I've been wanting to go full-frame for a while now and had Minolta glass before that wanting creeped into my mind. I knew there was the Metabones but laughed at the $600 or so price tag and so I was ecstatic to see the results of the Lens Turbo. While having the Minolta Rokkor PG 50/1.4 has been amazing, I simply can't see me loving the MD Lens Turbo with all the semi-negative reviews it has received while the Canon seems to have much less problems. Whats even worse is that I have 2 very good MD Teleconverters I got for a good price each that work flawlessly (minus the crap Albinar Vivitar 200mm that doesn't focus to infinity sharply that I've been using with it). But after learning that they won't work with the famous Minolta Sony-Alpha Mount Beercan, I have lost hope of going full-Minolta. So now I want to start anew and get the Canon Lens Turbo, a Canon-equivalent of Minolta's famous W Rokkor-X 24mm 2.8 Wide Angle, a Canon-equivalent of Minolta's famous 70-210mm f/4 Beercan, and a Canon-equivalent of Minolta's famous Rokkor PG 50mm 1.4. Can someone point me in the right direction with each of these? Although I'm going to go full-canon, I will keep 1 teleconverter and my 50/1.4...unless someone wants it. What also sucks is that I just sent off my Canon AF 70-210 f/4.5...but it wasnt sharp enough for my liking when taking moon photos. NOTE: Just for some extra help in you helping me, I want to use the 24mm for starry landscapes, the 50mm for all-around and portraits, and the 70-210 for mostly moon photos.