Support the channel on Patreon so I can make more lens videos! - www.patreon.com/mrbazreviews Follow me on Twitter - twitter.com/MrBazReviews Instagram - instagram.com/bazreviews/ Minolta 50mm F1.7 Amazon USA - amzn.to/31aDvNS
@theconstruct67 Yes prices vary on condition, so that's a fair price. It's a popular lens, there are a lot of them around (was a kit lens for the bodies hence why there are loads of them). Let me know how you find it, I think it's a great lens for the price - even outperforms some modern lenses
I have one of these because I got it for free with my A99. I have to say it isn't particularly sharp or contrasty until f/2.8 (the images in your review look like mine) and at f/4 it's excellent. I find it's a tricky lens to get truly creamy looking photos out of but in the right scenario at f/1.7 it can produce very retro looking results, particularly if you shoot into strong light. The colours are in particular very nice, I just wish I could get that reproduction on some of my other lenses, most of which are far better optically (even zooms).
Copies vary, so does focus accuracy. Even a slight miss at faster apertures is going to look bad. I'm not and never have been unhappy using it wide open. What people find acceptable wide open varies. I'm happy with this performance having used many other lenses (it craps all over the Canon 50mm F1.4 for example which genuinely is bad wide open). I did have the Sony 50mm 1.4, yes, it is a bit better wide open and is sharper - but it is loaded with tons of LoCA, which is very obvious, and I found to be invasive. I got rid of the Sony lens. This is one of the few I have kept, the other being the 100-200mm another unsung gem
Thank you!! I have the RS version. Love it. It's my very favorite lens. Just one correction, mine is from 89 and have the rubber ring. I know it's from 89 because it's marked on the lens.
@@MrBazReviews I picked up one from Ebay for $20 shipping included and it's a good copy. Suprisingly nice portrait lens on a crop censor Sony dslr. For optimum contrast I close it down to F2.2.
@@nandorblue I use it quite a lot if you have a good copy it's decent at F1.7, as with many 50mm's it sharpens up stopping down. It's better at F1.7 than the Canon 50mm F1.4 is at F2
@@MrBazReviews I had a canon 50mm F1.4 and if your copy is sharper at 1.7 than I had to try 2 more copies of the Minolta lens for comparisons. And lo and behold, the 3rd copy was significantly better. Sharp at 1.7 and also better contrast and better color. Now I use it at 1.7 most of the time with consistent result. Thanks.
@@nandorblue They do vary quite a bit, more than you would expect. Also some people have focus issues, which can add to the problem. A good copy of the F1.4 or F1.7 is very usable wide open, yes like most primes it improves stopping down, but shouldn't be super hazy or mushy as some report. The Canon 50mm I've used a few, generally it's not unusable IMO but it's not nearly as good as the Minolta's wide open or until F2.8, their F1.8 is more consistent I've always been happy with my copy of the 1.7, some have not but you can see yourself good ones are out there ;-D
I have 3 lenses for Minolta Maxxun 7000. One is a 50mm AF 1: 1.7. I am now using a Cannon 3ti DSLR. Is there an adapter available for me to use the Minolta lens on the Cannon
You can but you have to have one with a glass element. Like this www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995124-REG/fotodiox_sny_eos_g_pro_canon_eos_mount.html/reviews
Thanks, I think the common issue is copies do vary on all lenses, but with fast aperture ones like this - even a slight bit off on focus and it can look soft (lens is pretty good wide open least this copy). I prefer it to the 1.4 in terms of less CA issues, I had the Sony one and whilst it was overall a bit sharper, the cyan/magenta fringing in the out of focus areas was excessive, and distracting. But again copies vary on that too!
The f1. 4 version is way too expensive anyway. My f1. 7 is OK even wide open really, better by f2. 5. The 35 1.8 SAM is sharper wide open and generally a better focal length anyway. And inexpensive on the used market even at today's inflated ebay prices.
