Fairly Frequently Asked Questions
This page holds a lot of FAQ's to answer some common questions about Minolta cameras. Please see the respective question for the original source(s) of the information.
Last updated
This page holds a lot of FAQ's to answer some common questions about Minolta cameras. Please see the respective question for the original source(s) of the information.
Last updated
This page holds a lot of FAQ's to answer some common questions about Minolta cameras. Please see the respective question for the original source(s) of the information.
*Some of these FFAQ's deal with or link to DIY repairs and modifications. These can damage equipment permanently without following instructions and being careful!
This information is offered on the assumption that you already have some experience fixing cameras and are confident in your abilities to not cause further damage to your gear. As such, the authors of the links and the Minoltapedia are not responsible for any damages, injury, or expenses in repairs caused by following advice linked below unprepared.
As a side note, I strongly recommend reading and taking the Learn Camera repairs' offered before attempting any repairs if you are not familiar with fixing cameras or lenses.
So, you want a Minolta Manual Focus SLR - but information is confusing, there's loads of different models, and people are telling you to get this, that, and the other. You don't want to wade through hundreds of pages and video reviews? This decision chart might be for you!
Difficulty making out the text? Click the Image above to see this on the original Reddit post, where you can see the image in full resolution via Imgur in the comments. You can also Right Click > 'Open Image in New Tab' to zoom into this image if you like.
Bear in mind that the chart is a simplification - it separates models and variants by sometimes only a single unique feature or characteristic, when there might be more behind the camera. When you reach a final reccomendation, it's a good idea to then research that specific model to confirm it is the future Minolta SLR of your dreams. You can use to learn more about your model and variant.
If you are looking for a Minolta AutoFocus SLR, I would recommend using
The US, Japanese, and 'Other' (UK/EU/ME) markets had different model names for the SRT models. This was possibly to track regional sales statistics, or to control exports. Back then it made sense, since a photographer would only see the models sold within their market. Today, with global shipping however, it makes identifying models very confusing. To make matters worse, Minolta developed the SRT throughout their production, often with minute changes and sometimes with no outward name changes at all.
Starting simply with just series name differences, the names of these changed depending on which regional market it was sold in.
Series
Class
US Model Name
JPN Model Name
UK/EU/ME Model Name
1xx (1966-1975)
Budget
SRT 100
SRT 100
1xx
Shop Brand
-
- / SRT MC
1xx
Standard
SRT 101
SRT 101
1xx
Premium
SRT 303
2xx (1975-1981)
Budget, Upgraded
-
2xx
Shop Brand, Upgraded
-
- / SRT MC II
2xx
Standard, Upgraded
SR 101 / 101s
SRT 101b
2xx
Premium, Upgraded
SR 505 / 505s
SRT 303b
- Not sold in that region
So we have the general series names, but Minolta developed the SRT throughout their production. Some have Mirror Lock Up's, Hotshoes, Split Prism Viewfinders, or Film Tab Holders, and some don't have any of these features at all! Even the CLC metering system that the SRT is known for was removed in the very latest models. It's very complicated, often confusing, and can be a real nuisance when you are looking for the 'best' SRT for you when there's 2-5 different versions of the SRT Model.
There's an entire community devoted to surveying SRT variants and you can go down a very deep rabbit hole if you want. For simplicity this compiles the information from a few resources and splits them into 6 Stages:
Click the Image above to see this in Google Drive, where you can click on the models and read directly about the model and the differences (from external sources, Rokkorfiles and Minman).
These changes were a result of balancing features available on SRT's by adding new developments whilst removing obsolete ones. This coincided with other Minolta models being released, as they didn't want an SRT to accidentally compete with the XK (1972), XE (1974/75), XK-Motor (1976), and the XG/XD (both 1977).
The SRT 101 was released whilst the old SR models were still being sold, becoming their new flagship camera. While they developed the Budget (100) and Premium (102) SRT's, they improved the shutterspeed dial and the take-up spools (Stage 1). Later as the SRT 100 and 102 were released, they removed the Mirror-Lock-Up (Stage 2) from the SRT 101 as it seemed to be a feature only 'Pros' would use on the new SRT 102. Only a year later, the SRT 102 lost it's own MLU (Stage 3) which left the XK as the only 'Pro' camera with that feature.
Stage 4 saw the introduction of the new SRT 200 series, which apart from the name-change and discontinuation of the 100 series, saw shutterspeed and hotshoe upgrades as well a Film Tab Memo holder on the filmdoor.
