There are some good references to the different versions online. I checked quite a bit before deciding to get the FDn 50L. Here's an edited post from photo.net:
...the difference between the FD 55/1.2 SSC and non-SSC is at most in their coatings; they share the same optical formula (7 elements in 5 groups). The 55/1.2 Aspherical, which also comes in two versions, has a different and superior optical formula (8 elements in 6 groups, with an aspherical element).... The New FD 50/1.2 L is also sharp at wide apertures (it, too, has an aspherical element and 8 element/6 group formula), and to my eye has more pleasing bokeh than the Aspherical.
The non-Aspherical is reputed to be quite soft wide open (although I've never used one), while the Aspherical is quite sharp wide open.If you're interested in shooting at very wide apertures, the Aspherical or L would be a good choice, but otherwise I'd just stick with your 50/1.4.
I have FL 55/1.2, FD 55/1.2 ssc (sold) and FD 50/1.2 L
Interestingly, the FL 55/1.2 is sharper than the FD 55/1.2 ssc.
I dunno if the FL really sharper or maybe my FD 55/1.2 is not a good copy or has been modified.
The FD ssc has warmer color than the FL which have more pale color.
The FD L has buttery or smooth bokeh while the FL & FD ssc have harsh bokeh (in some condition it looks more artistics than the FD L ).
OP here, thank you all for so much information! BTW I have the 7 bladed aperture version of the Super Tak, two copies actually.
The 50L FD does seem to be the best choice but at that price I'd just stick with the Tak to be honest.
How much is the Rokkor 58mm 1.2 these days or if you have to ask . I got into the Tak at the time because I couldn't afford the Rokkor when it was about $650 for a good copy with clean glass, few years back. I assume it's more these days.
Rokkor 58 1.2 prices have dropped. You could get an EOS converted one for <$650 if you look around. Since you have the A7r you could save some money and buy an unmodified one for much less. Out of the three 50ish/1.2 lenses I have the Rokkor is the least sharp wide open, but it has some nice qualities. I have a good copy of the (often preferred) radioactive version, but the A7r puts them all to the test. I found my current radioactive Rokkor sharper wide open than the non-radioactive version I had previously. It also seems to have a bit more character/quality to the pictures. I didn't have them at the same time so I couldn't make any direct comparisons, but I did test them both on a 5DII. I was never impressed by the non-radioactive copy.
Have to be honest that sharpness wide open is pretty irrelevant to me. Character is far more important. I'm not using f1.2 to shoot sharp. By 2.8 I want sharpness though. Had a look, current lenses on ebay, the non modified with clean glass is at least $600. How do I tell if it's radioactive or not?
Is it worth bothering? My Tak does everything I want except focus the correct way. If I was able to standardise my lens collection on a single mount, the fd, it would be worth investing (though not as far as investing into the 50L FD ) however if I'm going to gain size and added adaptors, might as well stick with what I have and love?
I like it when a fast lens has enough sharpness and character to isolate and present the subject nicely. Extra sharpness and contrast also benefit my viewfinder image, to assist in precise manual focus.
If you search the B&S board here I think you will find a few lenses that have sold for much less in the last few months. At that price I would get a Zuiko 50/1.2
If you don't necessarily need f-1.2, the nFD 50/1.4 is really an excellent lens and can be had for under a hundred bucks. Pick one up and see if you like it. It's also much closer in size to the Tak than the 1.2 lenses, which are much bigger. I got mine for $50 because the focus mechanism was jammed. A quick pry to bend the dent that was binding and it's as good as new (in function).
Hard to tell. I personally love the character from the FL 55/1.2, not quite the same as the takumar, which is great (and has the best focusing helicoid of any lens I've owned), but still really nice.
Another lens with a beautiful wide open rendering (though watch out for loCA) is the Konica Hexanon 57/1.2. Not as sharp as the FL 55, but a really gorgeous dreamy look wide open.
Just a note about Konica adapters...they seem to be extremely finicky. I have found (at least with Sony E-Mount) that some will work with one Konica lens but not another (without extreme fiddling) and so on. Some of the lenses are crazy sharp though, particualry stopped down (such as the 50/1.7).
If I was choosing between Rokkor 58/1.2 and Konica 57/1.2, the Rokkor would be the easy choice due to the bokeh clipped issue with the Konica. The Konica mount is too small for the speed of this lens and there is a mechanical obstruction at the rear of the lens. The result is chopped-off bokeh shapes towards the edge of the frame. http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/Konica.jpg
More info: http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/Objektive/e57_12.html
Beni wrote:
And it will also have a shorter adaptor, maybe I should look at it. Um, just looked, same price as the Rokkor. Just not sure what I'm gaining again.
the rokkor adapter is nearly as short as the konica, but honestly all SLR adapters are within a few millimeters, so i don't really notice the difference. the konica 57/1.2 is more expensive than the rokkor and often more expensive than the nFD L btw.
i've tested 9 different copies of the rokkor and have not found any consistent difference between radioactive and non-radioacive other than the radioactive ones being yellower and lower contrast prior to bleaching. i've also consistently seen rokkors with good glass sell for around $400 the last few years.
honestly though, i think you should just spend $50 (lens + adapter) to try the rokkor 55/1.7 as i think it fits the look of the tak shots you post best.
I have a Pentax 35mm f2 Super Tak that I really like (has the same look to it) and an M85mm f2 (K mount) that is great. Not sure I'm going to get away from backwards focusing, if I would have solved the 50mm as an FD solution I would have said screw it and made them all FD but 50mm is my main focal length by a very long margin. Not seeing that there is an FD solution to replace my Tak and as such I'll stick with what I have and just live with my 24mm f2 and f2.8 and 20mm as wide angle FD solutions for the moment.
).
i've stopped using all my nikkors and pentax lenses though because the focus direction always throws me off.