![minolta camera lenses minolta camera lenses](https://earthsunfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC00233-920x425.jpg)
![minolta camera lenses minolta camera lenses](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0420/2774/5443/products/minolta-xm-black-1458mm-944056_960x.jpg)
Many of these even share the same optical formula, they have just some differences in the mount to transmit aperture information for automatic exposure. There are two generations of classic Rokkors, the MC and the MD line. Well, I need to make clear what "newer versions" are. Maybe I should checkout other vintage brands? I hate the video image look coming out from my pane 14-140 while I love the feel of the one coming out of my SLR magic 12mm 1.6T. I am looking for vintage lenses to get a softer more organic look than the clinically sharp rendering of the modern electronic lenses. The same question would be asked about the 28mm 2.8 (early vs second generation) for I'm planning to get one as well. How does that translate on the image in filmmaking? Will I see the difference between the two on the screen? how? (someone here said there is no real difference between the two in daily life usage: )
![minolta camera lenses minolta camera lenses](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2000x2000/vello_la_nf_sa_sony_minolta_a_lens_mount_1349596.jpg)
The 4/4 version seems to have better reputation on sharpness, while the 5/5 version is less sharp and more contrasty. I am planning to get the 135mm 2.8 MD 5/5. After reading about Minolta lenses I am still confused as for the impact of what's been said on video usage. I am looking to invest in two vintage minolta lenses and I need somme advice. It produces a very lovely cinematic look and is a bit of a sleeping giant - I picked mine up for $40 (!!!!) with a stuck aperture, and fixed it in about a hour of repair. The Kiron 28mm f2 has been practically glued to my GH2 and I feel I should mention that it has the most amazing and beautiful lens flare I've ever seen on a photo lens (without an anamorphic adapter). When I'm shooting with my rail system and mattebox etc, it's not a big deal, I put a linear 4x4 polarizer in the mattebox instead of a circulular polarizer on the lens (ND can go either on lens or as a 4x4 in the second mattebox slot if needed), but when I'm trying to keep the camera build smaller in size, I don't find this lens gets as much use. The Vivitar 24mm f2 is a pretty decent lens too (although a bit softer with more glow wide open than my Kiron 28mm f2), but the main reason I don't use it is because the front element rotates when changing focus. I do also own a some other MF lenses, like Super Takumars (35mm f3.5/50mm f1.4) and Vivitars (24mm f2 and 28mm f2.8) along with some other random old M42 lenses inherited from my grandpa's dusty old camera bag, but in my own personal opinion, the Kiron plays really nice with the Rokkors, which of course match REALLY closely, and I find these lenses produce the most pleasing image to MY eye on my GH2. I've been looking at the Rokkor 85mm f1.7 and the 21mm f2.8, as well as the Kiron 105mm f2.8 Macro (a true legend). I also LOVE my Rokkors: 40mm f2, 50mm f1.7 (even though they are a bit plastic'y), the 58mm f1.4. Right my now favorite MF lenses are the Kiron 28mm F2 (a really great 'normal' lens for MFT). I'm a little late to the party here, but I'll offer my opinion: