極上品? Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50mm F1.4 - 购够网
日本铁壶堂号代购 日本铁壶堂号代拍
日本古玩店家代购 日本古玩店家代拍
日本艺术品代购 日本艺术品代拍
其它收藏品
日本家电设备代购 日本家电设备代拍
日本办公用品代购 日本办公用品代拍
日本电气设备代购 日本电气设备代拍
日本手办代购 日本手办代拍
日本游戏代购 日本游戏代拍
日本时尚鞋包代购 日本时尚鞋包代拍
日本流行饰品代购 日本流行饰品代拍
日本休闲用品代购 日本休闲用品代拍
日本饰品代购 日本饰品代拍
日本小说代购 日本小说代拍
日本手机数码代购 日本手机数码代拍
日本汽摩配件代购 日本汽摩配件代拍
極上品? Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50mm F1.4
您现在的位置：
购够网由商品页面挑出的重要提示
此商品来源于日本雅虎网站
侦测到“故障品”字样，请与客服确认
侦测到“故障品”字样，请与客服确认
此卖家为店铺，可能收8%消费税
此商品为海外发货，可能收取高额运费
此商品为海外发货，可能收取高额运费
此商品注意尺寸重量限制,以免无法运输
此商品注意尺寸重量限制,以免无法运输
当前价：￥（合日元）
开始时间：06月10日 21:54:50
结束时间：
商品成色：二手货
提前结束：有可能
日本邮费：中标者承担
自动延长：会
最高出价：
可否退货：可以
新手必读 :
拍卖注意事项
您现在选择投标的商品为日本雅虎网站的商品！
◆无法进口的商品
極上品? Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50mm F1.4商品説明ご覧いただきありがとうございます！極上品? Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50mm F1.4単焦点レンズの出品です。希少レンズです?お探しの方は是非この機会をお見逃しなく！！【外観チェック】?使用感僅かで非常に綺麗な状態でございます☆【動作チェック】フォーカスリング、絞りリングの動作、クリック感も良好?絞り羽綺麗です。快適にご使用いただけます??【光学チェック】肉眼では確認できないレベルの薄カビがございますがクモリございません。テスト撮影では綺麗な写真が撮れました☆クリアに快適に撮影いただけます?付属品?前後キャップ※写真にあるものが全てです。?商品の状態に関しては個人差がありますので画像をよく見て判断してください。?説明文以外の初期不良は対応しますが、到着後3日以内に確認していただき初期不良の自然故障は返品対応させていただきます。※落札者都合の返品の場合は返品送料やその他の費用は落札者様ご負担でお願い致します。?落札後24時間以内に、必ず連絡の取れる方、3日以内にご入金可能な方のみご入札下さい。?特別な事情があり遅れる場合は事前にご連絡ください。こちらに理由がある場合もお知らせいたします。?その他、ご質問等がございましたらよろしくお願いいたします。?商品に万が一何かありましたら、評価の前にご連絡ください。当方に問題があり、※「悪い」評価の場合はできましたら事前にお知らせください。ご協力をお願いいたします。この商品説明は&&で作成されています。Powered
●RMB | 日元以上可以出价竞拍
人民币出价:
1.出价竞拍：结束之前出价最高者得。
2.可以输入您的心理最高价位，系统每次只会小幅加价。
3.出价需谨慎，一旦出价不可取消！
您的出价（出价金额不能修改）
人民币出价:
1.无须竞价，出价后立即中标。
2.出价需谨慎，一旦出价不可取消！
●RMB | 日元以上可以出价竞拍
人民币出价:
1.预约出价：让系统在商品结束时间前5分钟自动替您出价，但超过结束时间无法使用此功能。
2.可以输入您的心理最高价位，系统每次只会小幅加价。
3.预约出价操作成功后，在实际出价时系统给予汇率换算！
恭喜您得到100元代金券，马上注册吧！
关注微信公众号即送50元
3介绍转发，再得50元QQ群，微信朋友圈介绍转发本站，截图发给本站微信公众号，即可再得50元。
(C) 2012 中山市日淘乐网络信息有限公司. All Rights Reserved. 粤ICP备号-2
扫一扫关注我们The Rokkor Files - Ultimate Normal Lens Challenge
Ultimate Normal Lens Challenge
II - the 50mm f/1.4's
is the second review in a series on Minolta's manual focus normal lenses,
to see the first in the series, click .
investing in a Minolta manual focus system one of the first lenses commonly
purchased is a 50mm f/1.4 lens. The reason for this is that it is fast,
sharp, and with brilliant contrast, while at around $50 it is about
a quarter of the price you might expect to pay for the faster f/1.2
to the popularity of this speed and focal length the 50mm f/1.4 was
manufactured for a long time, from its first introduction as an MC lens
in April 1973, right through to the end of the Minolta manual focus
system. The lens design went through considerable changes over that
period, as detailed below:
1973 - Introduction of the 50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG. The lens
used the same optical formula as the 58mm f/1.2 and weighed in at a
more reasonable 305g compared to the f/1.2's 478g. It has outstanding
build quality, and with its big (but not bulky) design it is an absolute
pleasure to use.
