File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
soup guize, minolta fag here.

I currently have a 18-70 lense for my Alpha (in before shutter speed, "sony sucks", and butterfly), and i'm thinking of getting a 70-210 Minolta.

HOWEVER

My father has a bunch of Minolta MD lenses (including a 500/F8 and a 70-210/F4 as well as some fish eyes.)

Should i spend the $100-150 for the minolta 70-210 AF, or an MD to AF converter to open up many, MANY lenses to me?


that being said, would you guys say Minolta glass is the best for the A mount system?

picture related.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Get the converter if it is reasonably priced. Worth it for the fish eyes and the 500mm alone. You'd probably have a lot of fun with them. Maybe you'd even find they work just fine for you or it'll help you to decide what you want to buy next.
>> Anonymous
>>108149


the MD->AF converter is roughly $120, which is about $30-$40 cheaper than i could get a good used Minolta 70-210/f4.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>108151

Pretty pricey then. Shame. It'd still be tempted for the fish eye and the 500mm, but if it is ONLY for the zoom then you might be just as well getting one that doesn't need the converter if it is optically decent.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
get the beercan.
>> Anonymous
>>108146

Minolta MD to AF converters either fuck up infinity focusing or have a lens that degrades image quality a bit (same with Canon FD to EF).
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
I'd say get the autofocus 70-210 but also steal your dad's stuff and play around with film photography.
>> Anonymous
Beercan FTW

2nd best minolta lens I bought
>> dc !!9TNuNXN8QWn
hay guys im also new here
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
http://haodascreen.com/minoltaMDAF.aspx


this is the adapter i've been looking at. It claims to do infinity.


Also, does anybody else make good AF glass that's not insanely expensive (or if it is, at least cheap on Ebay?)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 20DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:01:06 14:32:11RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height380
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108248
Uh sigma and tamron make dynax mount, old minolta glass is all AF and is pretty cheap (and awesome).

how fucking poor are you?
>> Anonymous
>>108250


college student.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108252
so am i, i have:
a100
f56 flash
11-18
18-70
50/1.7
100-300

stop being so poor.
>> Anonymous
>>108256
Stop being a man-whore...!
>> Anonymous
>>108256
almost same heer
18-200
50-f/1.7
100-300 xi
fisheye 0.42
and soon a 56am flash
>> Anonymous
btw, don't forget the focal ratio!

when used on a dslr the "old" minolta lenses make for a 24x36 film does not have the same focal you have to calculate mentaly.

for example a 50mm lens will produce a 75mm 24x36 equivalent.

for the Alpha 100 (and maybe 700 too) th ratio is 1.5
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108571
A100 and A700 = 1.5
5D and 7D = 1.6
A900 = 1.0

*YEAH SUCK IT CANON WE"RE GOIN FULL FRAME!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>108607
Oh yeah? Well Canon's EOS 1Df will have a 6x7cm sensor!

(Hey, if you're allowed to brag about cameras that don't actually exist, so can I)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108613
A900 has been confirmed, it WILL exist.

is that.. medium format digital? 0_o
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>108617
>A900 has been confirmed, it WILL exist.
Unless Sony decides its SLR business isn't profitable enough. Or Nikon tells them that it'll take its sensor business elsewhere if they don't axe it and Sony caves. Or they decide to just concentrate on increasing their penetration in the low end since Canon and Nikon own the high-end.

The A900 hasn't actually been confirmed. Last I heard, it was "announced" in non-working mockup form at a previous camera show. An empty box with a full-frame-size pentaprism bump on top is not a shipping product. You should at least wait until there's a press release from Sony announcing the thing before you pin your hopes and dreams on it.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108621
fuck the A900 i cant really afford the A700, im still pissed at sony for not releasing the A300.

Anyway SCEI run without making any money, why cant sonys slr division (is it part of the cybershot group?) do the same :P
>> Vincent
>>108607
Uhh 5D = 1.0 I thought
40D, 30D, 400D, etc are all 1.6

D50, D200, D300 = 1.5
D3 = 1.0 (+1.5 crop mode)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108632
Minolta 7D and 5D, not canon.

LURK MOAR.
>> Vincent
>>108637
Oh, Weird they have the same crop as the Canon's (I thought 1.6 was an uncommon sensor size)

Well, even with all my lurking here, I never hear about Minolta DSLR's, so Its really your fault for assuming we all know what you are talking about :)
Especially considering a 7D is rumored to be in development for canon!
>> Anonymous
>>108738

No one expect you to know about shitty no-name cameras that only idiots use. Don't worry about it.
>> Anonymous
>>108738

Fucking newfag, get the fuck out of /p/.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108738
a - im a sony troll, this means im also a minolta troll, you should know this by now you have been here long enough.

secondly, the minolta 5D and 7D were out long before the canon 5D.

>>108767
Im sorry i cant here you over the sound of awesome that was minolta, more tech advancements than canon and nikon combined.
>> Anonymous
>>108782

I can't understand you because of your terrible spelling and grammar.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108796
1/10

at first i was like RAGE but then i was like lol dont troll me.
>> Anonymous
>>108800

Sorry? What? I don't speak moron-ese like you. You'll have to find someone to translate your native tongue into English for you.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108801
u don c wat i did thar
>> tiberus !!DpHXXP8gWqo
     File :-(, x)
I own the MD/MC to AF adapter. In my experience, anything below f/3.5 will cause your picture to come out too soft. I noticed a bit of vignetting in my Maxxum 5000, but I doubt you'll notice anything in the A100. Also consider that your shooting at nearly 2X focal length with the adapter and the half-frame sensor.

This picture was shot with the Minolta MC Celtic 135mm f/3.5 using the MD/MC adapter using the Maxxum 5000 and some crappy ISO 400 film.

tl;dr, get the beercan while it's around. Sony isn't reproducing Minolta quality.