Minolta MD / MC Switcheroo

[photophorous]

I could use some advice from any Minolta shooters out there. I ordered a 24mm f2.8 MD Rokkor lens, but I received the MC version (I think it's the 2nd MC version). It seems to be in good shape, but I based my decision to buy it on all the good reviews I read of the MD version. I don't know much about the MC version. I should probably return it out of principle, but I'd eat the shipping costs, and this lens is in great condition. I'm not sure I should mess with a good thing, if you know what I mean. I'd hate to end up with an MD that's in worse condition, assuming they are otherwise equal. I'm rambling, but you get the idea. Please let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Paul

[SolaresLarrave]

I can't recall if the MC and MD mounts are identical. I do know that the MD and the X mounts are... I'd keep it, or sell it later. After all, the price for these lenses isn't really as high as it is for, say, Nikon AF glass.

I used to own a Minolta X370s. It was my very first serious camera... and only kept it for about a year. I sold it to someone who lives now in Alaska, was raised in DeKalb, and wanted it for his daughter.

[photophorous]

Thanks for the response Francisco. The mount is not a problem. It will work just fine on my X370s. I'm just not sure if the quality of the lens is the same. I know the newer MD lenses have newer coatings, but I don't know what that really matters or how much difference there is. I assume it's the same optically, but I'm not really sure.

[IGMeanwell]

MD and MC are the lens coatings

The mounts are the same

MD was a slightly less expensive coating for Minolta to produce, but considered on par with the MC coatings ... but their are differing opinions on that point

In some instances the optical formula was changed in some MD lenses

[eric]

Have you tried rokkorfiles.com ?
I believe the MD is the mount for X series cameras. It has an extra tab. I think rokkorfiles has the listing of MD and MC mount lenses that has the same lens formulas.
I prefer the older lenses though since I only shoot B&W.

[roundg]

The MC Rokkor SI 24mm/2.8 is a legendary lens among Minolta SLR lens. The optical formula continued till early MD age (MD lens with 55mm filter thread). After that it has been redesigned to adapt to 49mm filter thread.

Both MC and MD 24mm are great lens. But I prefer MC for the best building quality. The later MD is a bit of plastic.

The only restriction with a MC is that u can't use it under P mode with X700 or S mode with XD.

Cheers,
Robin

[ath]

The only restriction with a MC is that u can't use it under P mode with X700 or S mode with XD.

Cheers,
Robin

Actually, you can use them in P or S mode (and I do so frequently with my MC's on my XD7 (aka XD11)).
The only disadvantage is, that the indication in the viewfinder is wrong. With some lenses you could get exposure errors in case the aperture mechanism is too slow (not with the XD because of the final stopped down check).

[photophorous]

Hi Everyone,

I appreciate all the comments. I know the MD version of this lens (with 55mm filter thread) is supposed to be great, I just wasn't sure about the MC version. Rokkor files is one of the places I read such good things about the MD version, but he doesn't mention the MC version. Compatibility is not my concern. It will work just fine on my X-370s, which doesn't have P mode. Even if I get an X-700, I probably will only use aperture priority and manual mode.

It sounds like this lens is probably just as good as the MD version, so I'll probably hang on to it.

Thanks,
Paul

[KoNickon]

The coatings probably are better on the MD lenses, but I think the MCs were multicoated also. MD is to MC much the way the Canon FD bayonet is to the Canon FD breech mounts -- newer, improved coatings, smaller size and lower weight.

I have a number of the MC Rokkors and get great results with them.

[photophorous]

Thanks, KoNickon.

Do you think the MC versions have a lower value on the used market? I wonder if I should just ask for a partial refund to make up the difference.

I sent an email to the seller to ask if they could check their inventory and verify that they actually do have the lens I ordered. If so, I'm sending it back for an exchange, but if not, maybe I'll see if they'll give me a partial refund. I don't know if they'd go for that though.

Paul

[laptoprob]

I wouldn't be surprised if the MC is better in build quality and optical performance. They very often are. If that 24mm is kinda rare in MC I would keep it or compare it to a MD if one comes along.
I changed my 50/1,4 MD for an MC version. Major differences are in favor of production cost and AE/program capabilities like in the X700.

[grainy_shadows]

I wouldn't be surprised if the MC is better in build quality and optical performance. They very often are. If that 24mm is kinda rare in MC I would keep it or compare it to a MD if one comes along.
I changed my 50/1,4 MD for an MC version. Major differences are in favor of production cost and AE/program capabilities like in the X700.

why did u change to the MC version?

[laptoprob]

why did u change to the MC version?

Uhhh... quite some time ago now. IIRC the OOF was more pleasing in the MC. But I might be mistaken. Years ago now...

[rover]

It appears the MC and MD lenses are both 9 elements in 7 groups so I am assuming they are the same optical formula.
http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/body_li.html

Rokkor Files does not mention a formula change until the late MD stage, so it sounds like the difference in your MC lens to the MD 55mm filter ring lens is the changes in lens coatings.
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm.html

That said, in general I would agree with the others that the build quality of the MC lenses was excellent compared to the MD lenses.

[eric]

Uhhh... quite some time ago now. IIRC the OOF was more pleasing in the MC. But I might be mistaken. Years ago now...

