For the provided lens MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm many thanks the store ProFotoSalewhere you can find many new and used lenses for different systems, including similar manual lenses.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm. increase.
In short
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm - old manual focus prime, developed for film cameras, particularly fast. Very much appreciated by amateur photographers. Considered one of the best lenses from MINOLTA.
The review shows an adapted version for use on cameras with a Canon EF / EFS mount. The lens originally had the original Minolta MC mount. Judging by the serial number 2773280 copies from the review, one of the last modifications and one of the last parties are shown.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm is primarily interesting for its bokeh at F / 1.2-F / 2 apertures.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
History
The MINOLTA ROKKOR class 58 / 1.2 lens is available in several versions:
- MINOLTA MC ROKKOR-PG 1: 1.2 f = 58mm, since 1966, metal focus ring, silver aperture ring. Radioactive.
- MINOLTA MC ROKKOR-PG 1: 1.2 f = 58mm, since 1969, rubberized focus ring, black iris control ring, non-radioactive.
- MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm, since 1973, rubberized focus ring, black aperture control ring, non-radioactive coating. The version is shown in this review.
- MINOLTA MC ROKKOR-X 1: 1.2 f = 58mm, since 1973, similar to the previous one, marking ROKKOR-X was available only for some countries. In the rest, this lens came without the 'X' prefix.
It was later replaced by MINOLTA MD ROKKOR 50mm 1: 1.2.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
Main technical specifications of MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
| Name of instances from review | Near the front lens 'MINOLTA lENS MADE IN JAPAN MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm 2773280' |
| Basic properties |
|
| Front Filter Diameter | 55 mm |
| Focal length | 58 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 1 x (this is fix) |
| Designed by | for film cameras with the Minolta MC mount. In the review, the lens is redone for the Canon EF / EFS mount |
| Number of aperture blades | 8 petals |
| Tags |
|
| Diaphragm | F / 1.2 to F / 16
You can set one intermediate value between each pair of numbers (except between F / 1.2 and F / 2) |
| MDF (minimum focusing distance) | 0.6 meters |
| The weight | 475 grams |
| Optical design | 7 elements in 5 groups |
| Lens hood | must screw into the thread of the front filter |
| Period | With 1973-1978 |
| Manufacturer country | LENS MADE IN JAPAN (Lens made in Japan) |
| Price | You can see real prices for MINOLTA 58 / 1.2 of different modifications on ebay at this link
Prices for modern Sony lenses (which absorbed Konika-Minolta) are available see here. |
The F / 1.2 aperture is about 1/3 of the wider than the F / 1.4 aperture of many other similar lenses, for example, Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 1: 1.4 f = 58mm. But F / 1.2 does not only mean higher aperture, but it also relates this lens to premium solutions, and also serves as a good indicator that the lens pattern should have its own character.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
Assembly, control, focus
Lens body It is made qualitatively. The focus ring has a wide anti-slip insert made of hard rubber or similar material.
The diaphragm consists of eight petals and forms a hole in the shape of a regular octagon.
Important: MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm has no intermediate value between F / 1.2 and F / 2, and this difference is more than a step. I would really like to have intermediate values, for example F / 1.4 or F / 1.7.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm uses small filters with a diameter of 55 mm. On the body there is a focus distance scale and a depth of field + tag for working in the infrared spectrum.
The focus ring of the MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm rotates approximately 180 degrees (half a full turn). During focusing, the trunk of the lens travels forward, but the thread under the filters does not rotate. Focusing is performed by moving the entire lens block. The minimum focusing distance is 60 cm, which is the norm for such lenses.
