Alex Krasotkin
Well-known
Guys, just got Minolta Rokkor M 40/2 in LN condition (the latest version with a serial number on a barrel) for my M10. So nice and tiny lens! Sharp at f/2. What is your experience with this creature?
Many thanks,
Alex
Many thanks,
Alex
maddoc
... likes film again.
One of my favorite lenses of many years. Sharper than my 35 mm Summicron v3. Good color rendition, contrast and minimal distortion. However, I sold it went back to the 40mm Summicron-C, which is a lower contrast lens and more unbalanced (sharper in the center than the corners of the frame)
cboy
Well-known
Beautiful old school rendering that is sharp but not clinical and has a subtle vibrance to the color rendition. I sometimes regret selling it. However if your picky about framing id suggest to pick up a 40mm viewfinder otherwise youll find yourself cropping lol.
albertospa
Established
The 40 Rokkor is a great lens. I bought it for my M3 as I wanted a very compact, bright lens that used the entire viewfinder. I use it with great satisfaction also on M10. It has a very nice blur, right contrast, great colors. I have one of the latest versions, perhaps slightly more contrasted than the Summicron version.
Guth
Appreciative User
I too own the latest version of this lens so will be following along with this thread with some interest. I acquired the lens along with a Minolta CLE last year. Not long afterwards I picked up a M-Rokkor 28/2.8 lens and have been using it exclusively with the CLE ever since. It provides an interesting alternative to the 35mm Summicron that I use on my M6. At some point I'll get around to using the M-Rokkor 40/2 lens. (I often take both cameras out with me and am using the CLE for color film while using the M6 for B&W film.)
BWF
Established
It’s a great lens. Excellent colors. I think of it as a “rendering” lens but it’s also really sharp. Small and well built. I had it adjusted to bring up 35mm frame lines. I will never sell this lens.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Nothing special on digital and on film. The only special is its size. Odd FOV for correct framelines like on M4-2. Good match for crappy 35 mm framelines like from M4-P. It was more accurate with this lens on M-E 220 than with 35mm lenses.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
I got one earlier this year and I shot a couple of rolls (Tri-x) on my M6.
Framing using the 35mm (I wear glasses) seems spot on.
It makes a very nice and compact combo.
Very happy with it.
Sorry, I don't have any print or scan on hand.
Enjoy the little and super light weight lens.
Cheers
Giulio
Framing using the 35mm (I wear glasses) seems spot on.
It makes a very nice and compact combo.
Very happy with it.
Sorry, I don't have any print or scan on hand.
Enjoy the little and super light weight lens.
Cheers
Giulio
Rich1950
Member
The Minolta CLE 40/2 is my most used lens. I used the Minolta optic with the MP 35mm frameline. The two are a near perfect match.
I tested the lens against a mint 35/2 v2 Summicron. Subject was 6 ft from camera and I evaluated on negative the edge sharpness and blur. The 40/2 is sharper at f/2.8 and by f/5.6 the two are the same. There is a tiny difference between the two lenses at f/4. Both lenses have a classic OOF rendering. Since the Minolta is a longer focal length it has more blur.
Minolta was sensitive to Leitz OOF blur aesthetic and emphasized it in their 1960/70s advertising.
The 40/2 is a very light/short lens and one reason its so nice to use. I believe its the lightest M mount in the 35-50mm range.
I just acquired a M3 and as others have written using the entire finder is the best way to frame. Regarding using it with a M2/4/5 …… with a little practice its preferred to estimate the 40 frame outside of the 50 frame line.
I tested the lens against a mint 35/2 v2 Summicron. Subject was 6 ft from camera and I evaluated on negative the edge sharpness and blur. The 40/2 is sharper at f/2.8 and by f/5.6 the two are the same. There is a tiny difference between the two lenses at f/4. Both lenses have a classic OOF rendering. Since the Minolta is a longer focal length it has more blur.
Minolta was sensitive to Leitz OOF blur aesthetic and emphasized it in their 1960/70s advertising.
The 40/2 is a very light/short lens and one reason its so nice to use. I believe its the lightest M mount in the 35-50mm range.
I just acquired a M3 and as others have written using the entire finder is the best way to frame. Regarding using it with a M2/4/5 …… with a little practice its preferred to estimate the 40 frame outside of the 50 frame line.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Guys, just got Minolta Rokkor M 40/2 in LN condition (the latest version with a serial number on a barrel) for my M10. So nice and tiny lens! Sharp at f/2. What is your experience with this creature?
It's a lovely lens. Compared to the original Summicron-C 40/2 and first series M-Rokkor 40/2, the last series M-Rokkor 40mm has multi coating and less flare than its predecessors, a bit more apparent contrast (which gives it more perceptual sharpness). I had all three together at one point in the past and would swap back and forth between the Summicron and M-Rokkor II lenses.
G
Rich1950
Member
The M-Rokkor for the CLE has a Leica 100% compatible cam.
Trask
Established
I've got the full CLE kit -- but didn't know there were/are three versions of the 40mm lens -- or versions of any of the three lenses. Any particular website that provides this information?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Version 1 is the Leica Summicron-C 40/2 made and assembled by Leica in Wetzlar, Version 2 is the M-Rokkor 40/2 made by Leica and assembled by Minolta in Japan. Version 3 is the M-Rokkor 40/2 manufactured and assembled by Minolta in Japan. At least that's my understanding through reading a few dozen different websites and commentaries mentioning the Leica-Minolta relationship of the 1970s-80s.
G
G
Bingley
Mentor
I purchased the Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f2.0 CLE from member Back Alley years ago. I filed down the flange so that it brings up the 35mm framelines on my M2 (now sold) and M6. Like most of the others in this thread, I think it’s a terrific little lens, both optically and in terms of its handling. I’ve been shooting it a lot recently. Here’s a recent photo made w/ this lens:
Faded Glory by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
The lens displays very nice micro-contrast, like the version III 35mm Summicron w/ which it’s often compared. It’s a really nice lens to use on the M3 too.

