With the number of threads in this section of the forum, I expected to find a number of threads on Konica AR lenses, but no. I´m not the typical fanboy, claiming that Konica lenses are the best optics to ever come out of Japan, but they are certainly comparable (maybe even surpassing) to Nikkors and what have you. Their short flange to focal distance has pretty much disqualified them from being adapted to SLRs, but with the ever-increasing number of mirrorless cameras being sold, they have found new use (with the inevitable increase in price).
Well, if only one other and myself are keeping the Panasonic image thread afloat, one can only wonder at the demographics behind these more obscure lenses
edit - I do appreciate the head's up, though - I'll be in the market soon for some primes on my A7 whenever it decides to finally ship, so I can start investigating these lenses also
I think the three that I tried, the 35/2.8, 40/1.8, and 85/1.8, were all good performers and decently sharp, but there were other lenses from other manufacturers at comparable prices or better that I liked for different reasons. There are certainly some great bargains to be had there, though.
Great shots to showcase the "famed" Konica sharpness! I also find the 50/1.7 to be really sharp, as well as the 85, the 100 and the 135/3.2 and 3.5. Bokeh is not great, though, I find it a bit "nervous", at least with the 50/1.7.
For the price, I can´t think of a lens system with more "bang for the buck". In Sweden, they can be had for ridiculously low prices. I paid 75$ for a 35/2.8, a 50/1.7 and a 100/2.8, all in great condition (hardly used) with original Konica UV filters and original hoods and cases for the 100 and the 35.
I think the Konica 57mm f1.2 is one of the best lenses from any system. Very low contrast with lots of spherical aberration wide open, but good by f1.8 and great f2 and above.
Close focusing, beautiful colors, sharp and smooth at the same time. Love it, and can't wait to try it on A7R.
Below are a few samples from the hundreds of "keepers" I've gotten with this lens over the last few years on m43 and NEX.
I'm looking for a small, wide slr lens in the 17-24mm range. So far my alternatives are the tamron 17/3.5 that I already have (and like). What would be a nice, reasonably priced konica be in this range?
So I am reading this thread thinking no love for Konica lenses eh? Well maybe they have slipped under the radar & I can find an 85mm 1.8 that will not break the bank. The few AR 85's I found listed on ebay were over $300.00 us asking price. Which is what some people want for Canon FD 85/1.8's which caused me to ask this question.
What is it about 85mm legacy lenses that make them so expensive compared to other focal lengths?
I can understand decent 21mm lenses being up there in price or the various 1.2 aperture lenses. I am not complaining mind you, just trying to figure out the attraction of the 85 and what drives a moderate aperture lens to command such a price.
I also have a Hexanon 50 1.4 that is a very poor performer by comparison.
Golly, I'm not usually interested in landscape photographs, but this picture is wonderful: the layered composition that encourages the eye to move back and forth across the frame, the transition from the sharp foreground to the misty background, and the tract housing (?) in the upper left acting as a counterpoint to the natural environment. Am I correct in assuming that this picture was made on the southern California coast?
I have a number of Hexanon AR lenses: 15/2.8, 28/1.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 57/1.2, 85/1.8, and 135/3.2, that I picked up a few years ago but haven't used much. I agree with the OP that the Konica AR lenses are underrated and look forward to seeing how they perform on the A7R.
ebrandon wrote:
I think the Konica 57mm f1.2 is one of the best lenses from any system. Very low contrast with lots of spherical aberration wide open, but good by f1.8 and great f2 and above.
Close focusing, beautiful colors, sharp and smooth at the same time. Love it, and can't wait to try it on A7R.
Below are a few samples from the hundreds of "keepers" I've gotten with this lens over the last few years on m43 and NEX.
