Canon FD vs MD Minolta

[tomasjonss]

Hello.
I just bought GH2 camera. I have bought some panasonic lenses, but now Im thinking about buying other cheap brands, the old lenses. I was wondering if someone here could tell me their experience of using FD and MD or some other old glass. Im going to buy one 30mm and one 80mm

Thanks
TJ

 

[Aki_Hartikainen]

MD lenses are great but they have strong sensor flares from headlights from cars, for example. I devised an adapter that has a multi-coated UV filters inside and that reduces the sensor flares by about half. A video made from 4k RAW images taken with a Minolta 35 MC: http://www.fourseasonshd.com/cgi-bin/csvsearch.pl?db=db1&tp=tp19&search=bluelight6

One underrated alternative are the Yashica ML lenses, they are similar to Contax Zeiss in many ways. They appear to have reduced sensor flare compared to MD lenses. One other thing, for the best flare resistance you would want to use the last MD series lenses with a 49 mm filter thread. They have the best coating and thus allow less flare.

 

[jmw]

I picked up an FD 50mm f/1.4 SSC for $60 off ebay. For that price it is amazing. I just ordered a Vivitar 70-210mm (Komine) as well but it hasn't come in yet. Considering the price of the older lenses, it's definitely worth grabbing a few. It's great to have the ability to get different looks from the vintage glass and the Panny/Oly pieces in my kit.

For example, I used the 50mm quite a bit during a recent wedding reception - and I think it really added a classic feel, where my Panasonic lens felt a bit more sterile.

 

[gk16blman]

I used to use Minolta glass years ago for film photography. Many other photographers would give me heck because I wasn't using Nikon and Canon. Well, when I got my GH2, I used a Fotodiox adapter and tried those old Minolta lens again. All I can say is they are really nice and worth pulling some off e-Bay. As mentioned earlier, the later MD lenses, (with the green locking tabs on them) are the last generation of Minolta lenses and have the best coating. They really are wonderful. Good bokahs. A nice, creamy film look without being absolutely super sharp, as some lenses tend to be.
Over the last 18months, I've collected most of the Minolta MD line. They stack up very well against Nikon AI and Canon FD glass. Many times better. Lens like the 24mm, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm and 20 mm are wonderful optics. It is unfortunate that they aren't wide enough to make the GH2 the equal of a 24mm lens on a 35mm film camera, but other than that, for less than one Olympus or Pannsonic lens, you can have 3-4 Minolta lenses. Also, the IDC follow focus for the GH2 is nice. The adjustable angled follow focus wheel can easily be positioned to use these manual lenses.

 

[Doctor Wu]

I have sets of FD's and MD's.
In general, the MD's are as good as the FD's optically and mechanically. The only real difference to me is that with Canon FD's you can get F/2.0 lenses (24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 100mm, 135mm) wherears Minolta never made F/2.0's for most of their focal lenghts other than their fast 50mm's and 85mm's (1.7 and 2.0).
Minolta did have their fast 35mm F/2 "HH" MC version. I own a copy and it is an excellent but rare lens.

So if you're happy with having a set of F/2.8's for some of those wides and longs, than go with MD and save bucks.

 

[Aki_Hartikainen]

Actually there is a Minolta MD 35 mm f1.8, which is supposed to be very good. It is a bit rare and fetches a good price in the ball-park of 150 dollars. This lens is on my to-get list.

Then there is the low cost pancake Minolta MD 45 mm f2.0, a very sharp tessar type lens but to my knowledge single coated only. Some flaring is inevitable when using this lens.