1977 - Minolta introduced the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X. It was
the first wholly new lens designed for the MD system, and while it retained
the 7 element, 5 group optical construction of the MC lens it was a
more compact design, slightly shorter and 60g lighter at 245g.
1979 - A new 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X lens is introduced with
an optical formula of 7 elements in 6 groups based upon that of the
50mm f/1.2 that was introduced in March 1978. The weight of the lens
was reduced to 220g, and the filter size dropped from 55mm to 49mm
1981 - The existing 50mm f/1.4 lens was updated to a late MD
cosmetic design (aperture ring lock, focus scale in orange not green
etc.). The lens weighed an extra 15g at 235g, but otherwise was unchanged
from the MD Rokkor-X version introduced in April 1979.
Justin Bailey's &Minolta Lens Chronology&- http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mciepl/chronology.htm
- an outstanding resource)
lenses being evaluated in this test are examples of the first two incarnations,
being the 50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG and the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X (both
with 55mm filter threads). An example of the later design was unavailable
for the test, but I have previously tested the 50mm f/1.4 MD and at
that time I found it to be inferior to the MC version. This finding
was in line with the opinions of several other collectors and testers,
and accordingly I believe there is a consensus that the earlier designs
are better performers in terms of resolution.
important consideration to remember with these tests is that they should
be treated as a guide only, and a general source of information. This
is because only one sample of each lens was tested in this review, and
there is no way for me to tell if the sample tested was indicative of
the average performance of the entire production run. Your 50mm may perform
better or worse than the ones shown here, so if this is important to you,
you should consider testing your lens yourself to ensure ultimate sharpness.
tests were performed on a focus calibrated X-570, using a viewfinder magnifier
and a tripod, and Fuji Velvia 100F fine grained slide film. The camera's
self timer was used to combat vibration. Slides taken have been scanned
at 5400dpi, and focus has been individually set for each crop so as to
avoid any issues with film flatness. Digital ICE and grain management
has been turned off to obtain maximum possible resolution.
f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG
f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X
resolution target used in the test - sure it's not the most interesting
subject, but I find it a handy subject to enable close comparisons. The
red boxes indicate the crops used in the testing
50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG is one of my favourite Minolta lenses, and battles
it out with my 50mm f/1.2 MD Rokkor-X for time on my camera. We have
already seen how the 50mm f/1.2 performed, so I am interested to see
how it compares with the MC f/1.4. Whatever happens, one is going to
be getting the lion's share of time on the camera in future.
am particularly interested in evaluating the bokeh of the 50mm f/1.4
MC Rokkor-PG. We saw in the f/1.2 test that the 58mm lens, while not
as quite as sharp as the 50mm f/1.2, had much more pleasing bokeh. With
the same lens design it will be intriguing to see if the 50mm f/1.4
lenses maintain that superb out of focus rendition. Anyway, enough preliminary
discussion, and let's get down to business!
Resolution
we can see the performance of the two lenses from centre and corner
crops at f/1.4. Results show excellent detail given that the lenses
are wide open, certainly considerably more detail than that achieved
in our last test with the f/1.2 lenses. Contrast is also noticably improved
from the level recorded with the faster lenses. It is noted that this
is a challenging test target (not particularly high contrast) and that
this crop reflects an area of less than 1mm square on the original negative.
At the screen resolution above (at standard 72dpi) the equivalent print
size would be 6 feet by 9 feet. Given this the performance wide open
of both of these lenses is very impressive.
upon my review of the images from which these crops were taken I conclude
that at f/1.4 the 50mm MC is noticably sharper than the MD in the centre,
but that the gap between the lenses has narrowed at the corners and
both are very similar at this point. Corner performance is actually
very impressive, and contrast remains good, despite light falloff (discussed
is my opinion, based upon the above results, that both lenses are fully
useable even for work requiring relatively fine detail at f/1.4. This
is an outstanding result and a tribute to the quality of the 30 year
old design.
shot below was taken with the 50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG at f/1.4 in order
to minimise the depth of field. The bokeh exhibited in this shot is
gorgeous, and it is quite probably my favourite shot taken in 2004.
a 50mm that is sharp enough to generate these results at f/1.4 opens up
some amazing photographic possibilities. Low light photography can be
fully explored, and the use of wider apertures to deliberately reduce
the depth of field can be undertaken with confidence.
f/2 the MD lens has improved markedly to catch up to and even possibly
surpass the MC version. The MC lens has naturally also improved, and
in fact both lenses deliver excellent resolution at f/2. The double
lines of some of the highways are visible in the crops from both lenses,
but possibly slightly more clearly in the MD version.. When you consider
that these lines are approximately 0.5mm apart on the original poster
that is a quite incredible result.
corner sharpness of the two lenses appears to be very similar at f/2.
Overall, I feel that at f/2 the MD lens has very fractionally outperformed
the MC lens, but the difference between the two lenses is very difficult
to pick even at a 100% crop at 5400 dpi. Certainly there would be no
way to split the two lenses based upon prints, even with very big enlargements.
f/4 the MD version holds its marginal lead in centre sharpness, and corners
remain too close to call. Contrast has also improved with both lenses.
These are amazing optics.
f/8 the 50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG has caught up to and possibly marginally
surpassed the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X in terms of centre resolution.
Both lenses record excellent corner sharpness. This is the best aperture
tested in terms of sharpness for both lenses, but the difference between
the results at f/4 and f/8 is very small. Certainly either of these
lenses could be used for images where critical sharpness was a priority
from f/4 and above.
Resolution
upon the crops above and my reviews of the full images I conclude that
the two lenses are very similar in terms of performance, and are difficult
to differentiate between. Possibly the MC was the better performer at
f/1.4, but at f/2 and f/4 the MD marginally outclasssed its earlier counterpart.
By f/8 the MC was once again slightly better. I believe that the performance
of both was so close as to render it impossible to say that one was better
than the other.
examine some other aspects of the lens' performance to determine if these
will help us separate them in terms of performance.
test each lens in their rendition of bokeh I set up a challenging target
with lots of distracting highlights in the rear. Note, this is an extreme
bokeh test! The lenses were tested wide open at f/1.4, and again at
f/4, what I would consider to be a normal portrait aperture when photographing
in daylight.
50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X shows neutral bokeh and the areas without sharp
highlights do show a very nice blur.
50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG shows results possibly not quite as good as those
achieved by the MD version, but still OK.
terms of bokeh both lenses do a good job, but not up to the level of
the 58mm f/1.2 tested previously. This is to be expected given its faster
aperture and longer focal length both work together to increase background
separation. A cursory comparison to the 50mm f/1.2 MD Rokkor-X shows
both lenses exhibit similar bokeh to that lens, however close up review
of the highlights does show a very slight brighter band around the extremity
of each out of focus highlight. A
closeup of the individual highlights is shown below:
background blur of the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X is not bad, but it is not
up to the level of either of the f/1.2 lenses (as would be expected).
50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG surprisingly performed slightly poorer than the
MD version at this test, albeit the differences were very minor..
lenses show some evidence of this ring, but clearly the 50mm f/1.4 MD
Rokkor-X has slightly better performance in this respect. It should
be noted that the test above is an extreme one with literally hundreds
of highlight spots, and huge transitions in contrast. Normal use would
see a much nicer blur.
f/4 the area out of focus is of course better defined, and you might
expect that the bokeh rendition of the lenses will be much closer. Let's
examine the shots and see.
f/4 with the MD the background highlights have blurred together nicely.
hexagon shapes of the MC's highlights are slightly more defined, but
the blur is still very nice.
bokeh of both lenses appears good, but the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X still
definitely has an advantage. The highlights show slightly less definition,
providing a marginally smoother background in areas of very high pinpoint
highlights.
upon my review I would expect either lens to perform well in terms of
out of focus blur in normal use, with the MD lens possibly marginally
edging out the MC (albeit the differences are quite minor). The images
above are designed to show a lens' flaws, and as a result you may conclude
that these lenses are poorer performers with respect to bokeh. Disabuse
yourself of this notion, as it is patently not the case. A quick review
of the photograph shown previously of the plant demonstrates that the
MC lens has outstanding out of focus rendition, and based upon our tests
the performance of the MD would even be slightly better. Either of these
lenses would make an outstanding performer when it comes to bokeh, but
certainly still the 58mm f/1.2 reigns supreme.