@@timatwater8247I had that lens it's pretty good, bit lightweight build but does a good close up too, and optically it was respectable. A mount has gone a bit weird, you can bag some really good deals on some lenses, yet some bodies are horribly overpriced even used. A99 costs more now than I paid years ago for a used one, A99II is crazy priced on the used market. Worth digging around a bit for things you might want.
@@MrBazReviews Yeah A mount will die slowly I guess. Full frame bodies still way over priced generally and even a lot of the apsc bodies. Just got an old A100 body for $75, we'll see if it actually works. Still looking for an A58 body at a realistic price. That's 10 years old now!
@@timatwater8247 USA prices are far better, you get deals there! Europe not so much! It doesn't matter if the stuff is still made, plenty of it around to use and buy even for decades to come. I bought into F Mount because the deals were unbeatable, D800's for way less than the A99 sells for, and some more lens selection. I still have some A mount bits left, I just wanted to expand things for other reviews and items, and just using A mount wasn't going to help there. It's a shame what happened, I think the mount deserved more attention and effort.
I have this lens, with my Maxxum 7000 and it seems to stop focusing once I back up "too far" from my subject. Not sure why that is, I'm suspecting old lenses like these might have a maximum focus distance? Any ideas?
Do you mean single or continuous AF? Max focus is infinity so that can't be the problem (check it's moving the full distance scale from close to far on the lens) use MF for this
Would you review the Minolta 24-105mm AF lens, please. I just bought a Sony A99 body and was wondering if I should get the 24-105mm to go with it. Thank you in advance.
I have done the test shots for the Minolta 24-105mm I just have to do more shooting with it, so the review is planned but it might be a bit before it's done. Is it worth getting at the price it sells yes...but there are some drawbacks vignetting is fairly notable, though reduces stopped down, distortion is fairly strong too. These are not show stoppers, just need to be aware of them. It's quite sharp and my copy is good at the 105mm wide open A99 doesn't have corrections for that lens. If you don't need the 24mm; I tend to use the 28-105mm RS as it is easier to work with less distortion, much less vignetting. Both lenses are sharp the 28-105mm has a slight edge in my testing, though I use both. Depends if you want the 24mm. I will have the review done, could be a coupe of weeks before it's finished (70-210mm is in progress first). Hope that helps
@@aiofilms I just posted the review on the 24-105mm D lens, it's quite in depth but should give you an idea of what to expect. Very much as I said above, but it might be useful if you want the 24mm coverage.
It's decent for the cost which is pretty low, I still have and use this lens it's more than good enough. The 1.4 is a little better, but not enough to worry about, it also tends to suffer from a lot more fringing (green/magenta), at least the Sony badged one does. I kept the 1.7 as I felt it was better suited to my needs
How long does it need for fungus to built it in the lens? I bought exact same from ebay, and the seller said that the lens was clean from any dust, fungus, and on the pictures looked clean too. Just got it today, and from what it seems, the lens got nice fungus inside, at least it looks like fungus, and plus some kind of leak inside the front glass. I took some picture and seems there's no problem with it at all. Will try someone who can clean this.
I suppose it could happen in a few weeks if the conditions were right, but it seems unlikely to me. I did buy a lens with fungus (quite mild), but I got them to clean it (eBay purchase), not a cheap lens I would add. Honestly I would just return it, Fungus is quite easy to spot, it spreads out in thin strands and patches. It needs the right conditions to do that ie high humidity/moisture, temperature. I have so far not had a lens get it when in my use, I'm not ultra careful but I get those dehumidifier packs in winter to absorb moisture. At the price this lens goes for I would return it, get another one. I still use this lens there are plenty around no shortage of choice.
You won't get AF unless you use an LEA4 adapter on Sony E mount bodies, or just use an A Mount body of course Any other system will be manual focus as it's screw driven
Can I get a automatic not manual adapter that connects my sony a6000 camera to a my minolta lense with 5 idk if they call it pin but it doesn't have 10 only 5 I work with mics most of the time.