The rotation of the focus ring is tight, making it inconvenient to focus. In the interval between 2-3 meters, the ring can slip. In this case, the lens looks well preserved.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
Image quality
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm for more than 40 years, which means that F / 1.2 at that time was really a serious test. F / 1.2 made it possible to give a vivid picture in the optical viewfinder, which was very important for comfortable work. But the picture on F / 1.2 is clogged with spherical aberrations, and also suffers from strong chromatic aberrations. But in the center of the frame, even F / 1.2 produces quite acceptable sharpness for many creative tasks. There is no catastrophe in terms of sharpness at F / 1.2 for the lens. At the same time, such lenses are more valued not for high-quality optical indicators, but for the nature of the pattern, in particular for the side of the lens, where all sorts of aberrations can only be in the hands of the photographer, creating their own unique pattern.
The F / 2.0 lens significantly increases sharpness, and on F / 2.8 it will be difficult to distinguish it from some modern lenses.
Aperture F / 1.2 and F / 2 are the most interesting for unusual photos. At F / 2, the picture has a more advantageous appearance due to a smoother bokeh.
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
Full Frame Sample Photos
Pictures from the MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm lens and camera Canon EOS 6D. JPEG straight from the camera. The control mode was 'Standard' with default settings '3/0/0/0'.
Download jpeg source photos c Canon EOS 6D can at this link (87 files, 400 MB). Pay attention to EXIF the F / 1.2 value is everywhere, but shooting was carried out at different aperture values. On the Canon EOS 6D the lens catches a mirror, a fraction of a millimeter is not enough to focus on infinity. Run on f / 1.2 through JVI very difficult and almost impossible, it is best to use Live View. The focusing screen of modern CZKs is not designed to work with F / 1.2.
Sample photos on APS-C
All photos below are shown without processing. Camera used Sony a3500 (EXMOR CMOS 20 MP). All photos are on-camera JPEG. Picture Control Mode 'Standard 0/1/1'. Functions' Corr. ob .: Shading ',' Corr. ob .: Chrome. aberr. ' and 'Corr. Rev .: Distortion 'were disabled.
Download jpeg source photos c Sony a3500 can at this link (27 files, 120 MB). On the Sony a3500 I used a lens through an adapter Canon EF -> Sony E (with autofocus support for lenses that have one).
Bonus Level
In the best traditions of Radozhiva, a good lens must definitely visit my Nikon D40 (CCD 6 MP). Shooting 'macro' at F / 1.2 is a lot of fun.
Download jpeg source photos from Nikon D40 can at this link (20 files, 70 MB).
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm
My experience
MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm is one of the few lenses I dreamed of a few years ago. Something about him attracted me very much. But I never got to the purchase. Now, when I played enough with the review version of MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm, I clearly concluded that MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm was clearly not for me.
Most likely, this is precisely the lens whose character can be tested only with a long passage of time, either by shooting on film, or certain plots. Even a whole month was not enough for me to properly try out the MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm.
The character of the MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm picture needs to be able to be applied, and this is not always possible or advisable.
The sandy, friable bokeh of the lens looks very good in black and white pictures. The picture with the MINOLTA MC ROKKOR 1: 1.2 f = 58mm also looks very good in some creative processing styles.
It was extremely difficult for me to make friends with these lenses, maybe other users of this lens will tell about their experience in the comments.
How to use SR/MC/MD mount lenses
To use a MINOLTA SR, MC, MD mount lens on modern mirrorless cameras, you should use the appropriate adapter:
- Canon RF/RF-S: adapter SR/MD/MC -> RF/EOS R
- Canon EF-M: adapter SR/MD/MC -> EF-M/EOS M
- Sony NEX/ILCE/FE/E: adapter SR/MD/MC -> NEX/ILCE/FE/E
- Nikon Z: adapter SR/MD/MC -> Z
- Panasonic L / Sigma L / Leica L/T/TL: adapter SR/MD/MC -> L
- fujifilm x: adapter SR/MD/MC -> X/FX
- Samsung NX: adapter SR/MD/MC -> NX
- Micro 4 / 3: adapter SR/MD/MC -> M4/3
- Nikon 1: adapter SR/MD/MC -> N1
The adapters are compatible with SR, MC and MD mount lenses and these mounts are backwards compatible. But the use of lenses with a MINOLTA SR, MC, MD mount on SLR cameras is difficult due to the long working distance. In such cases, a corrective lens adapter must be used, which will degrade the image quality.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
“One of the few lenses that I dreamed of a few years ago” - oh yeah ... It's so interesting when now you twist your nose from what five years ago was the ultimate dream.
