Review: Minolta MD 20mm 1:2.8
Another Minolta New MD 20mm F2.8 lens review.
Personally, it’s my choice among other wide options. I love this lens because geometry, sharpness and shape of hull, or may be because I’m feeling it in my hands better than others ultra-wides – this MD 20/2.8 is a very fit ‘chan’.
After getting a new lens, I always take a few technical shots to understand its strengths and weaknesses – usually it helps me a lot to start using unknown lens with much less of doubt. One day I decided that my data might be interesting for someone else and this site has been made.
Minolta New-MD (MD III) 20mm 1:2.8 parameters:
minolta.eazypix.de index | 21 |
Name engraved on lens | MD |
f[mm] | 20 |
A max [1/f] | 2,8 |
A min[1/f] | 22 |
Lens design [el.] | 10 |
Lens design [gr.] | 9 |
Filter thread Ø front(rear)[mm] | 55 |
Lens Shade | clip-in |
closefocus[m/ft] | 0.25/1 |
Dimension Ø x length [mm] | 64×43.5 |
Weight[g] | 240 |
Year | 1981 |
Style | MD III |
Code No. (ROKKOR-X) or Order No. | 515-810 |
Floating elements | YES (partial support by autofocused adapters) |
Aperture blades number | 6 |
Average international price (sold items) | 2019: USD 250-300 |
Reviewed lens SN: | 8003622 |
Lens exterior:
(forgive me the dust on the lens, I never have the patience to clean objects for close-up photo sessions)
Mounted on Minolta X-700:
Resolution – close distance:
Test description: target is a 10×15 cm picture (printed, glossy photo paper), fixed on the wall by scotch. Distance – about 10% longer than minimal focus distance marked on the lens. Camera Sony A7II (24mpx, full frame) was fixed on the tripod and managed remotely with computer display as a viewfinder. All groups of shots were repeated 9 times for every target position on all apertures from fully opened up to F16, ISO-100, WB – same for all shots. SteadyShot – OFF. Focus was manually corrected for each shot. After all needed shots have been taken for one target position – I moved the target to the next place.
Main idea – to exclude the field curvature affect on so close distance.
Of course, I can’t be absolutely accurate, but so many repeats of shots – 4 for corners, 2 for long side, 2 for short side are giving me insurance that test results are correct.
Finally, pictures were converted from ARW-files in Capture One with default settings (Some single files have a slight light correction, for better visual convenience in comparison), then cropped for 300×200 px elements, combined into diagrams and exported into JPEG-files.
Scene preview:
Test results (selected version, easy to compare – 4 positions):
Test results (full version – all 9 positions):
Resolution – long distance:
Test description: Camera Sony A7II (24mpx, full frame) was fixed on the tripod and managed remotely with computer display as a viewfinder. Targets (buildings) were fixed by gravity power on the distances in more than 200 meters. All shots have been taken with apertures from fully opened up to F16. ISO-100. Shutter Speed – depends on light (camera A-mode), WB – fixed and the same for all shots. SteadyShot – OFF. Focus was manually corrected for each shot to exclude focus-shift affect.
Finally, pictures were converted from ARW-files in Capture One with default settings (Some single files have a slight light correction, for better visual convenience in comparison), then were cropped for 300×200 px elements, combined into diagrams and exported into JPEG-files.
Scene preview:
Test results:
Vignetting:
(frames scaled – 300×200)
Geometric distortion:
(frame scaled 1200×800)
Coma aberrations:
(100% crops – 300×200)
Chromatic aberrations:
(100% crops – 300×200)
Close distance bokeh:
Test conditions: lens was focused on to minimal distance (0.25m), plants were fixed in 2m distance from camera in front of the window with bright light from outside.
(frame scaled 1200×800, bokeh covers the frame partially)
Long distance bokeh:
Test conditions: lens was focused on half distance on the scale (0.5m), houses were fixed in infinity distance on the ground.
Light dots bokeh:
Test conditions: lens was focused on to minimal distance + 10% of scale (about 0.27m), diodes were fixed in 2m distance at the dark background.
(frame scaled 1200×800)
Another resources with tests:
Demo Photos dedicated article
Some examples:
My overall conclusion about the Minolta N-MD 20mm 1:2.8F (Minolta MD III 20mm F/2.8):
Real wide lady. As I said – I very rarely shoot with lenses wider than 35mm. But if I do it – I do it with this beauty. Nice geometry (even better than popular MD 24mmF2.8), has a quite sharp corner after F5.6 which is enough for landscapes or interiors, and beautiful design and feeling in hands. This is my choice in wide-angle diapason up to 35mm. Auto-focus isn’t necessary for such focal distances.
Minolta MC W. Rokkor NL 21mm F/2.8 or this,… That is a question… I like Minolta lenses. I use these on the SRT100X and Nikon Z6. Btw. Very interesting pages, Many greetings from the Czech Republic.
LikeLike
Welcome ))) About the question – the tests of MCII 21/2.8 and comparison with this MDIII 20/2.8 is already done and articles are in production, I hope to publish it close to the autumn. Just can say now that choice is difficult – 20 beats 21 on the center and corners, but 21 beats 20 in the middle. Sounds strange but it is really so. I can’t recommend one instead of other – both have weaknesses and powerful sides.
LikeLike
Thank you for your response, so I’m not going to make a mistake with either of them.
LikeLiked by 1 person