The Hexanon arrived yesterday - super awesome early Christmas present. Only messed with it a little so far, but all I have to say is WOW. I can't believe I waited so long to pick one up. It's pretty much the same size as the G90, maybe a wee bit more dense, but it has a buttery smooth helicoid and really nice punch, without the over-the-top harsh microcontrast of the Zeiss. Tones, transitions are much smoother but the in-focus areas areas are very crisp and sharp.
I think it's just about perfect for my purposes, which would mostly be portraiture and occasions where more reach is needed (concerts and such).
Also, HUGE plug for Popflash. Not only did they send a great lens with lightening speed, they sent a replacement diopter for my M6, because - completely due to my haste - I mistakenly purchased the wrong listing of theirs a week or so before ordering the M Hexanon. Was dreading the post office, but they shipped the replacement along with the lens, before I even sent the other one back. That's above and beyond, and deserves mentioning.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I used to have the 90/3.5 LTM version but I eventually sold it since I prefer the Konica M-Hexanon 90/2.8 especially when it came to close-ups and bokeh. I found the close up bokeh rendering on the CV to be somewhat harsh sometimes, although it was better than Konica in infinity shots.
The LTM version is 260g and has MFD of 1m while the SL v1 version is 390g and has MFD of 0.5m. There is also SL v2 that was lighter than v1 at 320g and had a close-up lens option, and Nikon S-mount version (85/3.5). The optical designs look same.
SL2 was introduced in 2010, 8-9 years later than LTM and SL v1 versions so there might have been some additional improvements that are not visible in the specsheets. Looks like SL2 came with a close-focus accessory lens in the box. Canon SL2 version seems to have no aperture ring on the lens so it would not be a good one for adapting. Pentax KA SL2 was only in production for a couple of months and seems to be rare.
2nd hand prices for SL2 versions seem to be noticeably higher (in Japan) than LTM and SL1 and I think SL2 availability is more limited....Show more →
I ended up grabbing the LTM version and will test it out soon. Their optical designs look very similar including the CV 85/3.5 APO.
I didn't know they made a 85mm APO!
mawz wrote:
The Commlite is pretty much your only choice there.
There's a distinct lack of electronics-equipped Nikon adapters.
I shoot DSLR and mirrorless, Canon. I found that a chipped EF adapter added to my EF > RF adapter prevented one lens from working. It works fine on the full frame DSLR.
So at the moment, where I want my adapted lenses to work on both bodies, I'm ordering adapters without chips or contacts.
For someone else, different story, and I can see where they'd enjoy more options like you mentioned.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I ended up grabbing the LTM version and will test it out soon. Their optical designs look very similar including the CV 85/3.5 APO.
I didn't know they made a 85mm APO!
Thanks for the links!
I hope you like it! The LTM version is pretty light and thin though not that short. Looking forward to reading your impressions. I ended up getting one more lens (CV 75/1.5 VM) for Christmas too
I had a couple of those other S mount lenses with a CV S/C -> E-mount adapter earlier on, as I found some dead stock at cheap prices, but the 28/3.5 and 50/2.5 were not a good match with Sony sensor. The handling and feel of the lenses was quite different but pretty nice.
mdvaden wrote:
I shoot DSLR and mirrorless, Canon. I found that a chipped EF adapter added to my EF > RF adapter prevented one lens from working. It works fine on the full frame DSLR.
So at the moment, where I want my adapted lenses to work on both bodies, I'm ordering adapters without chips or contacts.
For someone else, different story, and I can see where they'd enjoy more options like you mentioned.
I've yet to see a chipped EF adapter that passes AI-P CPU data, only ones with embedded chips that talk to the camera but not the lens.
The question I was answering was specific to the AI-P passthru need of the poster I was answering.
The chipped EF adapters work pretty well in most cases, but are quite limited unless you dedicate one per lens.
I just received my Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar and it's a beauty. So compact and light + cheap $250. Luckily this copy is well centered too! I ordered the LTM version, black with 39mm front thread and 10-straight-blade aperture.
With the Voitpander adapter it weighs only 325g.
I compared it to my Batis 85/1.8 (great copy) at infinity and it held its own. It's great from wide open while the mid-field and corners improve at f/4-5.6. The lens is optimal across the field at f/5.6-6.3. (Sony A7R4)
Starting at f/5.6, resolution is similar to the Batis but I see a slight lower contrast. (+15 in Lightroom matches them)
I will post some crops at infinity but for now here is a quick side by side:
I have this lens (CV 90 LTM mount) and would love to love it, but my infinity tests (taken at F 5.6 & 8) linked earlier in this thread show that it's pretty good, but clearly not as good as my 90 Cron APO and Leica 90/4 Macro Elmar.
It could be copy variance, but as shown in my tests, my copy is well centered.
Jeff Kott wrote:
I have this lens (CV 90 LTM mount) and would love to love it, but my infinity tests (taken at F 5.6 & 8) linked earlier in this thread show that it's pretty good, but clearly not as good as my 90 Cron APO and Leica 90/4 Macro Elmar.
It could be copy variance, but as shown in my tests, my copy is well centered.