Arkady, if possible - a big request, please record paired photos with 58 1.4 on the open and slightly covered
It feels like 58 / 1.4 is much more interesting.
I can’t agree yet, because I didn’t take 58 / 1,2 on Minolta.
But I can say that the difference between 1,2 and 1,4 is purely psychological.
Follow the link - full size Minolta Rokkor 58 / 1,4 on the open:
https://psv4.userapi.com/c856528/u186682217/docs/d1/39edba411fd2/IMG_3277A.jpg?extra=6rIrnSNb7lSxCea1YCnFDk10ILZdJnuazsICcP1mmwn-nsR6-ycN0o3xoq1gzVsEfPDJpBZFpTS0jvi4nap6COKjbBerMKZlFDeTwfFa5H9oFRx0IXxT3lIW-izzwGxe8MR2ciwSuSMXEETDTzBNyZbEdQ
Uzhs))
After Takumara 50 / 1.4 and Praktikar 50 / 1.4, there is no particular desire to use the old 50-58 mm optics with an aperture> F / 1.7 ... Perhaps the Zeiss 50 / 1.4 C / Y would have been nothing else ...
The taste and color, as they say.
I gave my feedback about Minolta 58 / 1,4 on the corresponding page of Radozhiva. For me, this lens is not for every day. But I am not going to refuse it.
and why the boyar is not nice zuyko 50 1.4?
And the boyar likes to bend his fingers))
The lens is still gorgeous, despite more modern glass with an aperture of 1,2.
But how the words “legendary lens” and “uult lens”, which have long become stable, have been tortured!
Tell me at least one legend and show at least one worshiper of this lens!
I suggest just scoring in the search engine a request for the name of this lens and view the forum threads related to this lens
Your offer is accepted, I just “scored”))
Very beautiful picture of this lens.
Which of the seven?
The lens of a pro is the whole lens, in a Western manner, where the word LENS means LENS
Well, yes, and then you need to call glasses glasses, and not glasses according to Western manners.
I will support. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_(optics)#Photography_and_imaging
Ivan, I support 100%!
I also like to call a lens a 'lens' in everyday life. 'Lens' is long, but 'glass' is not very serious. This is really professional jargon, like "carcass", etc. There is nothing like that here, as you like. You cannot force everyone to speak or write in literary or technical language.
It's hard to focus on such a depth of field. However, I got used to shooting when the focus confirmation circle on Nikon D700 lights up. The lens is not really Minolta, but Nikon 50 / 1.2, but it doesn't matter. The picture is very specific, HA and other charms are present. But if you shoot when there are bright light sources behind, and even in the setting or morning sun, you get gorgeous portraits :)
Wow wow wow! I want myself this sweet 58mm pie! Old Minolta has a special charm; you love her or you hate her. I have 50 1.4 MD, on a full frame it is very good even on an open one (maybe I got this, but it doesn’t lather). I have long been hunting for live MD 58 1.2 (I did not like 1.4, from the word at all) and for MD 85 mm. Still advised to buy 35-70 3.5 MD. Would it not be by chance on the last mentioned review? I want to understand if he really is so good and how you can turn it 3.5 into 2.8.
I had this "charm". Pts cool combination, fujifilm + speedbooster + minolta. Namely, because of the color profiles of Fuji, they are very much combined with the picture of this glass. Went for 2 years without taking off Sold as always due to a banal lack of money (I think I'll come back to it)
Do not tell me the quality speed booster?
I took it with ali dol for 80, I did not notice a significant difference with and without, only the vignette was added
I liked the shot from Persia, etc. Suddenly interesting were the shades of red in the shots with Sonya.
