Canon fd S.S.C 50MM 1.4 or Minolta MD rokkor 50mm 1.4?

[asimkalkan]

used Canon but i sold it and i miss it very much now :/ but i also think how Minolta md is. Which one is better?

And what about Minolta MD 50mm 1.2?

Sent from my Lubitel 2 using Tapatalk 2

 

[kevistopheles]

Better is a subjective term...I had the later FD 50/1.4 (twice in fact) and have an MC Rokkor 50/1.4 and I prefer the Rokkor. I wouldn't say it's better than the Canon it just has some things that I like better (like build quality and the way the Rokkors are color matched so my Rokkor 50's, 24, 100 and 35-70 all look the same). That said I would put the FD 50/1.4 as one of the top three fast 50's I've had.

Optically the Minolta MC 50/1.4 and MD 50/1.4 are the same, the MD is supposed to have slightly better coatings. MC's might be a bit cheaper on the used market. Depending on what you are looking for the Can FL 50/1.4 is supposed to be excellent and of course the "Japanese Summilux" LTM 50/1.4 is excellent. The Minolta 50/1.2 is gorgeous and HUGE lens. You can find a Canon FL 50/1.2 for a lot less. I think there is even one for sale of the boards if I remember correctly.

 

[Ad Dieleman]

Optically the Minolta MC 50/1.4 and MD 50/1.4 are the same, the MD is supposed to have slightly better coatings.

According to several sources they have a different design. My samples behave quite differently, too. One of the more reliable sources (I think) says about the first MD Rokkor 50/1.4 model, and I quote: "The first new lens for MD, not simply an up-date of the preceding fast 50mm. While the optical formula is the same, it is a more compact lens, and not quite as superb over-all as the MC." My MD Rokkor 50/1.4 is superb between f/4 and f/8, while the MC is outclassing every other lens I know at f/2.

 

[kevistopheles]

According to several sources they have a different design. My samples behave quite differently, too. One of the more reliable sources (I think) says about the first MD Rokkor 50/1.4 model, and I quote: "The first new lens for MD, not simply an up-date of the preceding fast 50mm. While the optical formula is the same, it is a more compact lens, and not quite as superb over-all as the MC." My MD Rokkor 50/1.4 is superb between f/4 and f/8, while the MC is outclassing every other lens I know at f/2.

Agreed...I should have been more clear when I wrote that. When I said the same optically I just meant same optical formula. I wasn't even thinking about any changes in overall design. I myself prefer the MC 50/1.4 because of it's build quality overall feel. Clearly I had the history wrong. I always thought the redesign happened when the went to the 49mm filter threads. This is how I thought the the Minolta 50's evolved...

1. The Rokkor-X PG MC 50/1.4
(1973) - 7 elements in 5 groups, 55mm filter, 305g

2. The Rokkor MD 50/1.4
(1977) - 7 elements in 5 groups, 55mm filter, 245g

3. The Rokkor MD 50/1.4
(1979) - 7 elements in 6 groups, 49mm filter, 220g

4. The MD 50/1.4
(1981) - 7 elements in 6 groups, 49mm filter, 235g

Thanks for the heads up.

Kevin

 

[nianys]

I never had the FD 1.4, I have a 1.8 unit that is absolutely brilliant, and a Rokkor MC 1.4 which is just fantastic. I know the Canons a little bit as I have the FL 55/1.2, FL 85/1.8, and have had the FL 50/1.8. My observation is that while they are not as nice looking as other legacies, the FD's are optically hard to beat. My all have a metal feel and handle very nicely.
The MC Rokkor 1.4 is a very special animal on its own. Wide open it has a special softness with a "glow", but stopped down to F2 it's painfully sharp, with gorgeous color and contrast, and lovely bokeh. Plus the handling of the focusing ring is almost unmatched, save for the Takumar lenses.
So as Kevin stated "better" is gonna be totally a matter of personal preference, and nobody can decide in your place what is the most important.
After testing countless 50ish lenses I now have found my favorite one, the one that has made me wanna stop searching and just enjoy it, but it might be entirely different for someone else. That's the catch, most of those lenses are very good, and you have to decide for yourself...

 

[Dioptrick]

So as Kevin stated "better" is gonna be totally a matter of personal preference, and nobody can decide in your place what is the most important.
After testing countless 50ish lenses I now have found my favorite one, the one that has made me wanna stop searching and just enjoy it, but it might be entirely different for someone else. That's the catch, most of those lenses are very good, and you have to decide for yourself...

That's the bottom line right there. Nicely put.

I have to say that I have enjoyed reading through your 50mm odyssey Nianys, thanks for sharing your experiences and personal findings.

 

[nianys]

That's the bottom line right there. Nicely put.

I have to say that I have enjoyed reading through your 50mm odyssey Nianys, thanks for sharing your experiences and personal findings.

It's been an odissey indeed ! I don't know how long before the bug bites me again, but for now I'm so ecstatic with my perfect nifty I don't feel the need to investigate other options. What I feel great about is knowing those beautiful lenses I have collected can be adapted on any mirrorless camera i fancy to try <grin>

 

[asimkalkan]

Thanx for all your comments. bought Konica Hexanon AR 57mm 1.4

Accidentally i found it in ebay with its camera for 52$ then i bought.

Have anyone used this?

 

[eno789]

Not it's intended use, but even with a close-up lens on top, it's plenty sharp: see samples https://www.talkemount.com/f12/hibiscus-1239/