[edom31]

I am only interested in the 19mm end of that zoom.

These are a few in digital at the 19mm range. (The EXIF says 18mm, but the lens is 19mm)... Taken with the A35, so it fits the thread.

[ivanvernon]

Photos with the Sony 390 and Minolta Maxxum 70-300mm f 4.5-5.6.

[BigMackCam]

Photos with the Sony 390 and Minolta Maxxum 70-300mm f 4.5-5.6.

Good stuff - that's the body you recently bought, yes? The 70-300 lens renders out of focus areas rather nicely

[BigMackCam]

As posted in the "Your latest acquisition" thread, I recently bought a very inexpensive but allegedly fully-working Minolta AF 35-70 f/4 via eBay. Unfortunately, though, the diaphragm blades were gummed up with oil (a relatively common issue, apparently), so it wouldn't stop down when set to apertures smaller than f/4

After a long time searching online, I eventually found some guidance on disassembly, in the form of annotated photos HERE, and with no important chores awaiting my attention yesterday, I spent a leisurely afternoon and evening stripping and servicing the lens. It was very oily inside, and in addition to the gummed-up diaphragm, there were oil deposits on the inner optical elements, not to mention a fair amount of dust. It all cleaned up nicely, though, with a little isopropyl alcohol, a lot of cotton buds and a few optical wipes. Aside from a few head-scratching moments and frustrations along the way (including losing and re-locating the small spring for the macro button when it popped off ), both disassembly and re-assembly were relatively straightforward, if rather time-consuming. Infinity focus was a little off after re-assembly, so I spent another half hour this morning adjusting that. Overall, it was a satisfying learning experience, and I'd feel a lot more confident if I should ever need to service another Minolta AF lens from the same era.

I now have a fully-working Minolta AF 35-70 f/4, and one of the cleanest in the country, I dare say

Here's the oily diaphragm (doesn't look too bad, but it was preventing normal operation):



This is what the lens looks like disassembled:



... and this is the diaphragm after cleaning and re-assembly:



Finally, this is how the lens sits on my Hasselblad HV:

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 11-03-2021 at 06:33 AM.

[ivanvernon]

Good stuff - that's the body you recently bought, yes? The 70-300 lens renders out of focus areas rather nicely

Il est vrai. C'est le meme. (Practicing my high school French.)

I have that 35-70/4.0, so will be sure to hold on to those instructions. It is a nice lens, though I find the macro switch a little too fiddly. I could not quite tell whether or not yours had the macro feature. I love my Leica-R 35-70mm f 4.0 macro lens, great fluidity of rendering in true Leica style. I am watching the output from my Minolta 35-70 to see whether it shows any indication of its relationship to the Leica lens, but have not yet reached a decision.

Finally cleared away an entire short shelf for all things A-mount.

Today may be H-HV day. I have at least tracked it into Ohio!

[Gary H Perth]

These are a few in digital at the 19mm range. (The EXIF says 18mm, but the lens is 19mm)... Taken with the A35, so it fits the thread.

These are sufficiently convincing, Ed. I will give the lens a good try before I chase anything else. Thanks for posting some useful examples

[Fenwoodian]

I've got a Sony A350 digital camera body. It's 14.2 MP CCD sensor is (I believe) the highest MP sensor in a digital camera that's not medium format! So, all you CCD cult fanatics out there might want to check out the A350 (4 more MP than your beloved K10D bodies (I've got 3 of them).

I only use one lens on my A350 - the bokehlicious Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4. In fact I've got 2 of these lenses.

[ivanvernon]

I've got a Sony A350 digital camera body. It's 14.2 MP CCD sensor is (I believe) the highest MP sensor in a digital camera that's not medium format! So, all you CCD cult fanatics out there might want to check out the A350 (4 more MP than your beloved K10D bodies (I've got 3 of them).

I only use one lens on my A350 - the bokehlicious Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4. In fact I've got 2 of these lenses.

I am also enjoying my recently acquired Sony A-mount cameras, the Sony 350 and 390, both with 14.2 MP CCD sensors. However, those wishing a higher MP CCD sensor might look to the full-frame Leica M9 and the Leica MP9-P, both with an 18.0 MP CCD sensor. I would recommend the Sony Alpha 390 over the 350 if only because the 390 uses standard SDHC memory cards rather than the older CompactFlash cards with external pins that can be damaged in use. (I always download the 350 via cable rather than removing the card in order to reduce the chance of damage.)

