According provided by lens MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1: 2.8 many thanks the store FOCUSFILM. There you can find many interesting film cameras and manual lenses.
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8. increase.
In short
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 is a classic old manual fast short telephoto lens for film cameras with a frame of 36 X 24. There is a whole family of similar lenses from Minolta. This review shows one of the latest manual modifications, 1979 with a retractable hood and 5/5 optical design.
Nowadays, MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 is interesting for its focal length and aperture ratio. First of all, MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 is great for portrait photography. Of the obvious shortcomings - strong chromatic aberration.
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 belongs to the line of Minolta MD series lenses. SR mount lenses (including MD, MC) are the easiest to use on Sony E/FE mount mirrorless cameras (Sony is the historical successor to Minolta). It is difficult to use this lens on Sony A system SLR cameras - in order to be able to focus to infinity, it is necessary to use an adapter with a corrective lens. Mirrorless digital cameras have given a second life to these old lenses.
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8
History
Below is a list of MINOLTA class 135/2.8 lenses:
- MINOLTA TELE ROKKOR-PG 1:2.8 f=135mm, since 1958, scheme 7/5
- MINOLTA AUTO TELE ROKKOR-PG 1:2.8 f=135mm, since 1959, scheme 7/5
- MINOLTA AUTO TELE ROKKOR-PF 1:2.8 f=135mm, since 1962, scheme 6/5
- MINOLTA MC TELE ROKKOR-PF [+-X] 1:2.8 f=135mm, since 1966, scheme 6/5
- MINOLTA MC TELE ROKKOR [+-X] 135mm 1:2.8, since 1975, scheme 4/4
- MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR [+-X] 135mm 1:2.8, since 1977, scheme 4/4
- MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR [+-X] 135mm 1:2.8, since 1979, scheme 5/5, shown in this review
- MINOLTA MD 135mm 1:2.8, since 1981, scheme 5/5
- MINOLTA AF 135mm 1:2.8(32), since 1985, scheme 7/5
- MINOLTA STF 135mm 1:2.8[T4.5](T32) SMOOTH TRANS FOCUS, since 1985, scheme 8/6
- SONY STF 2.8(T4.5)/135 135STF SMOOTH TRANS FOCUS SAL135F28, since 2008, scheme 8/6
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8
Main technical characteristics of MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8:
| Review Instance Name | MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 LENS MADE IN JAPAN ø55 1294274 |
| Basic properties |
|
| Front Filter Diameter | 55 mm, metal thread for filters |
| Focal length | 135 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 1 X (this is a fixed lens, it does not have a zoom) |
| Designed by | for film cameras with a frame size of 24 x 36 |
| Number of aperture blades | 6 petals, form a hole in the shape of a regular hexagon |
| Tags |
|
| Diaphragm | from f / 2.8 to f / 22.
The lens has an aperture control ring. On the aperture control ring there are marks for f / 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22. The aperture control ring rotates with clicks, there is one intermediate value between each of the pairs of numbers (except between F / 2.8-F / 4 and F / 16-F / 22). |
| 1.5 meters, maximum magnification ratio of about 1:10 | |
| The weight | 509 grams (measured) |
| Optical design | 5 elements in 5 groups
|
| Lens hood | Built-in, metal, retractable |
| Manufacturer country | LENS MADE IN JAPAN (lens made in Japan) |
| Period | From 1979 to March 1981. Subsequently replaced by a similar model MINOLTA MD 135mm 1:2.8. |
| Price | About 100 cu for used option. |
Versions marked 'ROKKOR-X' rarer and optically more perfect. But head-to-head comparisons indicate the identity of the optical characteristics of lenses with different markings. Lenses marked 'ROKKOR-X' were only shipped to select countries in North America, while regular 'ROKKOR' lenses were sold worldwide.
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8
Assembling, focusing
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8 is well built.
The focus ring is wide, rubberized, rotates approximately 270 degrees (3/4 of a full turn). Ring travel is smooth. During focusing, the front retractable part of the body frame does not rotate. Focusing occurs by moving the entire lens block.
MDF is quite large, and is 1.5 meters (for example, a budget JUPITER-11 135/4 has an MDF equal to only 1 meter).
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8
Sample photos (APS-C)
All photos in the review are shown without processing. Photos on a cropped camera were prepared by a photographer Natalia (Instagram). Camera used Sony NEX-6 (16 MP Sony Exmor APS-C HD CMOS sensor) and adapter FOTGA MD -> SONY NEX. All photos are JPEG taken in camera. Original JPEG images can be view / download from this link (40+ files).
Appearance
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.
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR-X 135mm 1:2.8
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
Is it a fungus?
Reply
If you are talking about a photo from the bayonet side, then this is such an texture, not a fungus. There are a lot of pictures on the net with exactly the same view from the bayonet side (example).
Reply
So which is better FL 2.5 or MD 2.8? I didn't see much of a difference in the pictures. Most likely they will be approximately all the same with Jupiter 37A
Reply
MD has better enlightenment and is easier to handle. Other things being equal, Jupiter can only in some cases give a more interesting picture, but in general it loses to the eminent 2.8 and 2.5.
The best manual 135 I've tried is the more or less modern Zeiss T* 135/2.8. And, of course, 135/2 almost all are very interesting.
Reply
I support Zeiss, but with these two lenses I didn’t see something fundamentally better in the picture in comparison with Jupiters.
Reply
those. does the diagram affect anything?
Reply
Of course, the scheme affects. But enlightenment and performance also have an effect. In general, the usual old 135tk 2.8-4s were built on simple schemes (4/3, 4/4, 6/4 and 6/5 at best), since it is quite simple to make a 135tk. 135/2 is another story, but the prices there are also different. The same Jupiter-37a / 11a on a “simple” and very old non-septenary 4/3 scheme, but at the same time, due to the huge third element, it gives its characteristic Sonnar / Ernostar bokeh.
Reply
I really liked this lens. It is easy to use. I also appreciated the color rendering. In photographing false colors like white, magenta and red, this lens did a great job!
Reply
Yes, practically, any 135ka will produce a beautiful picture. But few, especially manual ones, have a rounded diaphragm. This is how they lose to the 37th Jupiter, IMHO.
Reply
And on the open hole will be rounded or what? And how often do you have to tighten the hole on a portrait lens?
Reply
the usual 135tki are sharp in the open, it is extremely rare to have to cover. The stronger the covered aperture, the more the lenses become similar to each other in pattern, small differences appear mainly from the number of petals.
Frankly weak South Korean and old Japanese cheap 135s, they are “wadded”.
Reply
I would like to read about the comparison with Canon, since the author had both lenses
Reply
the question is removed, read in the comments
Reply
I have such a lens in the Minolta celtic version, outwardly it differs only in a different rubber on the distance ring and slightly simplified inscriptions, and so one to one. I don't see any difference in the review photos. I really like the lens, I didn’t notice any special chromaticity. In overview photos, by the way, too. Sharp open with beautiful blur. Yesterday I photographed a friend, f2.8
Reply