Apparently, every Pentax owner on eBay is an idiot. Today I found four "Pentax f/1.2" lenses. That's how they were described. And each one included a photo with 1:2 clearly visible. Makes participating in this thread that much more difficult.
That_Hack wrote:
Apparently, every Pentax owner on eBay is an idiot. Today I found four "Pentax f/1.2" lenses. That's how they were described. And each one included a photo with 1:2 clearly visible. Makes participating in this thread that much more difficult.
yeah, i would always get excited when i saw an f/1.2 lens listed for $40, then i see the pic...
buggz wrote:
That Canon FD SSC 55/1.2 Aspherical looks very nice, not the blooming halos as other lenses seem to do.
Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 comes to mind...
I think the Canon FD 1.2/55 SSC Aspherical is about as good as it gets for lenses from this period (maybe the FD 1.2/50L is similar or better, I haven't tried it). Ironically the clean, sharp images you get with this lens make it a little less desirable for some kinds of photography but that's a subjective choice, of course. It's a great lens.
I recently purchased a Minolta 1.2/58 MD but am patiently waiting for an adapter. I'm hoping it has a balance of aberrations that I like, my own personal "Goldilocks" zone of optical imperfections. We'll see.
I recently picked up a Yashica ML 1.2/55 which I REALLY like a lot. It's maybe too glowy wide open, and a little flare prone, but very sharp across most of the frame wide open. It's quite impressive, surprisingly, as I'm not generally a Yashica fan TBH.
JohnJ wrote:
I think the Canon FD 1.2/55 SSC Aspherical is about as good as it gets for lenses from this period (maybe the FD 1.2/50L is similar or better, I haven't tried it). Ironically the clean, sharp images you get with this lens make it a little less desirable for some kinds of photography but that's a subjective choice, of course. It's a great lens.
I recently purchased a Minolta 1.2/58 MD but am patiently waiting for an adapter. I'm hoping it has a balance of aberrations that I like, my own personal "Goldilocks" zone of optical imperfections.
if you are a fan of the leica R 801/4, i think you will probably like the rokkor 58/1.2. they seem to have been designed with a similar set of tradeoffs.
sebboh wrote:
if you are a fan of the leica R 801/4, i think you will probably like the rokkor 58/1.2. they seem to have been designed with a similar set of tradeoffs.
Hope so, the hundreds/thousands of images I've seen from the Minolta seem great. I have a pet hate for purple fringing so hope this isn't an issue with the Minolta and it doesn't seem to be from the samples I've seen.
PF is an issue with the Canon FD 1.2/55 SSC Aspherical and it seems later iterations of Canons fast 50's, the EF 1.2/50L is a dog in this respect. It seems to me that purple fringing is less evident when spherical aberration is not entirely corrected, aspherical lenses tend to correct SA very well, but this lack of correction (in non-aspherical lenses) seems to manifest itself as a purple cast or glow wide open which I find more manageable than PF. The Leica R 1.4/80 is good in this respect and is certainly my Goldilocks lens in this focal length.
I lost my mind and bought a 42.5 1.2 Nocticron last week to mount my GM5 onto. I had seen a few images taken with the Noct, and was immediately intrigued. I have the Panasonic 42.5 1.7, which is crazy good, but it doesn't have that little "extra sauce" I was seeing in the Noct images. They look like full-frame images.
Long story short, I am extremely happy with the Noct. I can't even wrap my head around how sharp it is, with micro-contrast I have only seen in my vintage Zeiss/Contax C/Y lenses. The smooth, creamy bokeh is the icing on the cake.
A few from the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens this weekend.
Activatedfx wrote:
I lost my mind and bought a 42.5 1.2 Nocticron last week to mount my GM5 onto. I had seen a few images taken with the Noct, and was immediately intrigued. I have the Panasonic 42.5 1.7, which is crazy good, but it doesn't have that little "extra sauce" I was seeing in the Noct images. They look like full-frame images.
Long story short, I am extremely happy with the Noct. I can't even wrap my head around how sharp it is, with micro-contrast I have only seen in my vintage Zeiss/Contax C/Y lenses. The smooth, creamy bokeh is the icing on the cake.
A few from the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens this weekend.
buggz wrote:
That Canon FD SSC 55/1.2 Aspherical looks very nice, not the blooming halos as other lenses seem to do.
Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 comes to mind...
The colours look very nice,yet I had expected better corner sharpness wide open.The nFD 50/1.2 looks sharper.
Great shots from everyone, showing lots of character and strengths from various wide apertures.
I recently had the chance to take some shots with the new Canon R camera and its new RF 50/1.2L lens. Wow! I really love this lens. I already own an FL 55/1.2 and the current EF 50/1.2L, but this new Canon is very clean with low aberrations, even wide open. I'm glad they have an initial high price of $2300, or I'd be tempted to immediately buy the system for this lens and those undoubtedly to follow soon.
