p.1 #1 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
I’m trying to figure out whether my Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 is performing normally at f/1.2 or if my copy may have an issue. Would anyone be willing to share their full-res images or a 100% crop from their sharpest f/1.2 shots? Ideally center crops, and bonus points if you are able to share the RAW.
I fully understand this lens has some wide-open glow and softness, so I’m not expecting modern sharpness, but I’m trying to see what a good copy should realistically look like when focus is nailed. My copy seems inconsistent. Occasionally I’ll get a relatively sharp image, but most of the time it’s far softer/"glowier" than expected.
My Rokkor PG 50mm f/1.4 is considerably sharper and more consistent at f/1.4, so I’m trying to calibrate my expectations. I know it isn't exactly a fair comparison with f/1.2 vs f/1.4, but the difference is much more significant than I was expecting.
This 58/1.2 is new to me (after an unfortunate mishap with my Pentax 50 1.2 SMC), but I'm having a bit of buyer's remorse. I'm starting to wonder if I should have looked for another 50 SMC or just stuck with using the 50 1.4.
p.1 #2 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
I've got mine (MC Rokkor) with me today. What distances are you interested in comparing?
For what it's worth, I have no idea if mine is a "perfect copy" as it's the only one I've ever used. I don't think it's as sharp as the Pentax. I know it's not as sharp as the MD 50/1.2 or the Canon FDn 50/1.2L. It's got better SA correction than the EF 50/1.2L, but it's closer in sharpness to that.
Anyway, let me know if you want specific distances or subjects and I should have time later this afternoon. I think I can post RAWs to Google dropbox.
p.1 #3 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
I can also help if you want something different than what Brad offers. I extensively did controlled testing with the Mino 58 versus Noct 50/1, so have RAW's at different distances.
FWIW, I find the Mino have pretty decent resolution wide open across a good amount of the frame (by vintage lens standards) but the contrast, and CA correction are weaker than some others.
Jun 22, 2026 at 02:16 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
I have the lens and ought to be able to provide you what you need. Just PM me and we can figure out how to send you the files. Let me add, however, that IMO the lens really shines at f/2 not wide open. I rarely shoot it wide open, but I am happy to provide you with whatever files you want.
I hadn't read Brad's (freaklikeme) post, so I think he has you covered but I am happy to provide a second set of files from a different lens. This is my second copy of the lens. I wouldn't say one was better than the other of my copies. Nor can I say whether they were great or not so great copies. I would guess mine are average. My first one had yellowing that I cleared up by leaving it in the sun. My second one doesn't have any yellowing and neither of them had/have any noticeable defects in the glass and just typical amounts of dust.
p.1 #5 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
I'd be happy to see whatever examples you might have showing sharpness at f/1.2. The majority of my observations so far have been close to MFD, I'd say in the range of 5ft or less. Usually, I can quickly get a sense of how sharp a lens is by evaluating some shots with eyelashes in focus. So far, my expectations (which were already tempered) are far exceeding reality.
Also, I'm not sure if the variation I see is sometimes due to distance and/or light. It could be coincidence, but I did start feeling as though well-lit scenes with good contrast were actually giving me worse results.
I was really planning to just go out and shoot with the lens and NOT get consumed with pixel peeping and testing, but here I am lol. Tonight I'll try a tripod and a couple of static subjects to see if I'm matching what others are achieving.
p.1 #7 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
Minolta XK w 58:1.2 @ 1.2 and HP5
Leica M240 w 58 1.2 @ 1.2:
Jun 22, 2026 at 04:32 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
MMP wrote:
I'd be happy to see whatever examples you might have showing sharpness at f/1.2. The majority of my observations so far have been close to MFD, I'd say in the range of 5ft or less. Usually, I can quickly get a sense of how sharp a lens is by evaluating some shots with eyelashes in focus. So far, my expectations (which were already tempered) are far exceeding reality.
