Konica, Minolta lenses.

[waynecrider]

Decided to go back to film and am looking for feedback on the Konica/ Minolta AF lenses. I'm dragging out my lightweight "Minolta Maxxum" 70 out of the closet after a long hiatus, and am I'm trying to remember
the better lenses. Right now I have a 50mm F1:1.7 on the Maxxum, and was thinking about either a 24mm or 35mm with the fifty and something mid to long in the mountains.
A light bag is always preferable, since it's bad enough climbing up the mountains. If your a Minolta shooter I'd appreciate your input on your bag.

 

[randyB]

It largely depends on the size of your kit. A small kit of 1 camera and 2-3 prime lenses-- I use a shoulder bag big enough to hold everything plus filters, etc. A bigger kit with several zoom lenses and accessories then I use a backpack with a waist belt. Backpacks are NOT for the quick shooter, they slow you down which can be a good thing. I have many different sizes of bags/backpacks and try to match the bag to my envisioned adventure. Sometimes it works very well and sometimes it does not. RB

 

[dynachrome]

There are many possibilities. If I just wanted to carry one lens and didn't need a very long focal length, I would consider carrying a 28-85/3.5-4.5. For a two lens kit, a 35-70/4 and a 70-210/4 "beercan." A 28 or 24 can be added if you need something wider and 50/3.5 Macro. Sometimes if I am hiking (light hiking) I might just carry a body and a 50 macro. The Minolta 50/2.8 Macro is very nice and goes to 1:1 but is larger and heavier. The zoom lenses are slow so I would take Portra 400. It has the best combination of speed, grain and sharpness. Kodak's 200 speed color print films will cost a little less but will not be any sharper or more fine grained.

 

[ant!]

I use prime lenses more on my manual Minoltas, and Zooms on the AF (Maxxum 7). I like the 28-105 zoom, slow but nice and not heavy. The 28-70/2.8 is a different weight class... Combined with the beercan, a complete kit.
But of course there are many other nice ones, e.g. 24/2.8, 20/2.8, 100mm macro, ...
Still looking for a 85/1.4, currently I use a cheap and light Sony 85/2.8 SAM which should work as well on your 70 (but not on older Minoltas)

 

[Paul Howell]

All of the Minolta A mount, Konica Minolta A mount and I believe with the 70, which is the last generation of Konica Minolta film cameras will work with SSM lenes including Sony A mount lens. You might need to check the manual on SSM lens. In terms of primes, the Minolta 24, 28 and 35 are very good primes. For hiking, fast film, such as Tmax 400 pushed to 800 I would think about the 24 to 80 F 4.5 or the 28 to 135 F4 to 4.5, both are heavy but will do the work of 3 or 4 lens. My examples are sharp at F8 to 16, on my Minolta 9 or 7, AF is fast. If your 70 works with SSM lens, the Sony 28 and 50 are not too expenesive and have updated coating. I have a couple of 28 to 200s, Sigma and Tamron in A mount, dont like any of them very much. In terms of light weight and good coverage just slower is the 28 to 100 4.5 to 5.6 D lens. A good bargain lens is the 35 to 70 F4. I have a number of bags, all very old, doubt any are in production. For hiking I use a sling backback that takes body and 4 lens, room for 10 or so rolls of film along with a filter wallet. If you stick with a 28 2.8, 50 1,7 all you need is 49mm filters. Once you go fast such as the 28 2.0 or 50 1.4 you need 55mm filtes. My standard hiking kit is a 28, 50 and 100, along with one longer zoom like a 70 to 300 4.5 to 5.6 APO. D. it is light enough and does not add much weight but provides longer reach if I run across any wildlife. If you 70 works with SSM lens and you have deep pockets and want the best then Sony Ziess in A mount are really sharp lens.

 

[ant!]

Also, a good source for Minolta A-mount is dyxum.com/ . You'll find there a complete lens databases (select full frame for film in the search), for all Minolta, Sony and 3rd party lenses for the system, including technical specs and user reviews. The forum has also a few interesting threads, e.g. the best lenses, the cheap setup etc...

 

[waynecrider]

Thanks all... I'll hit the dyxum.com drove.

I've got the 24-85 which needs 62 filters, and the lens is front heavy on the Maxxum 70. I also have a 7000i which has a fabulous screen, slightly lighter but is bigger and more weird with the sliding controls.
Now, another lens I may pickup, would be a telephoto, but something lighter. Something out to150-180 perhaps.