, but I realized theres no point in doing so. It seems to me that this is turning this in to something personal, and i don't care enough to argue. And i don't want to add to the Tangents.</p>

<p><strong>Janet the best advice here was what Peter Blaise Monahon last stated. No one could have put it better</strong> <strong>. </strong><br>

<strong>P.S. I wonder if she is still reading this or after seeing all the confliction, just saying .. "aww the heck with it."</strong><br>

because if your still reading the Janet, please chime in with something so we know we have answered what you needed to know or just to give some more direction.</p>

[julie_kelly]

<p>Hi all,<br>

So I am the kind of novice I think Janet is- her post made complete sense to me and I have to say that a lot of the responses here were simply overwhelming with information that was way over my head (ttl metering, stop down, iris something...). The posts were most educational and entertaining due to the "sniping" and I am inspired to continue to learn more. <br>

I ended up here because I am in the same boat as she. I have lenses from an old Minolta body(hubby bought back when he was single). We replaced the body a few years ago with a Maxxum 5 and then last summer finally went to a DSLR (after buying and using several smaller point and shoot digitals). We bought a Sony A100 on sale (about 50% off on clearance) and I have to say I loved it til it became corroded (no idea how and not covered). <br>

We are now looking at buying ANOTHER DSLR body and I was hunting the net to find out if our lenses will fit other cameras besides the Sony DSLR. I am not sure if I get what all was said above, but my pics have gotten rave reviews from friends for quality and we have not seen anything that was noticeable to an untrained eye for quality issues. <br>

Of note, my lenses are now (I hope I am putting down the right info):<br>

Sony 9000HS N50 DT 3.5-5.6/18-70 .38/1.3 ft macro 55<br>

Quantaray MX AF 1:3.5-5.6 f=28-80 55<br>

Minolta Maxxum AF 35-80 mm 1:4(22)-5.6 46mm<br>

Maxxum AF 80-200mm 1:4.5(22)-5.6 46mm<br>

At this point I am not sure I want to go for another sony, but do not understand the tech-speak when I am researching a body. The specs are over my head regards to the lenses that will work. <br>

I am choosing the notification of responses on here so I do not miss them. ANY help is greatly appreciated. I know my lenses are probably cheap and not high quality, but to replace seems silly for just taking nice pictures of our travels and kids in the yard. Smaller point and shoots just do not do it for us anymore-we are definitely at the DSLR level of photo capture and are learning slowly but surely how to use the features, still we are far from even hobbyist photographers.<br>

Thanks!<br>

Julie</p>