Also, I'm not sure if the variation I see is sometimes due to distance and/or light. It could be coincidence, but I did start feeling as though well-lit scenes with good contrast were actually giving me worse results.
I was really planning to just go out and shoot with the lens and NOT get consumed with pixel peeping and testing, but here I am lol. Tonight I'll try a tripod and a couple of static subjects to see if I'm matching what others are achieving. ...Show more →
The lens isn't great at MFD as it has a lot of spherical aberrations and their effects are worse closer up. That said, it is really only at wide open and a bit at f/2 that the lens suffers as MFD. Stopped down to f/2.8 or better yet f/4 it is wonderful at MFD. Once you get to typical half body portrait distances the lens sharpens up enough for me at f/2 and I like the bokeh best at f/2.
Regarding light, the lens also doesn't have the best coatings and will exhibit a lot of veiling flare losing a lot of contrast if you shoot into the light. So that might be what you are seeing in what you are seeing in your well lit scenes. Light from the side that isn't hitting the front element, however, or better yet light from behind in my experience really makes this lens sing. You just can't shoot into the light unless you want the veiling flare.
I included some examples from my long time use of the lens below. Hopefully they help.
Yea, so those images are well beyond the sharpness I have been able to achieve. I started to do some more controlled testing on a tripod and with a softbox. After a few shots, I think I discovered the problem.
There is just the SLIGHTEST bit of play in my focus ring. I noticed this from day 1 but didn't think much of it as we're dealing with 50+yr old lenses. However, tonight I realized there is also a slight bit of forward/backward play on the front section of the lens. In magnified live view, I can now see this slight movement is affecting the image.
If I pull the front of the lens tight (towards me) the image has a noticeable improvement in contrast and a noticeable reduction in the glowing/ghosting. It still doesn't get quite as good as what I see in your images, but there is absolutely a difference. I believe this explains why my sharpness (or lack thereof) was inconsistent. That front element was moving in and out depending on how I was holding the lens and depending on which direction I had just turned the focus ring.
Below is an example of the typical IQ I'm getting at f/1.2...
p.1 #11 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
Sorry I didn't get a chance to shoot anything today. I had the lens with me, but I also realized I only had my mono-modded rII, which won't make for a good comparison. I'm at home tomorrow, so I get it on a color camera and try to post. I know it sounds like you've got it figured out, but now I'm curious. I rarely shoot anything close without stopping down.
p.1 #12 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
freaklikeme wrote:
Sorry I didn't get a chance to shoot anything today. I had the lens with me, but I also realized I only had my mono-modded rII, which won't make for a good comparison. I'm at home tomorrow, so I get it on a color camera and try to post. I know it sounds like you've got it figured out, but now I'm curious. I rarely shoot anything close without stopping down.
No worries. I'm considering looking for another copy of this lens, so any images/100% crops in this thread will become a good reference.
Here is a flickr link with various photos and crops on an a7cii (33mp FF) at f1.2 - 2.8 at MFD to a couple meters. My copy (which is my 5th and has been pretty consistent with the others) is optimized from MFD to just over 2 meters.
Here is a flickr link with various photos and crops on an a7cii (33mp FF) at f1.2 - 2.8 at MFD to a couple meters. My copy (which is my 5th and has been pretty consistent with the others) is optimized from MFD to just over 2 meters.
Thank you. I'm quite certain looking at those images that my lens has a problem. I'm very grateful the seller is accepting my return request.
Now I just have to decide if I want to go through this vintage lens lottery once again for the 58/1.2, or if I might want to go a different direction. Voigtlander seems to have some interesting options with their 50/1.2 and even the 50/1.0. I guess I'll have to do a bit of research to determine if either of those will give me the vintage rendering I'm looking for.
p.1 #16 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
MMP wrote:
Thank you. I'm quite certain looking at those images that my lens has a problem. I'm very grateful the seller is accepting my return request.
