# Minolta 58 f1.2?



## ksagomonyants (Feb 16, 2014)

Hello guys! Has anybody used Minolta 58 f1.2 manual focus lens on Canon FF DSLRs? I'm not a big fan of 50mm focal length, just find it a little boring. Thus, I don't want to spend a lot of money paying $1000+. But I still think it's good to have the lens of this focal length in the bag. So, I went over many images of the old legendary Minolta 58 f1.2 and I really like bokeh on this lens, and it's ~$350-500. So, the question is whether or not any of you guys ever used this lens? Would you buy it for occasional use or it's better to save money and get something else? Thank you.


----------



## JumboShrimp (Feb 16, 2014)

I believe Minolta lenses require an adapter with an optical lens which will allow infinity focus. Obviously this lens will degrade the image ... some will degrade it quite a bit. You might consider instead a Nikkor 55/1.2 MF that requires a simple non-optical adapter. I have one of these on my 6D and the results, bokeh, etc. are superb. The Nikkor lens will easily fit your budget.


----------



## ksagomonyants (Feb 16, 2014)

JumboShrimp said:


> I believe Minolta lenses require an adapter with an optical lens which will allow infinity focus. Obviously this lens will degrade the image ... some will degrade it quite a bit. You might consider instead a Nikkor 55/1.2 MF that requires a simple non-optical adapter. I have one of these on my 6D and the results, bokeh, etc. are superb. The Nikkor lens will easily fit your budget.



They do, but Jim Buchanan (http://www.jimbuchananspace.com/Camera_Services.html) is converting the mount of the lens to fit into the EOS mount. So you don't really need an adapter, and thus the image quality won't be affected, at least in theory. Nikon 55 f1.2 is a great lens too, I really liked the images taken with it! But it'll require the adapter, so in this case the IQ will most likely be affected adversely.


----------



## Sella174 (Feb 16, 2014)

It all depends on what you want to use the lens for ... I have found that Minolta lenses make excellent portrait lenses, because with the "macro" adapter, although you lose infinity focus, you can usually focus sufficiently up to about seven or eight metres. Well, whichever way, if you can grab one of these babies, then grab with both hands ...


----------



## sanj (Feb 16, 2014)

To me 50mm is a mandatory focal length.


----------



## scott_m (Feb 16, 2014)

There's also a 50mm f/1.2 Minolta in the later MD version, but this would also require a mount change to get infinity focus (or an optical adapter but that kind of defeats the purpose IMO)

The all-mechanical Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AIS is still available new and the F-EOS adapter does not require any optical elements to focus to infinity. It's a bit pricey but I've seen the Minolta sell used for almost the same in "like new" condition so maybe it's not so bad after all...


----------



## justaCanonuser (Feb 16, 2014)

Besides the general drawbacks of adapting such a non-native lens to a DSLR, you will have to focus it most probably manually (I don't know which Minolta/Canon EF adapters are available). The problem is that the focusing screens in modern DSLRs do not support manual focusing of such superfast lenses with paper thin depth-of-field anymore, says at least Ken Rockwell (read the paragraph just right over the lense's picture in http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/50mm-f1.htm). I don't know if he is right, but I can tell from my own practical experience with my Canon EF 85mm/1.2 that I would miss most shots wide open if I couldn't rely on the (great) AF system of my 5D3. Plus, the 5D3's VF indeed does not help me much focusing this lens manually, at least if I shoot moving objects (= people), but maybe I am not skilled enough. 

Such vintage Minolta glass is really intriguing, but it may make more sense to adapt such a beast to a mirrorless body that offers manual focus peaking in its EVF, which is not (yet?) available from Canon. Plus, you won't lose focusing at infinity with such a smaller body + adapter.


----------