What did you like better - glass from the review or Canon FD 55mm f / 1.2?
Purely subjective - Canon, smoother picture, I like this more, there is more "sandy", "crumbly". But over and over again - this is very subjective. And yet Rokkor has the status of a legendary lens.
And why can not I can not find this lens on ProfotoSale? Already sold? At least for how much?
This instance is not for sale, from a personal collection :)
Garni about ”active, hoch and manual. I specific through those who on the basis of the aperture of the diaphragm, like the people in the eyepieces, it is important to focus on the sharpness. Here z 2,8 aiming through the eyepiece is still comfortable. On the top of the screen - only through live view.
I can get infected with the team that needs me. Now, I would never buy a bi for $ 350 from Japan, or for a $ 500 from Europe (like at once on an all-round flea market). I would like, and earlier, the price of the boule is very high, the protest of such assets was much higher in sales, to go to Ukraine.
"Radioactive enlightenment"
There is no radioactive enlightenment there, the entire rear lens is made of special glass with thorium, for the time that has passed since the release, the products of r / a decay of thorium have accumulated in the glass and a beta and gamma component have appeared. Also, such lenses turn yellow due to changes in the initial properties of glass.
In general, there are quite a lot of radioactive collectible lenses, the most famous are the fast Super-Takumar.
Exactly. It was only due to the use of such glass that it was possible to create a lens with such an aperture of only 7 lenses.
Fixed
Tantalum is also sometimes mentioned, but I still do not understand whether it is radioactive like thorium. About a year ago, somewhere on the forum, I met panicky disputes about “radioactive” speed boosters from China. Interestingly, Metabones uses tantalum glass and presents it as a virtue. In short, there is a field for conspiracy theories))
Tantalum is stable.
Where ignorance reigns, conspiracy theology reigns. Quite paranoid already can buy a dosimeter and stupidly measure.
scales in bokeh even in the center of the frame.
a Canon 50L thread gives a much calmer pattern.
Some Canon 50L and costs a couple of times more. But at the same time he is fit for work, in contrast to the "legend".
Yes, some kind of scaly legend turned out
Although the glass is “about boke”, I like to shoot at F2-2.8. By the way, it is useful to cut the gap between F1.2 and 2.0.
Glass loves “close combat”, portrait, object, natural evening light. Its strength lies in plastic, contrast, dense color. For his years, he allows the correct color rendition to depend. On the open Boke can be nervous, but the background is not suitable either. On near-open it is worth underexposing, and when “developing”, return a stop or two.
It’s hard for mirrorless people for every day, but among classmates it’s definitely in the lead.
In skillful hands, his noble design will give odds to many eminent tops, which is more expensive.
I have one, only a bigger serial.
What does friable bokeh mean? Shortbread? Copy paste from descriptions and forums?
This is an ordinary planar (for example, lemons in the bokeh, not a biotar or trioplan. Everything is like ordinary planars.
The quality of the glass is excellent, the mechanics are excellent, sharp in the open.
"Scaly". Formally, this is the nature of light scattering. The bokeh elements themselves are the scattering of point light sources - bulbs, flower petals, sky breaking through the leaves. Good examples of bokeh have a lighter area on the inside and a darker (or transparent) area on the outside, so they will correctly layer on top of each other. Not very good examples of bokeh - on the contrary, lighter areas on the outside, you get such rings. The most dreadful example is the bagels of MTO type mirror lenses. Or "onion rings" from glasses with Fresnel lenses, all kinds of DO.
This lens has Planar lemons, this is a manifestation of some of the aberrations, this is for Rodion. In Helios and other similar aberrations, they twist. But this is the form. And the scattering of light here is just light outward, hence the feeling of scales. I won't say that this is too bad, but on the open, and even on MDF, as everyone loves, most of the frame is bokeh. So there, these scales are noticeable, and judging by the tape, it is noticeable to almost everyone, for this you do not need to read other people's reviews.