Stages 5, 6, and 7 came year-after-year for SRT 200's. The first cost-cutting measure was introduced which changed the metal aperture ring to plastic, and the locking Depth of Field preview mechanism become a 'push and hold' version. The next year, viewfinder focus aids were changed from a horizontal prism to split-prism which made it easier to use. The SRT 202's never saw this upgrade or any future changes, as they were discontinued. There was no reason to upgrade 202's further and put them against the new XD models, and they couldn't cheapen the model further because the SRT 201 and 200 existed below it.
The final Stage was a cost cutting measure as by then the remaining SRT's were becoming obsolete, whilst fully electronic cameras took over. They removed the 2nd metering cell in the camera, which made part of the 'CLC' system on all previous SRT's. This also meant CLC name wasn't on the prisms.
Within a year of the SRT's being discontinued entirely after 1981, the electronic X-300 (Budget/Basic), X-500 (Standard/Enthusiast), and X-700 (Premium/Pro) series came in.
When SRT cameras were released between 1966 and 1981, Mercury-Oxide batteries were already in popular use for mobile electronics because of their long shelf life, large energy capacity, and stable voltage output at 1.35 Volts. The Mercury acted as a stabiliser for the chemical reaction, so they held their charge for a very long time, and didn't explode or leak (so often).
The issue is that Mercury is a toxic substance - when the batteries were dumped, the Mercury leaked out of landfills and into drinking water. Workers would get sick making the batteries, and there is still no treatment for the mental and physical damage it causes. By the mid-90's, most Western countries had restricted their manufacture and banned their commercial import or use.
What replaced Mercury-Oxide was mostly Alkaline (A, AG, L, LR), Zinc-Air (ZA), or Silver-Oxide (SO, SG, SR) button cells. While they worked well in the more modern XE, XD, and X-hundred series, the different 1.5 Voltage and varying drain on these new batteries meant they couldn't work with the old SRT's system. The SRT meters didn't regulate Voltage, so they would under and over expose depending whether the battery was old or new.
Since the 2000's as the remaining Mercury batteries died out, methods for working alternatives have sprung up. There are literally hundreds and thousands of webpages, articles, and forum posts giving advice, from Sunny 16 to battery substitution, soldering a voltage regulator in, or modifying the meter. So, here's a summary of the common and uncommon methods I've found with links to all of them.
The table is ordered by how easy it is to complete the option - the first you could do with the camera in your hands right now. Each have their pros and cons, and the last one is illegal in most countries, but you can weigh the options and decide which one suits your needs (except the last one - that is objectively a bad option). Some links allow for each option's purchase, but I am not affiliated with or recommending any of them by having them on the table.
Type
Option
Ease
Voltage & BatteryDrain
Metering Consistency
Expense
Source
No Meter
Sunny 16
Easy, follow simple guidelines
0V, No drain
User Dependant
Free!
Manual Exposure Compensation (MEC)
Alkaline LR44 & MEC
Easy to attempt, Very Difficult to succeed
1.5V, Gradual drain
Very inconsistent
The 'Control' price
There are no guides, it's the worst idea!