The LA-EA4 which is the one for AF and aperture control. The EA3 won't AF but will control aperture and you have exif information. the new LA-EA5 won't AF screw drive on the A6000, only the A7RIV and A6600 - neither would be on my buy list personally. So the best bet is the LA-EA4, though you have limited AF points it at least works on all the E mount bodies. It's worth it if you have quite a few Minolta lenses, otherwise the manual ones are much lower cost and do the job
@@MrBazReviews I mean the mount that opens the lense I have a AF lens two big ones one small one I meant the mount that goes to the A6000 and connects to auto zoom focus and more they need to come out with one if they dont have it not only a lense connection mount they better pay me for saying this but nobody does
Yes it works on the A58 (and all A Mount bodies) Just remember it's about a 75mm field of view due to the 1.5x crop. If you need a 50mm equivalent the Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM is the one to go for (I have both use both)
Je l'ai depuis longtemps en argentique. Je l'ai ressorti sur un fuji X numérique, il est mauvais. A 1,7 affreux, mais il faut fermer presque jusqu’au bout pour qu'il dépasse le 50 mm Minolta macro à 2,8 !
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The 50mm F2.8 macro is a very different lens, it is excellent optically but it is F2.8. Unless you have a very poor copy of the 50mm F1.7, a good one is certainly usable wide open and extremely sharp stopped down. Copies of lenses can vary I was never unhappy with this one shot on 35mm or on digital FF or APS-C
@@fabcraft6383 The 2 highest resolution lenses by Minolta the 50mm and 100mm F2.8 macros. So nothing will touch them, but a good copy of the F1.7 is usable wide open, and gets very good F2 and closed down a bit more. If it's a bad copy it's bad try another one For crop sensor users the Sony 35mm F1.8 SAM is good, cheap built but optics are excellent
Support the channel on Patreon so I can make more lens videos! - www.patreon.com/mrbazreviews
Follow me on Twitter - twitter.com/MrBazReviews Instagram - instagram.com/bazreviews/
Minolta 50mm F1.7 Amazon USA - amzn.to/31aDvNS
@theconstruct67 Yes prices vary on condition, so that's a fair price. It's a popular lens, there are a lot of them around (was a kit lens for the bodies hence why there are loads of them). Let me know how you find it, I think it's a great lens for the price - even outperforms some modern lenses
Great job on the video Mr. Baz! Thanks for making it.
No problem, hope it helped. I still have this lens too like it quite a bit
I have one of these because I got it for free with my A99. I have to say it isn't particularly sharp or contrasty until f/2.8 (the images in your review look like mine) and at f/4 it's excellent. I find it's a tricky lens to get truly creamy looking photos out of but in the right scenario at f/1.7 it can produce very retro looking results, particularly if you shoot into strong light. The colours are in particular very nice, I just wish I could get that reproduction on some of my other lenses, most of which are far better optically (even zooms).
Copies vary, so does focus accuracy. Even a slight miss at faster apertures is going to look bad. I'm not and never have been unhappy using it wide open. What people find acceptable wide open varies. I'm happy with this performance having used many other lenses (it craps all over the Canon 50mm F1.4 for example which genuinely is bad wide open).
I did have the Sony 50mm 1.4, yes, it is a bit better wide open and is sharper - but it is loaded with tons of LoCA, which is very obvious, and I found to be invasive. I got rid of the Sony lens.
This is one of the few I have kept, the other being the 100-200mm another unsung gem
What is the cheapest superior lens you have? I have the Minolta AF maximum 35-105 and the 100-300. I am looking to get better lenses in the future.
I just ordered one of these from Amazon used for $26 USD to use on my Sony a55. I'm excited.
I like it quite a lot use it all the time on APS-C it's a good portrait lens, or for low light
@@MrBazReviews I'm even considering getting the f1.4 version, too. My Sony a55 is APS-C so it should be nice.
Sorry bro, have you the link of the 50mm?
I would like buy one
hi! I'm considering buying this for sony a33 (it's almost the same as a55). Do you think it's good?