Initially, after all, no one positioned this lens as “shooting flowers close-up”, all high-aperture lenses were just reportage high-aperture lenses, to shoot some events, people, reportage in poor lighting conditions, at a great distance, where even 1.2 gave a normal depth of field.
Scales - the effect of the presence of a coma, harmful field distortion that interferes with the use of the edges of the frame. Coma makes the olin from the edges of the lemon bright, which creates, when they are superimposed on each other, the effect of tiles or scales in bokeh. It is also reinforced by a spherical aierration, which gives the entire mug edging.
The lemons themselves along the edge are a consequence of vignetting. But the distortion of their shape (deviation from symmetry) is a consequence of coma and astigmatism (Like the Helios, for example).
Thank you :)
all high-aperture lenses were just high-aperture reportage lenses, to shoot some events, people, reportage in poor lighting conditions, at a great distance, where even 1.2 gave a normal depth of field. - I agree
but in modern realities there are a lot of competitors for the same money with autofocus, but not with such characteristics.
Now it’s interesting just for bokeh, blurring and leisurely photographing of portraits and maybe just flowers and cats, discussions about the picture from it are now compared with sands / oils / watercolors, which the Russian language awarded diplomas to. For me, it is interesting in optical performance in the open. Pleases.
Here, for example, is the Canon 85 1.2DS.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IQsSYH-aJ_U/maxresdefault.jpg
And here is a comparison with the non-DS version:
https://www.slrlounge.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Canon-RF-85mm-F1.2-L-USM-DS-lens-Defocus-Smoothing-Technology-OverviewCanon-RF-85mm-F1.2-L-USM-DS-lens-Defocus-Smoothing-Technology-Overview-SLR-Lounge-2000×1333-1200×675.jpg
Canon got confused and made a lens, in which the blurring character of these circles is specifically worked out.
The difference is enormous.
Invented apodization, How Fuji?
I am reading: “Free from optical aberrations. the system displays a point as a series of concentric dark and light rings. "
It turns out that these “onion rings” are the bokeh of an ideal lens or what? :)
And then bokeh, if we are talking about the image of a point source of light in the focus area? You at least read about Airy's disc on Wiki.
The onion rings in the sides are not a diffraction effect, but a consequence of the fact that aspherics and fresnel have an imperfectly smooth surface, but with grooves.
this was before the FE 100mm F2.8 STF GM OSS appeared, there are all profixes)
I wonder how then the bokeh that the real glass gives will differ from the blurring in the FS by Gaussian taking into account the depth map?
Everything, I read in the context of “gives an image of a point IN THE UNSFARE ZONE”, hence the confusion.
Another example with bokeh on canon 5dm4
Thought to see the magic. I didn’t see it. Excuse me.
58 / 1.2 in seven lenses - what kind of magic is there ... Magic begins with a certain level of technology. And this is a compromise: 58 mm versus 50 (Did not fit into the back section), thorium lens (There was no other suitable glass - lanthanum and tantalum were later).
Children grow up and stop believing in magic, it remains apparently to wait a little bit :)
What an interesting discussion here :)
It is a pity that Arkady did not have the Canon 50 / 1.2L test, it would be interesting to read impressions.
I looked closely at it for a long time, but did not come up with an application. And even 50 / 1.4 after comparison did not want to. IMHO, 50 / 1.4 with a stub is the best variant of fifty dollars, it's a pity, we'll see it only on RF, even if in the L-version.
These old lenses, with their bunch of problems and shortcomings, just due to these shortcomings, some kind of magic turns out. And so, the problems with the lack of aperture are solved by the stub. If you need exactly the blur (regardless of the nature) - 85, 100, 135 will give the same grip. The same applies to portraits, for fifty dollars it is not very convenient to shoot portraits, although it is possible, of course. Flowers-petals with a macro target - there is also a normal and real macro.