Battery Substitution
Alkaline 625A Battery
Very Easy, just insert battery
1.5V, Gradual drain
Inconsistent
Similarly priced
Battery Substitution
Zinc-Air MRB625 WeinCell
Very easy, just insert battery
1.35V, Stable for ~6 months
Very Consistent
More expensive, shorter lasting
DIY Battery Adaptation
Rubber O-Ring + ZA675 Battery
Easy, wrap battery in O-ring & insert
1.4V, Stable for ~6 months
Consistent, negligible inaccuracy
Marginally cheaper + 1-time O-ring cost
Simple Battery Adaptor
PaulBG Ring + ZA675 Battery
Very easy, insert battery into ring and insert
1.4V, Stable for ~6 months
Consistent, negligible inaccuracy
Initially expensive, recouped by ZA675 Battery use
Type
Option
Ease
Voltage & Battery Drain
Metering Consistency
Expense
Source
Advanced Battery Adaptor
Criscam MR9 Adaptor + Silver Oxide 386/SR44 Battery
Very Easy, insert battery into adapter and insert
1.35V, Stable
Very consistent
Very expensive, recouped with 386/SR44 battery use
DIY Potentiometer Adjustment
Adjusting SRT meter + SR44 Battery
Somewhat Easy, requires careful adjustment
1.55V, adjusted for SRT compatibility, Stable
Very consistent, if adjusted correctly and ONLY using SR44's
Cheap
DIY Schottky Adaptation
External Schottky Diode Adaptor + SR44 Battery
Difficult to make without electrical experience
1.35V, Stable
Very consistent
Cheap, but material upfront costs
DIY Schottky Conversion
Integrated Schottky Diode + O-Ring + SR44 Battery
Difficult without electrical experience
1.35V, Stable
Very consistent
Cheap, with 1-time material costs
Custom Circuit Conversion
Stable625 Chip + SR44 Battery
Complicated, Professional install expected
1.35V, Stable
Very consistent
? Cheaper than adaptation, one off costs from installation
Russian Imported Original Mercuries
Mercury PX625 Batteries, from Russia
Very easy, but heavily restricted
1.4~1.35V, Stable
Consistent but with QC issues (variable V range)
Expensive, possibly illegal and/or sanctioned in your country
* The final link is added as a source of reference and information, you cannot purchase from this link directly. I STRONGLY ADVISE AGAINST breaking your local laws or personal morals to buy a Mercury Battery from a Russian Military supplier. Alongside the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, there's also environmental & health concerns for disposal of and exposure to Mercury, and the legal consequences for purchasing and/or importing a banned product containing toxic material.
The models to be aware of for capacitors are;
Most X-300/370 and some X-500/570 series cameras - They were the budget alternative to the X-700, so they weren't expected to be used for long (40 years). Also by the time they released in 1983 and 1984 respectively, and by that time Minolta had used most of their remaining Tantalum capacitors left. Again though, only checking underneath the baseplate will confirm this.
Most X-700 series cameras. In the first few runs of the camera, The X-700 was given the expensive more reliable STEC/Tantalum capacitors because it was the 'Pro' camera which was expected to be reliable. Unfortunately the Tantalum material got more and more expensive, until it was no longer feasible to continue their manufacture. That means very early X-700's below serial no. 20xxxxxx got reliable capacitors and don't have issues, but all later serial numbers got the less reliable ones.
These are not set-in-stone truths, however. As time goes on, people get their cameras repaired. You might find any of these cameras with a freshly replaced capacitor from today. These are still ALEC capacitors, but with far better reliability than ones built 50 years ago. You should only replace the capacitor if the symptoms of a dying/dead capacitor are apparent;
The meter lights up on half-press or touch of the shutter button
Sometimes in addition, the LED meter will only flash the overexposure '🔺' arrow before dying, or the meter will run through all the shutterspeed LED's in sequence until the '🔺' arrow, regardless of lighting.
...but on full press of the shutter button the LED meter turns off and the shutter does not release (when the camera wind lever has been advanced/wound on and prepared to shoot). The meter does not turn on when you attempt to press the button again.
On turning the camera off and on again, the same symptoms repeat.
It can't be to identify the lens, because if I was talking about the 'MC Rokkor PF' lens, it could be a 135mm, 100mm, 85mm, 58mm, 55mm, 53mm, or 50mm. That's a lot of PF's! It also can't be a grading system, as the 16mm f/2,8 'MC Fish-Eye Rokkor OK' is better than ok, it's actually really good. It can't be a manufacturing location either, as the 21mm 'MC W.Rokkor NL' lenses were made in Japan, not the Netherlands.
Silly jokes aside, it's about the Elements and Groupings of the glass inside the lens. The first letter is tied to how many Groups of Elements there are, following the mathematical designation:
The P in 'PF' means 5 Groups.
Math Designation*
Tri
Quad
Pent
Hex
Sept
Oct
Non
# of Groups
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
* If this doesn't make sense, think of polygons. Pentagon, Hexagon, Septagon, etc.
Then the second letter covers the amount of Elements in the lens and is simply tied to the letters' position in the Alphabet:
The F in 'PF' means 6 Elements
# of Elements
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
So if P means Penta groups and the F means 6 Elements, the Lens has 6 Element in 5 Groups!
You might be asking yourself, 'What can I do with this information now, does that mean anything for quality?' and the answer is 'sort of'. Earlier original SR lenses like the 35mm W.Rokkor QE (5 Elements in 4 Groups) were slower at f/4 compared to the later MC W.Rokkor HH (8 Elements in 7 Groups) at f/1.8. You also see this with the MC-Rokkor PG lenses with 1 extra Element being ~1/3 of a stop faster than their PF counterparts, but then the focus is harder to make at that extra stop gained because it gives a narrower Depth of Field.