of the issues when shooting with faster lenses is the natural light
falloff that occures at the extremities of the frame when shooting at,
or close to wide open. Most visible when taking photos of regularly
toned subjects, like landscapes with blue skies or light coloured walls
etc, it manifests as a darkening of the frame at the corners.
you shoot with negative film this may not be an issue for you, as it
can often be addressed in the printing process. However with slide film
a drop of a stop or so in the corners may cause them to be irretrievably
darkened, and can ruin a good slide.
all lenses exhibit a degree of light falloff at wide apertures, and
the real sign of a lens that handles this well is when this falloff
is gone after closing down a stop or two. Lets see how the two Minolta
50mm f/1.4 lenses handle falloff.
Methodology
for this test is as follows. The test target includes an area of white
at both the centre and the extreme top left corner. The centre area
is selected and adjusted in photoshop to be the white point for the
image. A crop is taken from this area, together with a crop from the
corner, and the resulting crops are desaturated, and placed side by
side below.
image to the right shows two sets of crops. The top two are from the
50mm MD at f/1.4, the bottom two from the 50mm MC at f/1.4.
can be seen, both lenses exhibit significant falloff at f/1.4 when using
slide film. As discussed above, this falloff will be less noticeable,
but still apparent when using negative film. When seen side by side
the falloff seems particularly significant, but when seen in terms of
the full image it is lessened to a degree by the distance between the
crops. For example, refer to the crop below of the full image from the
58mm f/1.4.
f/2 both lenses record a significant improvement in falloff. At this level
the falloff would likely be not noticeable in a photograph unless the
shot included a significant expanse of solid colour, such as a blue sky.
I can see no real difference between the performance of both lenses.
f/4 the falloff is virtually eliminated on both lenses, and would not
be noticed when shooting a broad expanse of a solid colour, even on
slide film. Refer to the image below showing the sample area at f/4,
and it can be clearly seen that for all intents and purposes falloff
is eliminated at f/4.
is evident above, the slight difference in the white crops seen when they
are side by side is simply not visible when looking at a full image taken
lenses record significant falloff at f/1.4 that would be apparent on prints
or slides. By f/2 this falloff has been significantly reduced, and by
f/4 it is all but gone. Based upon the results detailed above I conclude
that both lenses are essentially identical in their performance in this
two 50mm f/1.4 lenses tested are outstanding optics, and performed brilliantly
for what are still very fast lenses. Central and corner sharpness were
outstanding from both lenses, and perfectly usable for full frame critical
sharpness applications from f/4. For portraiture and general use these
lenses can be used wide open at f/1.4 without hesitation, bearing in
mind of course the light falloff that is evident at larger apertures.
performance of both lenses was superior wide open than that recorded
by the f/1.2 lenses at f/2, and in fact across the board, at all apertures
the f/1.4 lenses outperformed the f/1.2 lenses in terms of resolution
and contrast.
terms of bokeh the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X performed marginally better
in our tests, but I would question whether anyone would be able to pick
the difference in a photograph, even at larger print sizes. In general
use both lenses produce a lovely blurred out of focus rendition, enabling
the photographer to concentrate the viewer's attention on his subject.
I rate the 50mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor-PG and the 50mm f/1.4 MD Rokkor-X as
equally as good as each other. The MC had a very slight resolution advantage
at f/1.4 in our test, and the MD had very slightly better bokeh in our
examination of this aspect of lens performance. These differences are,
however, so minor that they could simply reflect sample variation, and
accordingly I would consider that the owner of either of these lenses
has every reason to be pleased, and no reason to covet the other version.
useful test would have been to also consider the 58mm f/1.4 MC Rokkor.
Produced prior to April 1973, the 58mm f/1.4 has an avid following who
swear by its performance. It is made from six elements in 5 groups (similar
to the later 50mm f/1.7 lenses). I find it difficult to imagine that
its resolution would be up to that of the later 50mms, and certainly
it strikes me that Minolta would have been unlikely to produce a more
expensive 7 element design to replace it unless this also brought with
it improved performance.
there it is, my review of the f/1.4 normal lenses. Still to come are
the reviews of the slower normal lenses, comprising the 50mm f/1.7,
f/2 and the 45mm f/2. I am intrigued to discover if there will be a
hidden gem amongst these cheap lenses.}