Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Could be someone tried to clean the back element with a caustic (glass cleaner with an additive?) and that etched the metal. You may never know how much that effected the rest of the lens without a tear down.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like that you can take that metal element out by unscrewing 3 screws. I don’t think there is anything more complicated than that!

 

It should then be easy to clean although the pattern looks like it is almost something intentional ( i can see a smudge where you probably have tried to clean the metal retainer) but it is impossible that it would have been purposely done when new.

 

Is this a Minolta 135mm MD f2.8 or thereabouts? They are not special lenses but should be good and frankly speaking given their relatively small value there is nothing wrong in attempting to clean it, you won’t be losing much even if you were to damage the lens.

 

Other than that, this is not a type of fungus which could infect your camera and other lenses and it would be harmless, I think.

 

If the metal is, as I think, aluminum, it has to be a reaction to some agent producing aluminum oxide crystals.

 

Remove them and then apply a coat of black spray mat paint.

 

http://www.howtocleanthings.com/surfaces/how-to-clean-aluminum/

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Is this a Minolta 135mm MD f2.8 or thereabouts? They are not special lenses but should be good and frankly speaking given their relatively small value there is nothing wrong in attempting to clean it, you won’t be losing much even if you were to damage the lens.

 

 

Sorry for off topic but I need an advice.

 

Milandro, I'm pretty sure you have a big deal of experience with old Minolta lenses, so could you please suggest me what may I add to my recently purchased Minolta X-700 equipped with 50mm 1.4. I'd like to add some lens in wide and tele department. I've heard it's better to avoid MD III series and get older Rokkor ones. What can you say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for off topic but I need an advice.

 

Milandro, I'm pretty sure you have a big deal of experience with old Minolta lenses, so could you please suggest me what may I add to my recently purchased Minolta X-700 equipped with 50mm 1.4. I'd like to add some lens in wide and tele department. I've heard it's better to avoid MD III series and get older Rokkor ones. What can you say?

 

 

You might find this helpful:

 

http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche

 

This guy tested old Minolta lenses on Sony full frame bodies and against modern glass like the latest A and E mount offering.

 

It is mostly in German (use Google Translate), but often the images really speak for themselves.

 

On a side note, I like quite a bit my Minolta MC 24/2.8 (old version, not the new one with the 49mm filter size) and the 105/2.5 MD (latest version).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be someone tried to clean the back element with a caustic (glass cleaner with an additive?) and that etched the metal. You may never know how much that effected the rest of the lens without a tear down.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I have an 135mm Minolta lens that has just the same problem and it's never been cleaned with anything.

Edited by pranfeuri
Link to post
Share on other sites

The rest of the lens looks pristine, body and glasses.

e76c70247cbad291fd0bbf9d0c9af056.jpg

 

Just remove the screws, take the cover out and wash it with water and a good toothbrush. Use a good multipurpose cleaning agent, rinse clean, dry (under the sun for a good dose of uv) and replace. Chances are It won't come back again.

Edited by Aswald
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
    • I discovered this unmarked government installation today.  

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

×
×
  • Create New...