This is what I heard too. Maybe that's why, subconciously, I like my MC lenses more.

[photophorous]

I have one other MC lens, the 50/1.4 PG. That one and the 24mm both have fantastic build quality. The 24mm is actually a little bigger and heavier than the 50mm. It's solid.

So, how much difference do you guys think the coatings make? Are the MC coatings good enough? I'll be using it mostly for landscapes, shooting color slides, but I'm sure I'll put some B&W through it too.

Thanks,
Paul

[kuzano]

I have a nasty suspicion you may have gotten the VCF 24mm f2.8 MC Rokkor. If so, I'd hush up about the error. You got a far better lens than the MD, primarily because of the better build quality, if not the VCF feature. Your lens should be worth more in the market based on this Rokkorfiles page... but only to knowledgable Minolta fans.

See this page:
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm%20VFC.htm

The only piece you are missing is the P tab.... but you ain't shooting in Program anyway...............................ARE YOU!!!

[kuzano]

Here's another post showing the MC, which states that Leica liked the MC 24mm glass so much they used it in their Elmarit 24mm lens.

http://members.aol.com/xkaes/2428.htm

[photophorous]

I have a nasty suspicion you may have gotten the VCF 24mm f2.8 MC Rokkor. If so, I'd hush up about the error. You got a far better lens than the MD, primarily because of the better build quality, if not the VCF feature. Your lens should be worth more in the market based on this Rokkorfiles page... but only to knowledgable Minolta fans.

See this page:
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/24mm%20VFC.htm

The only piece you are missing is the P tab.... but you ain't shooting in Program anyway...............................ARE YOU!!!

There was a brief moment of excitement last night when I remembered the VFC version and rushed to check my lens, but alas, no it is only the MC SI version. But, from what I've read and from what others have said, it sounds like a great lens, so I'll probably just keep it. I'll try it out and if for some reason I don't like it, I can probably sell it for about what I paid, considering that it's not as common as the MD and it's in great shape.

Thanks for commenting.

And no, I'm not shooting in Program mode. Usually manual, but aperture priority is the only auto mode I like. :cool:

Paul

[rover]

Here's another post showing the MC, which states that Leica liked the MC 24mm glass so much they used it in their Elmarit 24mm lens.

http://members.aol.com/xkaes/2428.htm

That is what I was looking for, and good news for Paul.

[laptoprob]

this link (http://www.paulfvs.dds.nl/lenstest.html) shows a comparison in sharpness between various MC and MD lenses.
Another change between the versions may be the effort to make the sharpness more universal from mid- picture to the edges. Even at the cost of absolute center sharpness.

[IGMeanwell]

In another thread there was an article regarding the Minolta philosophy behind sharpness, which is more towards that of Leica and not so much Zeiss

http://www.dyxum.com/columns/dPhotoworld/Historical_perspective_Minolta_lens_design_philoso phy.asp

I never realized there could be differing philosophies on a how one would perceive sharpness ... but obviously there is

If Minolta actually kept the Rokkor philosophy with their AF lenses, I would be using Sony DSLRs right now instead of Nikon, but when it comes to digital I prefer the modern Nikkor lenses.

[photophorous]

this link (http://www.paulfvs.dds.nl/lenstest.html) shows a comparison in sharpness between various MC and MD lenses.
Another change between the versions may be the effort to make the sharpness more universal from mid- picture to the edges. Even at the cost of absolute center sharpness.

I looked at this link when I was shopping for a 50mm and it's part of the reason I chose the MC PG version. But, just like most of the other links I've looked at, there is no data for the MC 24mm...only the MD version.

[photophorous]

In another thread there was an article regarding the Minolta philosophy behind sharpness, which is more towards that of Leica and not so much Zeiss

http://www.dyxum.com/columns/dPhotoworld/Historical_perspective_Minolta_lens_design_philoso phy.asp

I never realized there could be differing philosophies on a how one would perceive sharpness ... but obviously there is

If Minolta actually kept the Rokkor philosophy with their AF lenses, I would be using Sony DSLRs right now instead of Nikon, but when it comes to digital I prefer the modern Nikkor lenses.

That was an interesting read. Thanks for posting the link. I think my head is going to explode now. :eek:

[kubilai]

MD added Programm mode to MC ; not a coating indication.

I have the MD last version and love it : it is my first lens with SLR.

See : http://www.dg77.net/photo/x500/md24.htm

I think you will enjoy this good lens (some say better than Nikkor equivalent), for a very useful focal length.

[chikne]

Here's another post showing the MC, which states that Leica liked the MC 24mm glass so much they used it in their Elmarit 24mm lens.

http://members.aol.com/xkaes/2428.htm

Does VFC of make a lot of difference on a 24mm?

[IGMeanwell]

Does VFC of make a lot of difference on a 24mm?


Depends on who you speak to ... some say its gimmicky and some say it manipulates the curvature to satisfy every taste

Unfortunately its not part of my arsenal

[dee]

... now buy a Leica M8 and adapter and use your marvelous , '' Leitz - like '' 24mm Rokkor digitally ! MC / MD both are underated lenses [ much better tonally than Nikon or Canon , but don't tell anyone !

dee