Hey guys,
Anyone here ever convert one of these? And yes, I'm asking about the 1.7 not the 1.2 . I got one for about $12 in ex. condition on a whim, and I was wondering if anyone had ever hacked one... It' the older MC PF version. It actually reminds me a lot of a Super Tak...seems like a nice little lens. The mount looks fairly easy to take apart...looks pretty much like the ones on the 1.2 conversions I've seen.
Anyway, just wondering if anyone else had played around with one of these...
Cheers,
Scott
Hmmm. What did you think of it's performance wide open? If it's no better than a 50/1.8, I probably won't bother converting it... I would expect it to be at least "pretty good". Maybe I will anyway...might be a fun project. It's a nice looking little lens anyway...
Scott Clark wrote:.. I would expect it to be at least "pretty good".
Yes, it is no better than a 50/1,8 Canon.
I have compared around 20 pieces different 50mm/1,8 focal length.
The best performance at f5,6 from all was 50/1,8 Carl zeiss Ultron M42.
IMO Canon EF 1,8/50mm ( first version,metal mount) is hard to beat.
convert wrote:
Scott Clark wrote:.. I would expect it to be at least "pretty good".
Yes, it is no better than a 50/1,8 Canon.
I have compared around 20 pieces different 50mm/1,8 focal length.
The best performance at f5,6 from all was 50/1,8 Carl zeiss Ultron M42.
IMO Canon EF 1,8/50mm ( first version,metal mount) is hard to beat.
I've got the all plastic Canon 50/1.8, and I gotta agree...it's performance is actually pretty good. For the money, it's fantastic. It's a little soft wide open, but again...for the money . If my Super Tak 55/2 had AF though, I think I'd buy an extra camera body and just leave it on there permanently. I guess I'll shelve the 55/1.7 Rokkor for now...save it for a rainy day project.
Scott Clark wrote:
If my Super Tak 55/2 had AF though, I think I'd buy an extra camera body and just leave it on there permanently.
Really? I find that my Super Takumar 55/2 is soft wide open (which can be nice for portraits) and has horrible longitudinal CA (mostly cyan), which is impossible to correct. It's also single coated and therefore prone to flare. I think this lens deservedly has an almost non-existent reputation, unlike the Super Tak 50/1.4 (which I should have bought really).
I love the build quality though - one of the smoothest focus rings around. That's about the only nice thing about it... playing with the focus ring (it has a very long focus throw).
You really need to test it with another adapter. I think it solves most of your problems. While being somewhat soft wideopen, this lens has the potential to produce stunning bokeh. Also, although being single coated, i rarely encounter flare with this lens. I once tested a 50/1.4 super tak against a 50/1.4 smc with minimal differences.
NL:
Anders kom je een keer langs een van deze objectieven proberen (of een helios, of een pentacon, of een... )
/NL
Ok, I agree with the 'potential' for stunning bokeh. In some cases it is very nice, but I've also made images with extreme polygonal OOF highlights that I have not seen with my other lenses yet.
The LoCA is just main turnoff for me, and the slow focus ring can be inconvenient for (portrait) moments that pass quickly. I don't really see how it could be a faulty adapter could cause LoCA on a simple lens like this without floating elements...
interesting, I've owned all three of the Super-Tak normals (55/2, 55/1.8, 50/1.4) and found I liked the 55 better than the 50 (the two 55's are optically identical, a minor physical change to the aperture mechanism is the only difference). I generally found the 55 delivered better results wide open than the 50 did until f2.8
mawz wrote:
interesting, I've owned all three of the Super-Tak normals (55/2, 55/1.8, 50/1.4) and found I liked the 55 better than the 50 (the two 55's are optically identical, a minor physical change to the aperture mechanism is the only difference). I generally found the 55 delivered better results wide open than the 50 did until f2.8
Both my copies of the 55/2 are great. I took one of mine out to the park with my kids a while back and shot these...
All were shot wide open at f2. It's extremely sharp even wide open in the plane of focus. I did catch a slight flare in the shot with the blue handles...but I was shooting almost directly into the sun. It was just out of the frame, only a few degrees off. The image didn't wash out at all, it just has that slight flare. Not bad for a single coated lens... I've been saying for years that the 55/2 is the biggest sleeper out there.
And I've heard from a couple of different sources that the 55/1.8 and 55/2 were the same lens, one just marketed by Pentax as faster so they could stick it on their more expensive cameras, and have the slower one on the cheaper cameras...like you said, optically the same, but different apertures for marketing. Kind of funny. I think the 1.8 version goes for more money.
. I got one for about $12 in ex. condition on a whim, and I was wondering if anyone had ever hacked one... It' the older MC PF version. It actually reminds me a lot of a Super Tak...seems like a nice little lens. The mount looks fairly easy to take apart...looks pretty much like the ones on the 1.2 conversions I've seen.