It's funny... I have the 50/1.7 and used it some back in early mirrorless days, on my Olympus E-P1. I didn't use it much, but took this one shot, I believe wide open, that to me has something I can't quite put my finger on but that I like a lot. It's not a very interesting shot, but it just has that something to me. Could be a combination of coincidence, light/haze and editing, but I dunno... I should use it more, even if for no other reason than to get to come to a conclusion. I also have the Hexanon 40/1.8 pancake, but never took to it. Will give it a second chance once I have a FF mirrorless body for it. Anyway, this is the shot I mentioned.
genji wrote:
Golly, I'm not usually interested in landscape photographs, but this picture is wonderful: the layered composition that encourages the eye to move back and forth across the frame, the transition from the sharp foreground to the misty background, and the tract housing (?) in the upper left acting as a counterpoint to the natural environment. Am I correct in assuming that this picture was made on the southern California coast?
I have a number of Hexanon AR lenses: 15/2.8, 28/1.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 57/1.2, 85/1.8, and 135/3.2, that I picked up a few years ago but haven't used much. I agree with the OP that the Konica AR lenses are underrated and look forward to seeing how they perform on the A7R....Show more →
Thanks! You're close - it was shot in Northern California, just south of San Francisco.
So I am reading this thread thinking no love for Konica lenses eh? Well maybe they have slipped under the radar & I can find an 85mm 1.8 that will not break the bank. The few AR 85's I found listed on ebay were over $300.00 us asking price. Which is what some people want for Canon FD 85/1.8's which caused me to ask this question.
What is it about 85mm legacy lenses that make them so expensive compared to other focal lengths?
I can understand decent 21mm lenses being up there in price or the various 1.2 aperture lenses. I am not complaining mind you, just trying to figure out the attraction of the 85 and what drives a moderate aperture lens to command such a price....Show more →
Many regard 85 as the ideal short tele for portraits, great 85's are over $1000, good one's are $600-$800, which is where the Konica and FD would be if they had a longer register to mount on EF.
I expect their prices to climb with the release of the A7(r), so get them now.
LightShow wrote:
Many regard 85 as the ideal short tele for portraits, great 85's are over $1000, good one's are $600-$800, which is where the Konica and FD would be if they had a longer register to mount on EF.
I expect their prices to climb with the release of the A7(r), so get them now.
Thanks,that makes sense. So the fact that you can use a Nikkor or C/V Zeiss on a EOS is why the Nikkors & C/V's command the price they do. Not to mention they are pretty nice lenses. I have a few older Nikkor lenses & I like them.
OK I am on it & will get my 85 right off. I did notice the 85 1.2's bring big bucks no matter what the brand.
Tarocco wrote:
Thanks! You're close - it was shot in Northern California, just south of San Francisco.
Well, when I wrote "southern California", of course I really meant Northern California.
A few years ago a friend and I drove from San Francisco to Los Angeles and that landscape seemed familiar. And for some reason I thought that SF is in "the middle" of California so south of SF became southern California. But I just looked at a map and was surprised to see that SF is definitely north of the mid-point. Anyway, it sure is a spectacular coastline.
The 85/1.8 is among my favourite Konica lenses. Fully usable wide open (I´m allergic to the term "sharp wide open", which is rarely the case) and stopped down to f/2.8, it´s as sharp as I´ll ever need from a lens.
Nothing near the artistic quality of the other contributions to this thread, but it shows the sharpness the 85 delivers when stopped down to 2.8 (focus is on the left eye, click for full-res on flickr):
I'm bumping this thread because during the last days I enjoyed shooting with a new Konica 28mm F1.8 UC Hexanon lens so much.
28mm is one of my favorite focal lengths (full frame field of view). On this particular lens, that remains quite compact for such a fast FF wide angle, I like the ability of background isolation. I think the bokeh and OOF highlights are good, too. I also like the low contrast wide open and the sharpness that comes at F 2 or F2.8.
Photos have some test character but so far I had no better shooting opportunity.
Post-processing is moderate, by the way. I added some vignette in LR and perhaps pushed or pulled a little bit.
All shots are from the a.m. lens on a modified lens turbo (Minolta to Konica lens mount conversion) using a Fuji X-E1.
.I like my Hexanons for built quality,sharpness and low level of CA.Here are some walk about early spring shots with some of them.All NEX5N:
