Minolta MD / Leica ???

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

S

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

So i gues i would be looking at the MD 35-70 constant 3.5 w/ macro. is
that correct?

also I think there was another longer zoom, any idea?

S


On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:05:31 -0500, "Ken Rosenbaum"
wrote:

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

So i gues i would be looking at the MD 35-70 constant 3.5 w/ macro. is
that correct?

also I think there was another longer zoom, any idea?

S


On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:05:31 -0500, "Ken Rosenbaum"
wrote:

I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

Steve,
I have a couple of the splendid Minolta MD 35-70 macro zooms that fit that
description. They are the constant 3.5 lens, not the 3.5-4.8 or somesuch
Minolta. Nor are they the constant f 3.5 35-70 MD non-zoom which, by the
way, I also own and enjoy. Not a bad lens, but not in the same class as the
macro 35-70 lenses co-developed with Leica. The constant f 3.5 lenses have
55mm filter threads. The macro versions are very sharp and reasonably
contrasty, but not too much. The non-macro is still a good lens, however.
Ken

Steve wrote in message . ..
I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

S

Leica used 3 lenses that were co-developed with Minolta for Leica
cameras. None was made for the Minolta.

Steve wrote in message . ..
I Understand that Minolta worked for or with Leica on the develkopment
and mfg of some of their MD zoom lenses. Can anyone tell me which ones
and if they are any good?

S

Leica used 3 lenses that were co-developed with Minolta for Leica
cameras. None was made for the Minolta.

Steve wrote:
I understand that Minolta worked
for or with Leica ...

Not 'for' but 'with', and not 'Leica' but 'Leitz' back then.
The co-operation started in 1972 and ended some ten
years later, in the early '80s.

The reason for the co-operation was Leitz's inability
to develop new R lenses for their then-new Leicaflex
SL2 at reasonable, competitive cost. So they looked
for a partner who was able to produce highest-quality
lenses (including the raw glass for them) at low cost.
They chose Minolta because they had just introduced
a few new lenses that impressed the Leitz people.
These were the MC W.Rokkor-SI 24 mm 1:2.8, the
MC Fish-eye Rokkor-OK 16 mm 1:2.8, and the
MC Zoom Rokkor 80-200 mm 1:4.5.

Leitz wanted Minolta to produce these lenses also
for Leicaflex and Leica R cameras, and Minolta did.
Minolta produced the lenses and re-badged them
with the Leitz name. The first Minolta-made Leitz
lenses (the three mentioned above) were released
at Photokina 1974. It is often claimed that the lenses
meant for Leitz were produced under more stringent
quality control than those meant to bear the Rokkor
name --- but that's not true. The quality control was
just the same for all. Of course, Leitz applied their
own quality control after delivery but the drop-out
rate was not significantly higher than with Rokkor
lenses.

At the same time, Minolta and Leitz also started a
co-operation in developing new SLR cameras. Out
came the Minolta XE-1/Leica R3 and a few years
later the Minolta XD-7/Leica R4. More Minolta
lenses were re-badged with the Leitz name, including
the MD Zoom Rokkor 75-200 mm 1:4.5, the
MD Zoom Rokkor 35-70 mm 1:3.5 (non-macro),
the RF Rokkors 500 mm 1:8 and 800 mm 1:8
.... and still later, the MD Zoom 70-210 mm 1:4
and MD Zoom 35-70 1:3.5 (macro).

In turn, Leitz provided the Minolta SR system with
a few of their lenses, including the Photar 12.5 mm
1:1.9, the Photar 25 mm 1:2.5, and the huge Telyt-S
800 mm 1:6.3. These lenses, however, were not
re-badged 'Minolta' but proudly kept their Leitz
name.

After the Leitz-Minolta co-operation has ended,
Leitz kept producing a few of the Minolta designs;
in particular the 9-element Rokkor 24 mm 1:2.8
was dragged along for several more years ---
they were even forced to apply a slight change
to the design after Minolta stopped to produce
one of the special kinds of glass needed for one
of the original design's elements.

A similar co-operation existed between Carl
Zeiss Oberkochen and Asahi Pentax for some
time.

Olaf