Now I just have to decide if I want to go through this vintage lens lottery once again for the 58/1.2, or if I might want to go a different direction. Voigtlander seems to have some interesting options with their 50/1.2 and even the 50/1.0. I guess I'll have to do a bit of research to determine if either of those will give me the vintage rendering I'm looking for.
You’re welcome!
They will not give you a vintage vibe—contrast is high, bokeh is quite smooth from wide open. The CV 50/1 has feild curvature so the periphery of the frame the gets a bit harsh. The CV 50/1.2 has increased SA wide open at MFD due to a lack of floating elements, but otherwise it’s fairly well corrected. Both do have a fair amount of axial CA. Both those lenses are a really nice – I have owned them both. But I don’t think you’re going to get files that look like the Minolta 58/1.2.
Why not try the CV 50/1.5 Heliar if you want to avoid vintage?
p.1 #17 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
MMP wrote:
Thank you. I'm quite certain looking at those images that my lens has a problem. I'm very grateful the seller is accepting my return request.
Now I just have to decide if I want to go through this vintage lens lottery once again for the 58/1.2, or if I might want to go a different direction. Voigtlander seems to have some interesting options with their 50/1.2 and even the 50/1.0. I guess I'll have to do a bit of research to determine if either of those will give me the vintage rendering I'm looking for.
I was going to say just get the lens repaired, but seeing you can return it, that is the way to go.
Careful w the CV 50 1.2. Apparently decentering is common - but if you get a good one they are excellent.
p.1 #18 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
MMP wrote:
Now I just have to decide if I want to go through this vintage lens lottery once again for the 58/1.2, or if I might want to go a different direction. Voigtlander seems to have some interesting options with their 50/1.2 and even the 50/1.0. I guess I'll have to do a bit of research to determine if either of those will give me the vintage rendering I'm looking for.
I do kind of regret no longer having the 58/1.2 (I sold all my SLR lenses); I got some nice photos with it including this one, which would have been at f2:
In addition to those Voigtländers you mention, you might want to check out the Zeiss C-Sonnar 50/1.5. It'll give you vintage rendering wide open, but once you stop down to f2 it starts looking more modern with more contrast. There's a whole thread devoted to it here (an old thread, so many of the earlier photo links are broken but the later pages are still good: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1448834/
p.1 #19 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
MMP wrote:
Thank you. I'm quite certain looking at those images that my lens has a problem. I'm very grateful the seller is accepting my return request.
Now I just have to decide if I want to go through this vintage lens lottery once again for the 58/1.2, or if I might want to go a different direction. Voigtlander seems to have some interesting options with their 50/1.2 and even the 50/1.0. I guess I'll have to do a bit of research to determine if either of those will give me the vintage rendering I'm looking for.
It’s a lens worth trying again and again until you get a copy you’re happy with. Mechanically and optically, I’ve found it much easier to find good copies of the Minolta SR mount (MD/MC) lenses than other vintage lenses like Contax/Zeiss C/Y.
p.1 #20 · Minolta Rokkor MC 58mm f/1.2 - Baseline sharpness wide open
bjhurley wrote:
I do kind of regret no longer having the 58/1.2 (I sold all my SLR lenses); I got some nice photos with it including this one, which would have been at f2:
In addition to those Voigtländers you mention, you might want to check out the Zeiss C-Sonnar 50/1.5. It'll give you vintage rendering wide open, but once you stop down to f2 it starts looking more modern with more contrast. There's a whole thread devoted to it here (an old thread, so many of the earlier photo links are broken but the later pages are still good: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1448834/ ...Show more →
Nice photo and processing--as always.
I too missed my Mino 58/1.2 and found a cheap one of the forums and am happy to have it, even if I don't shoot it that often. I mainly is used on film nowadays--and makes a good video lens for my purposes and tastes.
@highdesertmesa Interesting to hear you say that--it's been my experience as well, but I just thought I was a bit lucky. Or unlucky with CY's.