Thank you!! I have the RS version. Love it. It's my very favorite lens. Just one correction, mine is from 89 and have the rubber ring. I know it's from 89 because it's marked on the lens.
I still is it often it's a gem for the crazy price it sells for
@@MrBazReviews I picked up one from Ebay for $20 shipping included and it's a good copy. Suprisingly nice portrait lens on a crop censor Sony dslr. For optimum contrast I close it down to F2.2.
@@nandorblue I use it quite a lot if you have a good copy it's decent at F1.7, as with many 50mm's it sharpens up stopping down. It's better at F1.7 than the Canon 50mm F1.4 is at F2
@@MrBazReviews I had a canon 50mm F1.4 and if your copy is sharper at 1.7 than I had to try 2 more copies of the Minolta lens for comparisons. And lo and behold, the 3rd copy was significantly better. Sharp at 1.7 and also better contrast and better color. Now I use it at 1.7 most of the time with consistent result. Thanks.
@@nandorblue They do vary quite a bit, more than you would expect. Also some people have focus issues, which can add to the problem. A good copy of the F1.4 or F1.7 is very usable wide open, yes like most primes it improves stopping down, but shouldn't be super hazy or mushy as some report.
The Canon 50mm I've used a few, generally it's not unusable IMO but it's not nearly as good as the Minolta's wide open or until F2.8, their F1.8 is more consistent
I've always been happy with my copy of the 1.7, some have not but you can see yourself good ones are out there ;-D
Sony A900 и minolta af 50mm f1, 7 лучшая связка!
It's a good lens for that camera at low cost
I have 3 lenses for Minolta Maxxun 7000. One is a 50mm AF 1: 1.7.
I am now using a Cannon 3ti DSLR. Is there an adapter available for me to use the Minolta lens on the Cannon
You can but you have to have one with a glass element. Like this
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995124-REG/fotodiox_sny_eos_g_pro_canon_eos_mount.html/reviews
Hi Sir, would you recommend the 50mm or 28mm for general travel photography? Laurie
I like both focal lengths and have primes for 28 and 50mm. For general travel perhaps a zoom is a better choice? 28- something is fairly affordable.
I use the Minolta 50mm f1.7 on a Sony A5000 and it loves the camera
I've a lot of time for the lens use it often the fact it's bargain priced is a nice bonus!
does the autofocus work on an emount?
@@littlewarriorellis pretty late reply to this comment, but I don’t think so since it’s a screw driven af
@@littlewarriorellisyou need the La ea 2 adapter then it will work
Good general review, I've always thought this lens was a bit underrated. Some excellent portraits too by the way.
Thanks, I think the common issue is copies do vary on all lenses, but with fast aperture ones like this - even a slight bit off on focus and it can look soft (lens is pretty good wide open least this copy). I prefer it to the 1.4 in terms of less CA issues, I had the Sony one and whilst it was overall a bit sharper, the cyan/magenta fringing in the out of focus areas was excessive, and distracting. But again copies vary on that too!
The f1. 4 version is way too expensive anyway. My f1. 7 is OK even wide open really, better by f2. 5. The 35 1.8 SAM is sharper wide open and generally a better focal length anyway. And inexpensive on the used market even at today's inflated ebay prices.
@@timatwater8247I had that lens it's pretty good, bit lightweight build but does a good close up too, and optically it was respectable. A mount has gone a bit weird, you can bag some really good deals on some lenses, yet some bodies are horribly overpriced even used. A99 costs more now than I paid years ago for a used one, A99II is crazy priced on the used market. Worth digging around a bit for things you might want.
@@MrBazReviews Yeah A mount will die slowly I guess. Full frame bodies still way over priced generally and even a lot of the apsc bodies. Just got an old A100 body for $75, we'll see if it actually works. Still looking for an A58 body at a realistic price. That's 10 years old now!