For reporting 35 / 2.0 is also much more appropriate. And it turns out that the aperture fifty dollars is no longer a special place, except out of habit. Either the magic of the drawing, or there is no more money for anything, we will climb into all areas at once.
well, go down, go down. somehow zuyko 50 1.4 makes me happy that on the crop, that on the full frame. despite the fact that I have 85 and 105 and 135 and so on.
By the way, he went on the edge, climbed into Exif the first photo he came across.
https://img.pravda.com/images/doc/9/3/935919f-228a516-khmelnitskiy-1600-4.jpg
Fifty on 6D2. Well, and with tilorange all this has been processed. There’s 50 / 1.8 on the lens (I thought something was wider, to be honest). And so, as if there were 1.4 or 1.2, most likely they would have covered at least 1.8, or even 2.0, to get into the flu. A rare reporting application of a traditional fifty dollars full frame. Now I would rather wait 24-70 / 2.8 or even 24-105 / 4. In order not to walk with legs, do not cling to chairs, but from a place to compose a convenient frame.
where such confidence? in RF stabilization is matrix and there are already 1.2 years since 1.8 will appear in a lot
for fifty dollars you can shoot most of the stories and it will be cheaper than with 1.4 than 35 and your long-focus fantasies
where does reporting zoom?
Minolta MC ROKKOR-PG 58 / 1,2 in medium format (Fujifilm GFX 50R).
1. Its distance - near and middle, if on an open diaphragm. Shooting long-range shots on an open aperture - only spoil these most distant shots.
2. Her diaphragm is 1,2-2. You can aperture up to 8, but then Helios will give the same picture, which costs 9 times cheaper.
3. A lens with an aperture of 1,2 is good at twilight and in low light, in these conditions it is easy to work with it at this aperture, it is well focused, unlike daylight or bright light, when haze and horseradish immediately come out on the open for sharpness hover over.
4. The combination of focal (58 mm) and aperture (1,2) is more from the field of “we can” than from the field of practical application, especially considering that the lens began to be produced 55 years ago, and developed even earlier.
CONCLUSIONS.
1. The lens is a compromise, the engineers of Minolta in the distant 60s somewhere did not hold something, somewhere they pulled something over, - that's how it turned out. And it turned out very well, by the way.
2. There is nothing “legendary” or “cult” in it, it is an ordinary high-quality super-high-aperture about XNUMX%.
I do not understand the adherents of manual optics coming out with saliva and praying for him, although I myself am a manual technician to the core.
But working with it is very pleasant, the lens is clearly not a shelf lens and really reveals its capabilities precisely in the narrow format for which it was created.
On the medium format, its EGF will be 46,5 mm - neither fish nor meat, although the picture is interesting and there are almost no vignettes on the open one, and when apertured it disappears completely.
About radiation.
Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58 / 1,2 has only the first version radioactive (thorium dioxide in the rear lens glass) with a “silver” diaphragm control ring.
I have just the first version. The lens will sound 7 μSv / h * if the radiometer is placed directly on the rear lens. At 20 cm from the rear lens, there is already a normal background.
_________________
* This is 700 microroentgens per hour.
Please tell me, there is a minolta sr1 of the 60th edition, the first versions and an auto rokkor pf 55mm f2 lens for it. Actually with him and the problem. The diaphragm is constantly open, even when removed from a carcass. The jump rope is not pressed, most likely the grease, from which you have to clean it, the petals are not visible.
The question itself. It says on the net that the mount is SRT-mount, but is the Sony A mount suitable? So that you could replace the lens with another one, or use the M42 adapter for Sony A. Fortunately, the working segments allow.
A couple of days ago I bought one converted to kenon. In exif, it gives out everything except the aperture value.
And how will he give you the aperture in exif without electronics?
Mas mostra todos os dados, exceto a abertura, ou seja, o buraco…
Esta información proviene de la cámara.
On the open. Eyes are loaded ordered eyepiece with magnification.
We will look for a metal hood for it, and in the chamber with it it is advisable to add a counter, otherwise softin on the open one.