I wonder what accounts for the discrepancy?
I would try another copy.
Comparing my copies, the Batis 85/1.8 is outstanding (close to Loxia 85's performance) starting at f/4 across the entire image field. Great colors, very high resolution and contrast.
The CV 90/3.5 LTM competed neck-and-neck in terms of resolution across the field (starting at f/5.6) but could not match the Batis' contrast. Either way, it does not get much better than that.
Perhaps a bit more contrast (modern coating) and better veiling flare resistance would make me highly recommend it.
Probably targeted at portrait work, being an LTM lens dating from 2001. An attractive design, basically a classic Sonnar plus an additional rear element, and the one ED in the front group.
The 90AA M is a 'late out of bed' lens, like the many Zeiss lenses deliberately softened for wide open by design before roaring into life by f4-f5.6. At f5.6 that 90AA charts really well, in the region of the Loxia 85, with better outer frames. Not bad for a 21 year old lens (designed under chief Lothar Kölsch, along with many other ground-breaking lenses).
At the moment, I don't think there is anything as good as the Loxia 85/2.4 in a somewhat compact design. We have the 110/2.5 APO macro but it's a large 1:1 macro lens.
Let's see if Voigtlander delivers a 90mm APO that competes with modern lenses.
philip_pj wrote:
Probably targeted at portrait work, being an LTM lens dating from 2001. An attractive design, basically a classic Sonnar plus an additional rear element, and the one ED in the front group.
That could explain the slight lower contrast due to spherical aberration. Great for portraits indeed.
Would love to to see Voigtlander give a modern update to this lens for emount. We need a new high IQ light Tele.
My Canon TSE 90 II is the sharpest lens I’ve ever seen in that range. Its edge performance is better than my CV110. But it’s large and heavy. I use the Mamyia 80 2.8 for my light lens in that focal length.
Jan 03, 2020 at 11:21 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
I'm still loving the M-Hexanon 90/2.8. Really nice rendering. So odd that the internet is so quiet about it, but then again it was made for a camera that only was produced for 4 years, so that could explain it. Leica people are... Leica people, so I'm sure many have a weird prejudice about using non-Leica stuff, but they're missing out. I dutifully ran a test roll on my M6, focusing wide open and it couldn't be more spot on, calibration wise, so there's a myth debunked about incompatibility.
It's absolutely silky to operate, super compact and has that sweat built-in hood I wish more lenses used. In fact, I'm so enamored I'm now eyeing the 50/2 version. All reports (with the exception of a certain prominent reviewer who's bias is palpable) say that the M-Hex 50 is just as good as the Summicron, if not "better", depending on one's application.
Fred Miranda wrote:
At the moment, I don't think there is anything as good as the Loxia 85/2.4 in a somewhat compact design. We have the 110/2.5 APO macro but it's a large 1:1 macro lens.
Let's see if Voigtlander delivers a 90mm APO that competes with modern lenses.
Just curious, Fred, are you keeping the CV 75 1.5 and adding a 85/90mm prime or are you replacing the former with the latter?
imagesfromobjects wrote:
I'm still loving the M-Hexanon 90/2.8. Really nice rendering. So odd that the internet is so quiet about it, but then again it was made for a camera that only was produced for 4 years, so that could explain it. Leica people are... Leica people, so I'm sure many have a weird prejudice about using non-Leica stuff, but they're missing out. I dutifully ran a test roll on my M6, focusing wide open and it couldn't be more spot on, calibration wise, so there's a myth debunked about incompatibility.
It's absolutely silky to operate, super compact and has that sweat built-in hood I wish more lenses used. In fact, I'm so enamored I'm now eyeing the 50/2 version. All reports (with the exception of a certain prominent reviewer who's bias is palpable) say that the M-Hex 50 is just as good as the Summicron, if not "better", depending on one's application. ...Show more →
Happy to hear you are loving the M-Hex 90/2.8. In Japan they are quite popular and there's pretty good availability in the 2nd hand market, but I also could find only very few reports about it in English.
In addition to 90/2.8 I used to have the collapsible Hexanon 50/2.4 LTM and also the 35/2 M-Hexanon, but I eventually sold them and just keep the 90/2.8.My 50/2.4 LTM was very sharp and relatively small & light and I liked the rendering but it was weak when shooting against strong light sources and the mechanics when collapsing/un-collapsing didn't feel so sturdy. I had several alternative 50mm lenses so I sold it when buying something new but I miss it sometimes. My 35/2 M-Hexanon was a bit weak a the edges/corners on Sony sensors although very sharp centrally. It's somewhat rare and often relatively expensive in good condition.
The 50/2 M-Hex should be good too, I've never tried it though but I believe it should work pretty well on Sony as well.
I once tried a friend's 28/2.8 M-Hex on my A7R (which was my main camera at that time) and it was showing some color shifts towards the corners so that one didn't seem optimal for Sony sensors. I've been curious about Konca's LTM 35/2 lenses too, especially the UC-Hexanon, but they are always quite expensive and probably not well optimized for Sony sensors... After I got the small Ultron 35/2 I haven't been too tempted by the small legacy 35/2 alternatives.