A-mount cameras have the advantage of using the relatively inexpensive Minolta MAXXUM, Tamron, Samsung, and other brands of A-mount lenses. These lenses are likely to continue declining in price now that Sony has abandoned the A-mount cameras.

[edom31]

These are sufficiently convincing, Ed. I will give the lens a good try before I chase anything else. Thanks for posting some useful examples

You're welcome and thank you as well.

---------- Post added 11-03-21 at 08:45 PM ----------

Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 58mm F1.4

I use mine on micro four thirds.

[ivanvernon]

FEDEX brought me my latest A-mount camera, the Hasselblad HV, a thinly disguised Sony a99. The camera and complete original kit came in with around 9,000 clicks and with all the kit materials--Zeiss 24-70mm lens f 2.8 lens, two batteries with charger, hot shoe adapter, user manuals, and lots of cables and software that I have not yet inspected. Here are a few quick snaps.

[BigMackCam]

FEDEX brought me my latest A-mount camera, the Hasselblad HV, a thinly disguised Sony a99. The camera and complete original kit came in with around 9,000 clicks and with all the kit materials--Zeiss 24-70mm lens f 2.8 lens, two batteries with charger, hot shoe adapter, user manuals, and lots of cables and software that I have not yet inspected. Here are a few quick snaps.

Congratulations, Ivan!! Those shots look great!

Have you had a chance to try a Sony A99 yet? I think you'd be surprised... the HV feels far more substantial by comparison

[ivanvernon]

Congratulations, Ivan!! Those shots look great!

Have you had a chance to try a Sony A99 yet? I think you'd be surprised... the HV feels far more substantial by comparison

No, I have not tried the a99 yet. However, from using the a350 and a390, I believe that any one accustomed to Pentax bodies would find the Sony bodies far less substantial than anything by Pentax. By the way, are the HV and Zeiss 24-70 lens water proof? I am still learning the kit but have not located that information yet.

[ivanvernon]

So far, I am loving the HV and not feeling foolish becaiuse I did not pay $11,000 for the rig! I have only used it with the kit lens, the Zeiss 24-70mm f 2.8, which offers great sharpness and naturalness of color. I have ordered a FOTODIOX PK-A mount adapter because I have several K-mount lenses that I would like to try out without having to duplicate them in my collection by ordering the same lenses that I own in PK in A-mount as well. These include the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar f 2.0 macro, the Zeiss APO Sonnar 135mm f 2.0, the Rokinon/Samyang 85mm f 1.4, the Pentax-FA* 85mm f 1.4, the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f 4.0 macro, the Leica 135mm Elmarit-R f 2.8, the Leica 90mm Elmarit-R f 2.8, and the three Pentax FA limited lenses holy trinity (31mm, 43mm, and 77mm). I am particularly interested in comparing the Zeiss 24-70 f 2.8 to what has been my absolute favorite zoom lens, the Leica 35-70 f 4.0. I will appreciate any thoughts anyone may care to offer about these lenses specifically as used on the Sony a99 (Hasselblad HV).

[edom31]

These include the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar f 2.0 macro, the Zeiss APO Sonnar 135mm f 2.0, the Rokinon/Samyang 85mm f 1.4, the Pentax-FA* 85mm f 1.4, the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f 4.0 macro, the Leica 135mm Elmarit-R f 2.8, the Leica 90mm Elmarit-R f 2.8, and the three Pentax FA limited lenses holy trinity (31mm, 43mm, and 77mm). I am particularly interested in comparing the Zeiss 24-70 f 2.8 to what has been my absolute favorite zoom lens, the Leica 35-70 f 4.0. I will appreciate any thoughts anyone may care to offer about these lenses specifically as used on the Sony a99 (Hasselblad HV).

First, great shots, looks like you'll have some fun, enjoy and post often!

Now - I can only wish I'd be able to have one day with at least one of those lenses you listed. Sorry cannot be of help there, but would love to hear more!

[BigMackCam]

No, I have not tried the a99 yet. However, from using the a350 and a390, I believe that any one accustomed to Pentax bodies would find the Sony bodies far less substantial than anything by Pentax. By the way, are the HV and Zeiss 24-70 lens water proof? I am still learning the kit but have not located that information yet.

The HV is weather resistant, but the Sony Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8 SSM isn't, sadly. The later Mk.II version of the lens is, but that wasn't released until after the HV kits were put together...