crazeazn wrote:
what is the sweet spot f-stop for the lense for bokeh or sharpness?
bokeh is wonderfully soft from f/2 on, though at some point octagons become more noticeable. f/4 to f/8 is the sharpness sweet spot, but f/2 is sharp enough for most work.
Very interested in a rokkor 58 1.2 but the prices seem high ( I feel like I've caught on to this lens about 5 years too late) and the effort required to adapt it to my canon 1Ds2. Are there any alternatives which are still 1.2 which I should look at or is the rokkor the only option if I want a super fast fifty something? I've been looking at the cheaper canomatic 58 1.2 r, the 55 1.2 fl but am not sure how they compare
R.Young wrote:
Very interested in a rokkor 58 1.2 but the prices seem high ( I feel like I've caught on to this lens about 5 years too late) and the effort required to adapt it to my canon 1Ds2. Are there any alternatives which are still 1.2 which I should look at or is the rokkor the only option if I want a super fast fifty something? I've been looking at the cheaper canomatic 58 1.2 r, the 55 1.2 fl but am not sure how they compare
I've said it many times but I do believe this lens is really best on a-mount if you want it for full-frame digital. Easy to adapt and no mirror issues. There are some cheaper Porst 1.2 M42 lenses out there, very hard bokeh. The 50/1.2 Rokkor is cheaper than the 58/1.2, don't know about mirror collision on that one though. If you're on EOS and really want 1.2 there are of course the genuine Canon lenses...
R.Young wrote:
Very interested in a rokkor 58 1.2 but the prices seem high ( I feel like I've caught on to this lens about 5 years too late) and the effort required to adapt it to my canon 1Ds2. Are there any alternatives which are still 1.2 which I should look at or is the rokkor the only option if I want a super fast fifty something? I've been looking at the cheaper canomatic 58 1.2 r, the 55 1.2 fl but am not sure how they compare
the rokkor 58/1.2 has the best bokeh IMHO of any of the manual focus slr normalish f/1.2 lenses and is very easy to convert to eos since you can buy a kit with directions. the rokkor 50/1.2 is sharper and only slightly cheaper with funkier bokeh and even easier to convert except it you can't buy a kit. the pentax 50/1.2 and nikkor 50/1.2 are probably sharper with with busier bokeh and all you need is an adapter (and to clip the aperture lever on the pentax). the canon FL 55/1.2 is definitely sharper, but again, with busier bokeh and is more difficult to convert (though i hear there is a kit for it now too?). don't know as much about the other canon FL and FD lenses, but they are all more difficult to convert than the FL 55/1.2 (though jim buchanan from this forum can convert them for you).
ricardovaste wrote:
I've said it many times but I do believe this lens is really best on a-mount if you want it for full-frame digital. Easy to adapt and no mirror issues. There are some cheaper Porst 1.2 M42 lenses out there, very hard bokeh. The 50/1.2 Rokkor is cheaper than the 58/1.2, don't know about mirror collision on that one though. If you're on EOS and really want 1.2 there are of course the genuine Canon lenses...
by all accounts the rokkor 50/1.2 is less likely to have a mirror collision than the rokkor 58/1.2.
Cool, thanks for the response. I'll hold out for the rokkor then. Bonus next month! by the way, the 55 FL does have a kit on eBay if anyone cares. Not cheap though.
Best to get one that's not been converted then? Will I be disappointed compared to my Zeiss 35f2 or Canon 50mm 1.4?
if you get a 58mm rokkor you have the risk, that you damage it when you file down the rear element. the 50mm does not have that rear element, it does not touch the mirror.
50mm 1.2 can be used at infinity without problem, 58mm has a problem, but still works ...
i have both lenses and i am never shure, which one i like more ....
that means, in fact they are quite similar, although the 58mm is better ... and the 50m is better as well
moment if i sold it! haha