The lens displays very nice micro-contrast, like the version III 35mm Summicron w/ which it’s often compared. It’s a really nice lens to use on the M3 too.
Bingley
Mentor
Some more photos made with the Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f2.0 CLE. Leica M6, TMax 400:
Guest quarters by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
Hiding in the trees by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
Regarding clouds by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr



Bingley
Mentor
This is my understanding, too. The CLE version of the M-Rokkor is multicoated, whereas the previous versions of the lens are single coated.Version 1 is the Leica Summicron-C 40/2 made and assembled by Leica in Wetzlar, Version 2 is the M-Rokkor 40/2 made by Leica and assembled by Minolta in Japan. Version 3 is the M-Rokkor 40/2 manufactured and assembled by Minolta in Japan. At least that's my understanding through reading a few dozen different websites and commentaries mentioning the Leica-Minolta relationship of the 1970s-80s.
G
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m6 + m-rokkor 40 (cle)
tri-x 400 (developer I believe is DDX here)
scan from the negative
I simply put some tape on the frame preview lever to bring up the 35mm framelines, a perfect fit IMO for the 40mm (I wear glasses)
cheers
giulio
tri-x 400 (developer I believe is DDX here)
scan from the negative
I simply put some tape on the frame preview lever to bring up the 35mm framelines, a perfect fit IMO for the 40mm (I wear glasses)

cheers
giulio
Bingley
Mentor
Spring at Maverick’s Beach, Half Moon Bay, CA. Leica M6, Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f2.0 CLE, dark yellow filter, Delta 400 @ iso 200 in Ilfotec DDX:
Spring at Maverick's Beach by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

Last edited:
Bingley
Mentor
Pillar Point bluffs, Moss Beach, CA. Leica M6, Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f2.0 CLE, TMax 400 @ iso 200:
Pillar Point bluffs by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

Archiver
Mentor
I used one for a few days when a friend let me use his on a trip in 2017. It's a tiny, fast lens with a sense of solidity, and the images were pretty tasty. There was some glow/softness wide open, especially at long distances, perhaps this was from sample variation.
M9 - Gotcha by Archiver, on Flickr
M9 - Tin Hau Temple 2 by Archiver, on Flickr


Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.