Minolta glass on Brevis

Tokarsky

New member
I just picked up a Brevis adapter, I have a Nikon mount on it, and an EOS mount in my bag. I am currently doing test shoots with the adapter using some non-high end Nikon glass. I have a Minolta SLR, MD mount. Which I have toooonnns of lenses for, what I would like to know is: how many Brevis users out there use Minolta glass, and in anyones opinion, is it worth running the Minolta glass just because of their quality? Or will I run into any sort of issues with these lenses? I'm running the Brevis on an HVX200 by the way.
 
I have an HPX170 and huge amount of Minolta lenses as well. I'd love to use them on an adapter. I realize I offer no help to your question but someone who can answer now has twice the motivation!
 
I just picked up a Brevis adapter, I have a Nikon mount on it, and an EOS mount in my bag. I am currently doing test shoots with the adapter using some non-high end Nikon glass. I have a Minolta SLR, MD mount. Which I have toooonnns of lenses for, what I would like to know is: how many Brevis users out there use Minolta glass, and in anyones opinion, is it worth running the Minolta glass just because of their quality? Or will I run into any sort of issues with these lenses? I'm running the Brevis on an HVX200 by the way.

I don't know. I think you'll get more performance out of the Nikkor ED 35mm film glass and Canon EOS glass (if you're okay with its focus rotation direction) than Minolta MD glass on a DOF adapter. Things that come to mind of what to try on a DOF adapter is Rollei, Takumar, Leica M, Leica R, Nikon's rangefinder 1.0 glass. Kinoptic lenses for various mounts.
 
The minolta adapter is cheap. if you already have the glass, of course buy the adapter then decide if you like the glass. it'll always give you lens choices. i've never heard anything bad about Minolta glass. - why are you hesitating?
 
I've got my original Minolta Rokkor lenses from (and I'll age myself here) my first SLR camera, a Minolta X-7A. They work very well on the adapter. I've said it quite a few times but good glass is always a good investment.

Technology has made the greatest difference at very wide angles (like 16-24mm) but the 35mm and up focal length stuff still tests out solid. One of our pals, Bill Frakes showed us two Nikon 300mm f2 lenses that he carries...older but still world class optics and worth something like 27K each...gulp.
 
I am personally a huge fan of Minolta. Probably the biggest fan you'll ever meet. I own almost every prime minolta lens (MD/MC mount) from 16mm to 300mm and have used almost every other one too. And I will personally say, they are some of the best lenses ive ever used.

Minolta definitely has the BEST bokeh and sharpness ive ever seen in the price range. I mean the most Ive ever spent on a minolta lens is on the 135mm f/2.0 and yet it was still under $400.00 and i have found it to work MUCH better than the Canon FD and Nikon MF 135mm f/2.0 plus the minolta lenses have better bokeh that simulates the feel of film.

Its strange in my mind that not many people use minolta, they really are amazing. and not to mention, very inexpensive!

If you ever need advice on minolta lenses, they're specs, comparison charts, or test footage. Im your guy to come to.

A good place to start would also to check out Rokkorfiles.com, it has a lot of great info on minolta brand rokkor lenses. But I also own and have a lot of knowledge on off brand minolta lenses.

Good luck! Minolta lenses are amazing for 35mm adapters!!!!! even in the 17mm through 28mm range, they are superb. Dont be fooled, minolta is the hidden pearl of lenses hahaha.
 
I've got my original Minolta Rokkor lenses from (and I'll age myself here) my first SLR camera, a Minolta X-7A. They work very well on the adapter. I've said it quite a few times but good glass is always a good investment.

Technology has made the greatest difference at very wide angles (like 16-24mm) but the 35mm and up focal length stuff still tests out solid. One of our pals, Bill Frakes showed us two Nikon 300mm f2 lenses that he carries...older but still world class optics and worth something like 27K each...gulp.


27k!!! O man! haahaha, I have all these lenses for an XG-7 outfit of my dad's, and next to no money for nice nikon(which would be put to more use on and off the adapter) glass. Plus there are a wide variety of zooms and primes, which is temping me alot to use the MD lenses. I'll just have to shop around a bit I suppose for Nikon glass.
 
Nikon glass has been most common for the adapters because they are very common and they're good, but most SLR's also had very good glass. There's no reason to lust after Nikon's if you have that stuff available.
 
exactly, Nikon and Canon are just VERY popular, so everyone runs to them first, but what people don't realize is that many other lens companies were using the same glass and designs and a lot of time, making better lenses than canon and nikon, but people dont often notice this. Like minolta, soligor, pentax, ect.

Of course modern glass is far better today, but what we dont realize is that many lenses are BETTER than our what cameras or adapters can even register, while older cheaper MF glass is not as good, but STILL way better than what many cameras and adapters can register, so why bother paying the money for nicer glass? the important part is speed, contrast, bokeh and sharpness in my mind. and Minolta nails it while sometimes nikon and canon can even lack in those areas, actually a lot of the time they do.
 
Nikon glass has been most common for the adapters because they are very common and they're good, but most SLR's also had very good glass. There's no reason to lust after Nikon's if you have that stuff available.

True, hahaha, I am just so used to seeing and hearing people talk up Canon and Nikon glass so much, hahaha. I would like to see some test and comparisons between the three(Canon, Nikon, Minolt) just to see what, if any difference there may or may not be in the various image the lenses produce. I really would rather spend the 60 or 70 bucks on the Brevis MD mount than 270 on a nice lens when the MD ones I have are just as nice, hahaha. I'm too indecisive with choosing equipment sometimes. I mean, it took me like 5 months to decide what adapter I was going to look for, let alone buy one...
 
We've tested quite a few 50mm lenses, including older Nikon f1.4, Canon FD f1.4 and Minolta MD f1.4 glass. It's a wash really between the three in terms of adapter use. We've never tested anything we liked better than the Zeiss Zf optics we sell...but they're not cheap. The difference in terms of contrast and color on the Zeiss optics is very obvious.

A general rule is that if you can find older fast primes in good shape, chances are they are quite good. Every manufacturer has also realeased "crap" from time to time, so by all means google some lens reviews first!
 
Back
Top