Once I added manual focus cameras to the VMLP, I had to decide which lenses to explore. Initially, I settled on zooms because I had the standard 50mm lenses, and prime SR lenses were more expensive than the AF lenses I used. Once I had a decent collection of manual zooms to play with, I stopped searching for SR lenses. Primes intrigued me, but the prices were still beyond my 35.00 budget for lenses. Eventually, I got seduced into primes by a great deal that came with a set of MC-X primes (35mm 1.8, 58mm 1.2, 85mm 1.7, 100mm f3.5 Macro, and 200mm f3.5 lenses). Once my budget was ruined, the door was open for the MD Tele Rokkor 100mm 2.5.
As usual, reading forum posts leads to buying things I don’t need, and that is what happened with the 100mm f2.5. Someone mentioned that the 100mm 2.5 was underrated and flying under the radar. When I investigated, I found few people had mentioned the lens online, so I became more intrigued. Finally, one came up for sale at below-market prices, so I bought it. The 100mm FL was familiar because of the AF 100mm 2.8 macro. It produces exceptional images, and it made the idea of a 100mm manual lens appealing, though non-macro.
The MD Tele Rokkor 100mm 2.5 arrived in late 2022 and sat around for a while, awaiting its turn. Then, one day, while testing a recently arrived X-700, I popped it on and took a few shots. It was a while before I developed and scanned the film, and when I did, I was impressed. The image quality matched that of the AF 100mm 2.8 macro! Over the next six months, I used the 100mm 2.5 a few times for testing because of its small size. Each time, the images were great. Then, a few weeks ago, while testing an XD5, I decided to use the MD Tele Rokkor 100mm 2.5 again, and this time, I left it on for the whole roll. This lens has lived up to the hype.
Background & Technical Specs
Introduced in 1968, the 100mm f2.5 has gone through five iterations. The initial version weighed 410 gm with a 6/5 lens formula. The first MD versions have a 5/5 optical configuration, 55mm filter size, and weigh less, at 375 gm. The final MD version (1981) is only 310 gm, has a 49mm filter ring, and a built in hood. The minimum focus distance (MFD) is 3.5 feet/1 meter for the MD versions. The MD II version is compact, measuring a little less than 2.5 inches in length. Earlier versions have an MFD of 4 feet/1.2 meters (For more detailed specs, see Minolta SR Lens Index). There are a few good technical reviews of this lens (Phillip Reeves, Lens QA—MD III, 678 Vintage Cameras—MD Tele Rokkor, MDII); otherwise, few bloggers seem to have written about it.
Buying
Fortunately, the 100mm f2.5 shows up on eBay quite often. However, the prices are much higher than what I paid. MD versions tend to cost more than MC versions, which, along with being cheaper, are more common. The MDIII version (plain MD) costs the most and is the rarest. Expect to pay well over 100.00 for an MC-X or later version. MD versions can easily reach 200.00. Hoods are rare, except the new MD version has a built-in hood. I have not seen much in terms of problems with these lenses. Some schniederitis-like stippling of the coating on the rear of the inner lens mount occurs, but that does not affect function or image quality. Get an MD version if you want to use the lens on a Minolta XD11, XD5, or X-700.
Shooting
I’ve used the 100mm 2.5 with a variety of cameras (XE-5, X-700, XD5), and it performs well with all of them. Its compact size and relatively light weight make it convenient to pop into a pocket. It has a nice, solid feel, and focusing is quick with all cameras. It also seems to manage flare pretty well. The MD III version has a shorter focus throw, but I don’t find that of the MD I or MD II versions to be an issue. I have a hood but rarely bring it along. Lately, I seem to shoot a lot around midday, so I will rethink not bringing the hood.
I’m beginning to think that an ideal lightweight prime combo to take out would consist of the 45mm f2, 35mm 2.8, and an MD version of the 100mm 2.5. If a little more weight/size is not an issue, the 50mm PG could replace the 45mm f2. (The 50mm MD-III is also smallish.) I’m still getting used to the 24mm f2.8. The Minolta AF-C (35mm 2.8) and the 100mm 2.5 also make a great combo.
Still-life images are also a good fit for this lens. The 135mm is too long for my small space, and the large zooms, such as the 70-210mm f4, are too slow with my lighting set-ups. I have tried 50mm lenses, and their field of view is too broad. The only remaining candidate is the 85mm 1.7, which I will try next. But so far, the 100mm f2.5 seems ideal.
Images
Color film images (Fuji Pro 400H) were shot with a Minolta XD5. An Olympus e300 with a Fotodiox adapter was used for digital images. The first two e300 images are basic tests for sharpness at f2.5 and f5.6. The two B&W images are Kentmere 100 shot with an XD5. Color images were made in late morning in bright sun, notice the flare on the tower image. I used Fuji Pro 400H for the first time, and I’m pleased with its performance. Film images were home-developed using CineStill chemistries and scanned with the Epson v600.
Impression
The 100mm 2.5 renders sharp images with superb color. Center sharpness wide-open is amazing. The MFD is not bad—after all, this is a portrait lens. I don’t do people portraits, but it works great for flowers. It doesn’t feel too heavy at a little over 13 ounces, paired with an XD or X-700. On those cameras it also supports all modes, including full program mode on the X-700.
I’ve grabbed this lens many times while testing recently-arrived cameras, and I guess that was an unconscious clue that it had wormed its way into my heart. The results are always predictably great. The fact that it is sharp wide-open has earned it an honored spot, and its performance on my ancient Olympus e-300 means it’s bumping my Sony a100/100mm 2.8 macro combo for digital garden shots.
For studio still-life images, it still has to prove itself against the MC 85mm 1.7 and possibly the MD 28-85mm, which is a superb lens despite being a zoom. My walking companions will now be the 100mm 2.5 and an XD, or X-700 (maybe the XG-M) and an AF-C. I think I’m getting to my sweet spot for lenses!