For later MD lenses this information isn't helpful, as no MD Lens has this naming feature. You'd have to look up that information online, but then you'd find many MD Lenses have less Elements and Groups than their earlier MC counterparts, but are faster or considered generally better. This is because of their more advanced glass coatings which came later with the MD lenses.
There is a very common mistake that any lens that says 'MC' on it is for Minolta mount cameras. Unfortunately this isn't true and can lead to compatibility problems. Here's how to make sure a lens is definitely for Minolta Manual Focus! (AKA SR mount);
MC Lens Identification
'MC' is often confused as Minolta meant it to mean 'Meter Coupling', but 3rd party brands used it to mean 'Multi-Coated'.
MD Lens Identification
It means 'Meter Diaphragm', for Program and Shutter Priority modes of later Minolta cameras.
Rear Lens Identification
Alternate Identification Methods (for 3rd Party Minolta Mount Lenses)
Other methods work better with 3rd Party lenses, as they won't carry the 'Minolta MC-Rokkor', Rokkor', or 'Minolta MD' name on the front ring.
There may be a combination of all these. For example, 'SR/MC for MINOLTA' or 'SR/MD' or 'M/SR'.
Older Minolta Lens Identification
This is mostly for posterity, as these older SR lenses are so old that they aren't likely to be seen very often or confused with anything else.
From Geiger counter testing by members of the Minolta Collectors' Group on Facebook, there are known to be only 4 radioactive lenses made by Minolta.
Lens Name
Radioactive/Surveyed, %
Average Radioactivity (μSieverts/hour)[*]
Location of Radioactivity
Highest known Radioactive Lens Serial #
Source(s)
MC-W Rokkor-SI (28mm f/2.5)
MC-I, MC-II, MC-X
1.99
Rear Element of Front Lens Assembly
MC Rokkor-PG (58mm f/1.2)
MC-I, early MC-II
5.90
Rear Element
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF (100mm f/2)
AR-II
2.38
Rear Element
MC Tele Rokkor-PF (100mm f/2)
MC-I
2.83[**]
Rear Element
[*] The average is calculated for only the radioactive lenses.
[**] The average is calculated for only 4/6 radioactive lenses that had available measurements taken.
Is the 85mm f/1.7 Lens Radioactive too?
Lens Name
Radioactive/Surveyed, %
Average Radioactivity (μSieverts/hour)
Location of Radioactivity
Earliest Surveyed Serial #
MC Rokkor-PF (85mm f/1.7)
MC-I ?
0
N/A
* 20 MC-II models were surveyed, including an extremely early production serial number of the lens, yet none were found to be radioactive.
What about [Insert any other Minolta Lens]?
Is it on the list? Then probably not.
Radioactive lenses were only used by Minolta in an early and short period of time (60's - early 70's) before lens designs and manufacturing got better. They were also more expensive to produce, so across all lens manufacturers they were mostly restricted to Prime lens ranges used by professionals (24-35mm, 85-100mm, fast lenses <f/2.8). That means a common MD 50mm f/2 lens made in the late 1980's is almost certainly not going to radioactive.
However.
We only know table of radioactive lenses above because they were tested by the community. If you test any Minolta lens with a Geiger counter or other radioactive measuring device and it picks up something, we'd love to see the results so serial numbers or even a new lens model can be included in the radioactive table! All credit will be attributed to whoever finds one.
Are Radioactive Lenses Dangerous?
So, some Minolta lenses are radioactive. But are they dangerous? Not at all. These are measured with the detector right up to the glass, whereas the strength of radioactivity decreases rapidly with distance from the source. At 1 metre or 3 feet away from the back of the lens pointed at you, there is no detectable radioactivity. If you put the lens cap on or mounted it on a camera, the radioactivity distance would be reduced to just that space inside.
100 mSv / 6 μSv per hour = 16,666 Hours, or 694 Days. Even if you strapped the rear element of the most radioactive MC Rokkor-PG 58mm lens to your body for an entire year, you couldn't increase your risk of cancer. You are safe.
Officially, Minolta provided support for only 3 lens mounts, with a simple letter-based adapter system;
Today you can find cheap adapters for various mounts from 3rd Party Vendors for adaptation. Many use glass corrective elements to adapt the lens to Minolta SR, and don't produce good images as a result. It's best to stick native SR-mount lenses, or adapted M42/Exacta lenses using the correct adaptor.