@@timatwater8247 USA prices are far better, you get deals there! Europe not so much! It doesn't matter if the stuff is still made, plenty of it around to use and buy even for decades to come. I bought into F Mount because the deals were unbeatable, D800's for way less than the A99 sells for, and some more lens selection. I still have some A mount bits left, I just wanted to expand things for other reviews and items, and just using A mount wasn't going to help there.
It's a shame what happened, I think the mount deserved more attention and effort.
Have one. Great lens! Thanks!
I still use it and I've always liked it, thanks for the comment
I have this lens, with my Maxxum 7000 and it seems to stop focusing once I back up "too far" from my subject. Not sure why that is, I'm suspecting old lenses like these might have a maximum focus distance? Any ideas?
Do you mean single or continuous AF? Max focus is infinity so that can't be the problem (check it's moving the full distance scale from close to far on the lens) use MF for this
Would you review the Minolta 24-105mm AF lens, please. I just bought a Sony A99 body and was wondering if I should get the 24-105mm to go with it. Thank you in advance.
I have done the test shots for the Minolta 24-105mm I just have to do more shooting with it, so the review is planned but it might be a bit before it's done. Is it worth getting at the price it sells yes...but there are some drawbacks vignetting is fairly notable, though reduces stopped down, distortion is fairly strong too. These are not show stoppers, just need to be aware of them. It's quite sharp and my copy is good at the 105mm wide open
A99 doesn't have corrections for that lens. If you don't need the 24mm; I tend to use the 28-105mm RS as it is easier to work with less distortion, much less vignetting. Both lenses are sharp the 28-105mm has a slight edge in my testing, though I use both.
Depends if you want the 24mm. I will have the review done, could be a coupe of weeks before it's finished (70-210mm is in progress first). Hope that helps
Mr Baz Reviews Wow, thanks for the detailed reply. That’s almost good enough for my decision. Please continue your good work. All the best.
@@aiofilms I just posted the review on the 24-105mm D lens, it's quite in depth but should give you an idea of what to expect. Very much as I said above, but it might be useful if you want the 24mm coverage.
Mr Baz Reviews Wow, thanks a lot.
Nice photos, seems to be a great lens.
It's decent for the cost which is pretty low, I still have and use this lens it's more than good enough.
The 1.4 is a little better, but not enough to worry about, it also tends to suffer from a lot more fringing (green/magenta), at least the Sony badged one does. I kept the 1.7 as I felt it was better suited to my needs
You can get some great artistic photos at the closest focus distance
I still use this lens, I like it quite a lot - yes you can do a fair bit with the shallow DOF
How long does it need for fungus to built it in the lens? I bought exact same from ebay, and the seller said that the lens was clean from any dust, fungus, and on the pictures looked clean too. Just got it today, and from what it seems, the lens got nice fungus inside, at least it looks like fungus, and plus some kind of leak inside the front glass.
I took some picture and seems there's no problem with it at all. Will try someone who can clean this.
I suppose it could happen in a few weeks if the conditions were right, but it seems unlikely to me. I did buy a lens with fungus (quite mild), but I got them to clean it (eBay purchase), not a cheap lens I would add.
Honestly I would just return it, Fungus is quite easy to spot, it spreads out in thin strands and patches. It needs the right conditions to do that ie high humidity/moisture, temperature.
I have so far not had a lens get it when in my use, I'm not ultra careful but I get those dehumidifier packs in winter to absorb moisture.
At the price this lens goes for I would return it, get another one. I still use this lens there are plenty around no shortage of choice.
Just got this lens! Going to do a video on it about how I found it
Do I'll keep a look out for that if it's as good as this copy I think you'll like it
Mr Baz Reviews I will send a link what’s the video is up
i have a sony A57 and this lens. great lens
I still have the lens and use it, something I like about it no question. A57 is a decent little body I had a few of them
Hi. I bought this exact lens but the autofocus is not working. I am using it with Fujifilm XT20 and K&F concept lens adapter. Please help
You won't get AF unless you use an LEA4 adapter on Sony E mount bodies, or just use an A Mount body of course
Any other system will be manual focus as it's screw driven
I have sony alpha7 (this lens its working at my camera?
