Minolta lenses to Canon EF....Ed Did it again!

EOS guys rejoice, Ed Mika did it again. He will now be offering adapters for Minolta lenses to EF! So far they have all cleared the mirror and they're reversible and do no damage to the lens.

I've been using Minolta glass for the past year on my Sony A7 and for the most part the lenses are way better than the Canon FD/Nikon F counterparts, for 1/2 the price.

https://www.facebook.c​om/EdmikaInc/

Stay tuned to his facebook for updates.

Also invest in glass now before the prices skyrocket again like they did when mirrorless cameras came out.

maverick75 wrote in post #18209118
I've been using Minolta glass for the past year on my Sony A7 and for the most part the lenses are way better than the Canon FD/Nikon F counterparts, for 1/2 the price.

This is interesting! In what way are they "way better"? Is the autofocus faster and more accurate? If so, in what situations does the autofocus perform better?

AF performance with fast moving subjects in low light is really the main thing to look for in lenses, so if you have experienced "way better" AF performance with a 3rd party manufacturer, I would be very interested in hearing all about the specifics.

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18210162
This is interesting! In what way are they "way better"? Is the autofocus faster and more accurate? If so, in what situations does the autofocus perform better?

AF performance with fast moving subjects in low light is really the main thing to look for in lenses, so if you have experienced "way better" AF performance with a 3rd party manufacturer, I would be very interested in hearing all about the specifics.

.

Canon FD should have tipped you off that this is referring to manual focus lenses, so I have NO idea why you brought up auto focus... if you would have clicked the link you would have also seen that it was referring to manual glass.

Better as in better construction, better colors but more importantly better consistency. Often time with FD glass the colors temps are way off from lens to lens. They also tend to have more contrast,where as Canon FD lenses are flat until you get to F4-ish.


I'm using these lenses to shoot video where autofocus is a downfall since the camera can't guess what you want in focus, also the focus rings are terrible on AF lenses. Hence why I, and most videographers use manual glass.

So, some manual F1.2 and F1.4 glass to look out for. Good. Need to compete with all that affordable Fuji F1.2 and F1.4 stuff that has autofocus.

Very best,

maverick75 wrote in post #18210294
Canon FD should have tipped you off that this is referring to manual focus lenses, so I have NO idea why you brought up auto focus... if you would have clicked the link you would have also seen that it was referring to manual glass.

I really don't know anything about "FD" lenses, and I certainly had no idea that they were some kind of "manual focus only" things. In fact, I didn't even notice the letters "FD" in your post, because I think that my eyes and my brain automatically skip over things that I don't understand or that I am completely unfamiliar with.

I brought up autofocus because it is so crucially important, and yet it is the thing that so often suffers whenever adaptors are used to mate 3rd party lenses to 1st party bodies. If all you are counting on a lens for is it's resolving ability, bokeh qualities, contrast, and color rendition, then yeah, I suppose that you could throw any high quality 3rd party lens on there and get excellent results. Heck, if you don't need autofocus you could probably even get good results with those el-cheapo Samyang things that are suddenly so popular.

.

The Rokkor X 50mm 1.4 MD is so sharp and contrasty wide open, made my Canon FD 50mm 1.1 SSC look like crap.

The Rokkor 58mm PF 1.4 has INSANE bokeh, just as nice as the one on my Canon 50mm 1.2, for $900 less!

The downside of the 58mm is it's not as sharp as the MD 50mm, but still sharper than the FD 50mm.