There is no way to retroactively adapt modern DSLR or Mirrorless lenses to Minolta SR in any way.
There are LA-EA Adaptors for A-mount to E-mount, and adaptors for Minolta SR/MC/MD to Sony E-Mount, but Minolta SR/MC/MD to A-Mount adaptors are very uncommon. When the Minolta Autofocus A-mount came in 1985, the older Manual Focus Minolta mount were quietly dropped from support, and new lenses stopped being made entirely by the mid 1990's. Konica Minolta and Sony didn't even bother making an SR to A-mount adaptor by their period of ownership.
Not much is known about them, but they are suspected to be old copy-projection lenses for 70's Minolta office photocopiers.
If you are in the market for large format lens adaptation, I would not advise using these as they were built for extremely short focus distances.
/
If you want to read more about each option or get into the discharge curves and details of the Mercury Battery Problem, you can read resources by , , , , , and . is probably the most detailed and authoritative on the issue, and the technical differences between battery types.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, , *
No! XD's, XE's, XK's, SRT's and SR cameras don't have capacitor issues. The cameras can still fail and stop working, of course, but capacitors are not expected to be the cause of failure in those models, as they had more reliable Tantalum capacitors. Early model XG's were more likely to have Tantalum capacitors, but it's not guaranteed. You can identify Tantalum caps by their . The ones to be concerned about are the Aluminium capacitors, that are .
Some XG series cameras - It's more likely that the XG models with the are more likely to have Aluminium capacitors, but it is not a guaranteed method of testing. You will only be certain by taking off the base plate of the camera. They didn't expect people to keep using them 45 years on!
In those cases, refer to the repair articles by , & (XG-M), , and for repairs if you are confident. If you aren't, you can also get them repaired professionally in most vintage camera repair shops.
As you might have already seen on your lenses, have 2-letter suffixes after 'Rokkor'. If you're very fortunate, you might even have an earlier Auto-Rokkor or an original SR lens with two letters like 'PF'.
If you want to read more about it, you can check out Minolta Lens Designations by or by . You can also read more generally into Minolta Lenses by and which refer to the Lens Designations and their eventual removal when MC III (aka 'Rokkor-X') and MD lenses started production.
If it just says like this, that is not a reliable way to tell the mount of the lens. This is an M42 lens, not for SR.
To reiterate, Minolta MC doesn't mean '. This is also a non-compatible lens.
If it says , , or alongside the Minolta name, it is compatible.
Minolta was the only one to make MD lenses, so it will say , , or just on the front ring, alongside the Minolta name.
Minolta SR (MC/MD) mount changed a couple of times during development, but it has always looked relatively the same. It always has had , with the aperture linkage (2) opposite the bayonet with the nick in it (1).
Later got the aperture meter coupling tab (4) and minimum diaphragm tab (5), respectively.
Most 3rd parties are kind enough to state it directly on the back, such as '' on the lens mount or . It may also come across as '' or just ''.
Older 3rd parties may refer to the but are less common.
lenses lack the MD and MC tabs, and the aperture linkage is very long. The very old ones have the linkage connected to a ring that rotates along outside, instead of the tiny linkage you see on later Minolta lenses. They almost always say 'Auto Rokkor' and no one made any 3rd party copies, so they aren't easy to confuse.
were the very first Minolta SR mount lenses, and lack even the aperture linkage. They always say 'Rokkor-XY'. There were very few 3rd party manufacturers making Minolta lenses this early, and you'll likely never see one to get confused about them in the first place.
These 4 are radioactive because their glass elements contained Thorium or Lanthanum, periodic Elements that have a high . Thorium/Lanthanum glass reduced Chromatic Aberrations, by stopping light splitting and dispersing as it passes through the glass (think Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd). As a side effect, it made the lenses mildly radioactive since the glass could be made of up the 30% of radioactive Elements. Based on these lens surveys however, they are only very mildly radioactive. We'll get to that later.
All of this data in these tables was by researched members of the , and the original post by Maury J. goes more into detail on the general methodology for measuring radioactivity.
Affected
, 100%
SN
, 75% (MC-I: 1/1, MC-II: 4/7)
SN
, and
, 100%
SN
and
, 75%
SN
, , and
There were rumours that a fifth lens (an MC Rokkor 85mm f/1.7) might be radioactive, however there's no proof that Minolta made a radioactive 85mm lens. cited an MC-I version of the 85mm lens used radioactive components, but there isn't an .