A7 is E mount so you need an adapter to use this.
Nice review thx
Can I get a automatic not manual adapter that connects my sony a6000 camera to a my minolta lense with 5 idk if they call it pin but it doesn't have 10 only 5 I work with mics most of the time.
The LA-EA4 which is the one for AF and aperture control. The EA3 won't AF but will control aperture and you have exif information. the new LA-EA5 won't AF screw drive on the A6000, only the A7RIV and A6600 - neither would be on my buy list personally. So the best bet is the LA-EA4, though you have limited AF points it at least works on all the E mount bodies. It's worth it if you have quite a few Minolta lenses, otherwise the manual ones are much lower cost and do the job
@@MrBazReviews I mean the mount that opens the lense I have a AF lens two big ones one small one I meant the mount that goes to the A6000 and connects to auto zoom focus and more they need to come out with one if they dont have it not only a lense connection mount they better pay me for saying this but nobody does
@@matchelometropolis6558 You mean the Xi power zoom Minolta lenses?
Hi there! Would this work with a Sony a350 or do I need a secondary adaptor?
Works fine with it no adaptor needed, only E mount for the adaptor
Mr Baz Reviews Thankyou!!
Hi! Are you using an A-mount camera or is this adapted to another mount?
Using it on A mount cameras, though you can get adapters for other mounts ie E, X etc
Is there adapter for cannon m50?
K&F do one I'm sure others do
www.kentfaith.com/KF06.158_minolta-af-to-canon-eos-m-mount-adapter
Does it work with Sony a74?
Only with the LA-EA5 adapter, or you can use a basic one for manual focus
Does it work in a Minokta X-700?
No that is SR Mount you want the 50mm F1.7MD the optical design is quite close to this (I've used both of them)
@@MrBazReviews Thank you so much!!!
Which body have you used here?
Subbed.
👋
The Dynax 5 and 7 film body (7 is Alpha Japan model). Photos are either A99, A57, A77 - I got the A77ii after this
does it works on the sony a6300?
You need A to E mount adapter
nope, Sony a6300 isE mount lens type you Need a A mount adeptur then its work
Is this lens Radioactive?
Not that I am aware off some of the manual focus ones were (various makers) a few MD mount ones. Not seen any Minolta AF ones noted for this.
Does it support sony a58
Yes it works on the A58 (and all A Mount bodies)
Just remember it's about a 75mm field of view due to the 1.5x crop. If you need a 50mm equivalent the Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM is the one to go for (I have both use both)
i have a sony A57 it is work no any issue .
I'm deseperatly searching for this Lens
Do you use eBay quite a lot of them around, or try camera shops it's a common lens as it was a kit lens on the early film bodies.
@@MrBazReviews i can't be delivered by eBay on most of this Lens in my country, and Shop don't have it
this lens is actually almost all metal and glass
No it's mostly plastic on the outer body, thick plastic with a metal mount.
Je l'ai depuis longtemps en argentique. Je l'ai ressorti sur un fuji X numérique, il est mauvais. A 1,7 affreux, mais il faut fermer presque jusqu’au bout pour qu'il dépasse le 50 mm Minolta macro à 2,8 !
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The 50mm F2.8 macro is a very different lens, it is excellent optically but it is F2.8. Unless you have a very poor copy of the 50mm F1.7, a good one is certainly usable wide open and extremely sharp stopped down. Copies of lenses can vary I was never unhappy with this one shot on 35mm or on digital FF or APS-C
@@MrBazReviews Maybe but I compared: 1.7 is very vague. It must close to half to exceed the 2.8 of the macro. After the macro is even better.
@@fabcraft6383 The 2 highest resolution lenses by Minolta the 50mm and 100mm F2.8 macros. So nothing will touch them, but a good copy of the F1.7 is usable wide open, and gets very good F2 and closed down a bit more. If it's a bad copy it's bad try another one
For crop sensor users the Sony 35mm F1.8 SAM is good, cheap built but optics are excellent