Just Purchased Minolta Lenses

Wanting to convert to EOS, I only pad 30 bucks buck I got a 50 1.7 and a 28 2.8. I see the conversion doesn't appear to be simple, but I am wondering what I would need. This appears to require addtl glass but I did see some without glass. What would the room recommend to make this work? Or should I just sell and move on?

come across many threads saying its not worth the hassle but many of them were old threads. New experiences anyone?

Sell them as is on eBay. They are not speical and very hard to adapt to your body.

do you go out of your way to give the most negative perspective on each and every post?

Converting either of those two lenses is probalby not worth it. The adapter with glass does degrade your image and glassless adapters lose long distance (infinity) focus. Still better than not being able to use your lenses at all. In the future, if you pick up a mirrorless camera, including EOS M, you can adapt your lenses without any issues.

I'm guessing you bought those before reading my last post in your other thread.Minolta/Konica are not worth the hassle.

gasrocks was not being negative, just that, honestly, there is nothing positive to say about trying to adapt Minolta lenses to the EOS system, much like what was said about trying to convert the FD's to EOS.

KirkS518 wrote in post #16844473
I'm guessing you bought those before reading my last post in your other thread.Minolta/Konica are not worth the hassle.

gasrocks was not being negative, just that, honestly, there is nothing positive to say about trying to adapt Minolta lenses to the EOS system, much like what was said about trying to convert the FD's to EOS.

"there is nothing positive"? I don't have a 50mm, now I have a acquired one for 1/4th the price. Actual information is more beneficial than a yes or no to someone who is asking for assistance. thanks for the reply, but if you aren't going to add information that I can use please don't even bother.

However, they do work very well with a simple adapter for the Fuji X-system or micro 4/3 cameras.

Bracetty wrote in post #16844504
"there is nothing positive"? I don't have a 50mm, now I have a acquired one for 1/4th the price. Actual information is more beneficial than a yes or no to someone who is asking for assistance. thanks for the reply, but if you aren't going to add information that I can use please don't even bother.

no, you paid 1/4 the price for a lens that doesn't work well on your system.

gasrocks knows his sh*t when it comes to old manual lenses. He isn't being negative, he's being real.

if the lens needs an optical adapter, then you have to spend significant money on one to get something that gives you okay results. cheap ones will give your garbage images.

so, for less than you'll spend getting this turd adapted over, you could have bought a 50 1.8 which has AF and probably better IQ.

Bracetty wrote in post #16844320
do you go out of your way to give the most negative perspective on each and every post?

the truth hurts sometimes...without adding an emoticon it comes out blunt...say he puts a smiley face on the end of that, then you wouldn't have taken it so badly...

buy the bottom line is...it's usually better to ask before buying

A couple links with info that might be of help;
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=57023
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=70506

The first, which is a very informative thread, confirms soundly what has been said already here;

More importantly however, these threads list lenses that ARE very good choices for adapting!

Bracetty wrote in post #16844504
"there is nothing positive"? I don't have a 50mm, now I have a acquired one for 1/4th the price. Actual information is more beneficial than a yes or no to someone who is asking for assistance. thanks for the reply, but if you aren't going to add information that I can use please don't even bother.

Yes, I'll say it again. THERE IS NOTHING POSITIVE ABOUT BUYING SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T WORK PROPERLY ON YOUR SYSTEM - AT ANY PRICE.

Had you read your other thread, you would have noticed that the list of lenses to keep an eye out for was given to you, and on that list, Minolta is in the 'not compatible' section, and had been specifically pointed out (by me I might add) that Minolta is not one you should look for. For $10 you could have gotten a Fuji 2.2 50mm, that would have adapter over with a $3 ebay adapter, correctly. Now which is more positive - getting a non-compatible lens and having to buy an adapter for about a total of $60, or getting a 50mm lens with adapter for about $12?

Here is a POSITIVE suggestion for you.

New THIN glassless Minolta to Canon adapter for about $20: http://www.ebay.com …ens+to+Canon+EO​S&_sacat=0

I see that there are now "Thin" Minolta to Canon adapters available. Canon and Minolta are only .5mm different in flange-to-focal-plane distances. Hopefully this thin adapter should allow you to focus at normal distances of 5-10 feet. Before you buy it just take you Minolta lens at infinity focus and hold it up against the body lens and look through the viewfinder. Some people call this "free-lensing". I have done this with Canon FD lenses and was able to focus about 3-4 feet away with a 50mm lens. (telephoto lenses can focus farther)

If you can focus about 10-20 feet with the lens up against the body, the new "Thin" adapter might work for you.

Bracetty wrote in post #16844150
come across many threads saying its not worth the hassle but many of them were old threads. New experiences anyone?

So, you had already read many threads saying it's not worth the hassle, but asked for opinions anyway. Then when people reply saying exactly what you already know from the other threads, that the Minolta lenses are not worth adapting to fit an EOS body, you throw a hissy fit and accuse everyone of being negative and not giving you any good information.

Bracetty wrote in post #16844320
do you go out of your way to give the most negative perspective on each and every post?

Bracetty wrote in post #16844504
"there is nothing positive"? I don't have a 50mm, now I have a acquired one for 1/4th the price. Actual information is more beneficial than a yes or no to someone who is asking for assistance. thanks for the reply, but if you aren't going to add information that I can use please don't even bother.

What reply would you like to receive? Let me know and I will give it to you, a wonderful glowing report on using Minolta lenses on an EOS. Of course, that will just have you go out and buy an adapter and then realise that you have wasted your money because the results are so bad.

These people are simply being honest with you, and answering your question. You started off by saying that you have seen a lot of people saying they are not worth the hassle, did you expect to get a different answer in this thread?

Gasrocks gave you some good advice, your best option is to sell them on ebay and hopefully get your money back. Then look for some cheap lenses that actually work on your camera.

Bracetty wrote in post #16844504
"there is nothing positive"? I don't have a 50mm, now I have a acquired one for 1/4th the price. Actual information is more beneficial than a yes or no to someone who is asking for assistance. thanks for the reply, but if you aren't going to add information that I can use please don't even bother.

Sorry, but he's right... those lenses are mediocre at best and they're a huge hassle to adapt. If it was a 50/1.2 then I might say otherwise.

Here's a few quick examples which would be better for your camera

http://www.ebay.com …enses&hash=item​4ad29aa706

http://www.ebay.com …enses&hash=item​35d0c39dc8

Heck, I've found 2 50mm's for basically free at thrift stores that were attached to old SLR's (Yashica DS-M 50/1.7 and Vivitar 50/1.9) and both are very decent lenses. You just have to know what mounts work, Minolta isn't one of them unless you find a rare lens for good money (like a f1.2 prime), neither is FD or Fuji FM/DM or Konica/Hexanon.