Unfortunately the myth of a radioactive 85mm lens persisted and spread, including being reproduced on the Rokkorfiles website. It has since been and even by the author of Rokkorfiles himself. Unfortunately the Rokkorfiles creator does not maintain the website any more and cannot correct the mistake, so this table aims to keep setting the record straight;
*
SN , 7th 85mm lens made
For a , an average daily Background Radiation dose is between 2-10 μSv, a Dental X-Ray is 5 μSv, a Chest X-Ray is 20 μSv. A yearly dose that is clearly linked to increased cancer risk is 100 mSv. Let's do some math;
- For Pentax (or Praktica) M42 screwmount. This was a simple adaptor that only allowed for stop-down metering. The lens would be pre-set at the aperture when the meter was taken and the shutter released. Whilst it was designed for Pentax' M42 lenses in mind, it's compatible with the universal M42 screwmount found on cameras found in the former Soviet Union (Praktica, Carl Zeiss, Zenit, Contax), Japanese manufacturers (Mamiya, Yashica, Tamron, Tokina, Soligor, Fuji), and now some TTartisan lenses being released in M42.
- For Exakta bayonet mount. Similar to the P-Adapter, the lenses could only be used with the aperture pre-set, for stop-down metering only. This adaptor was intended for lenses commonly found in East Germany (Carl Zeiss Jena, Pentacon, Meyer) as well as some early Japanese manufacturers (i.e. Topcon, Nikon).
- This was for Leica's Thread Mount (LTM), otherwise known as M39 screwmount. This was . As such, stop down metering was required, and even focus was controlled via the bellows instead of focusing the lens. You would attach the bellows to the camera through the regular Minolta SR-mount, then attach the L-Adapter to the bellows. Whilst LTM lenses could theoretically fit onto this adaptor, it was only designed for bellows-work, so most non-macro lenses (i.e. LTM rangefinder lenses) would not be functional.
For a brief time however, Minolta did make official 'M/A Converters', an , and an . They adapt Minolta SR lenses to A-mount, but also act as x2 teleconverters (i.e. An MD 50mm f/1.7 becomes functionally a 100mm f/3.5 when adapted). They require stop down metering of the aperture to function on an A-mount camera. They are 'dumb' adaptors, lacking any electrical contacts to communicate EXIF-metadata with the camera. This requires changing a setting on your Minolta/Konica-Minolta A-mount camera to allow shutter release without a lens mounted as the adaptor is not detected. There is a section for this in the . You can learn more about their general performance . These are the best available as they were the only official adaptors. They're harder to find nowadays, but are occasionally on Ebay. Just search '' and you will eventually find a few.
There were also 3rd party ones offered by Sigma in the 1980's, and some unbranded ones by another company. There's not as much information on these, but you can read more about what adapter/converters were available on (Ctrl-F, 'Manual Focus Lens Section'). There are also modern adaptors by that teleconvert by x1.4 (i.e. 50mm becomes ~70mm), but these are of lower quality as they add a cheap glass element to adapt them.
The alternative and better recommended option for manual focus lenses on an autofocus or digital camera is to have a Mirrorless camera with an adaptor. They don't use corrective glass or teleconvert the focal length, however they have their own cost vs quality considerations. You can read more about these from .
I.E.
Those are from a Microfilm/Microfiche Reader-Printer. You can and with some careful adaptation can be used a highly magnifying Macro lens. You can also just , if MicroFiche Readers are your thing.
In short, there was a dubious Trademark dispute involving US Patent Law in the mid-2010's, and Minolta (Konica Minolta) lost. The Trademark of 'Minolta' was then passed to a US-registered licensing company called JMM Lee, and they proceeded to sell their license to EliteBrands, who manufacture crappy cameras under a ''. You can find unbranded copies of their 'MND' and 'MNZ' cameras on AliExpress at a fraction of their costs advertised on US shopping channels or Amazon.
If they are considered 'Minolta', then I have an Minolta-brand bridge to sell you. Don't buy them, at best they have no relation to old Minolta, and at worst are the modern-era equivalent of a ''.
If you are interested in the Trademark Patent dispute, you can written up to cover this FAQ that kind of ballooned into it's own thing. (I would appreciate any critique and comments on the draft before I finally 'publish' it somewhere!)
