This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Hexanon Lenses?
p.1 #1Hexanon Lenses?
So, I'm trying to find an excellent fast 50mm for my GH2. I am looking for a great combo of wide open sharpness (even on the pixel dense GH2) and bokeh. I saw a shot from the Hexanon 40/1.8 that was awesome, and thought the 50s or 57s might be similar. Any experience with the Hexanon 50/1.4 or 1.7 or the 57/1.2 or 1.4?
Dec 16, 2010 at 10:02 AM
p.1 #2Hexanon Lenses?
Jman13 wrote:
So, I'm trying to find an excellent fast 50mm for my GH2. I am looking for a great combo of wide open sharpness (even on the pixel dense GH2) and bokeh. I saw a shot from the Hexanon 40/1.8 that was awesome, and thought the 50s or 57s might be similar. Any experience with the Hexanon 50/1.4 or 1.7 or the 57/1.2 or 1.4?
the 57/1.2 is supposed to be one of the best ~50mm f/1.2 lenses of the time. i can't speak about it from personal experience though. i doubt the drawing styles of any of the 50s are quite like the 40/1.8 though since it is a pancake design. i had the 40/1.8 on 4/3. it is quite sharp even wide open with just a bit of veiling flare wide open. i loved it's compact size too and they are dirt cheap. the only thing i didn't really care for from it was the bokeh - definitely not classical good bokeh, quite busy in fact. sometimes it worked sometimes it didn't. i often found i liked it better in b&w. i was always annoyed by the hexagons stopped down as well.
a few random shots with 40/1.8 on 4/3:
wide open:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4047/4684639547_49abbcb3d0_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2782/4168726403_bce2bd7592_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/5054724584_f9034932e7_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4028/4325506050_636e14bf16_b.jpg
stopped down a bit:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3635396911_5ac26342eb_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3569474953_0d91d2b796_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3566/3693687655_f707c9d162_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/4668222914_f6ef06dab5_b.jpg
So, I'm trying to find an excellent fast 50mm for my GH2. I am looking for a great combo of wide open sharpness (even on the pixel dense GH2) and bokeh. I saw a shot from the Hexanon 40/1.8 that was awesome, and thought the 50s or 57s might be similar. Any experience with the Hexanon 50/1.4 or 1.7 or the 57/1.2 or 1.4?
the 57/1.2 is supposed to be one of the best ~50mm f/1.2 lenses of the time. i can't speak about it from personal experience though. i doubt the drawing styles of any of the 50s are quite like the 40/1.8 though since it is a pancake design. i had the 40/1.8 on 4/3. it is quite sharp even wide open with just a bit of veiling flare wide open. i loved it's compact size too and they are dirt cheap. the only thing i didn't really care for from it was the bokeh - definitely not classical good bokeh, quite busy in fact. sometimes it worked sometimes it didn't. i often found i liked it better in b&w. i was always annoyed by the hexagons stopped down as well.
a few random shots with 40/1.8 on 4/3:
wide open:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4047/4684639547_49abbcb3d0_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2782/4168726403_bce2bd7592_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/5054724584_f9034932e7_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4028/4325506050_636e14bf16_b.jpg
stopped down a bit:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3635396911_5ac26342eb_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3569474953_0d91d2b796_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3566/3693687655_f707c9d162_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/4668222914_f6ef06dab5_b.jpg
Dec 16, 2010 at 11:49 AM
p.1 #3Hexanon Lenses?
Hi Jordan,
The Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 is supposed to be an excellent lens and if you look in the archive Dmitri had some pictures with it using his extensively mirror shaved 5D. It looked good as I remember, but was quite similar to the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2, which if I recall you liked fairly well, but ultimately sold. Keep in mind the Hexanon is 460 grams so a pretty big lens.
As I think of getting a GH-2, my first choice for a fast 50ish lens would probably be the nFD 50 f/1.2L. From samples I have seen with that lens, it is quite nice even wide open and it only weighs 380 grams. That lens and the Canon 55m f/1.2 Aspherical and the Zeiss 55mm f/1.2 anniversary lens are I believe the only 50s with a floating element which should improve close up performance, which I think is important for micro 4/3rds. It also has an aspherical element which may help a bit with wide open performance, again on micro 4/3rds wide open performance is likely to be pretty important. I also like the bokeh of from the lens.
But there are others strong contenders too. Including:
Pentax A mount 50mm f/1.2 which only weighs 345g and may be the sharpest of all the fast 50s. (the K mount version might not be a bad choice either but weighs a bit more at 385grams). The bokeh in my view is a little less than optimum on this lens perhaps, however.
Minolta MD 50mm f/1.2 which only weighs 310 grams and is very sharp. I have seen a number of nice shots with this lens from sebboh, but it does tend to have bright rings in the wide open bokeh.
Olympus OM 50mm f/1.2 which is weighs just 285 grams and has fairly nice bokeh, IMO--but with bokeh these things are very subjective.
Nikon 50mm f/1.2 AIS - which weighs 365 grams and is not a bad performer
nFD 50mm f/1.2 - which does not have the aspherical element or the floating element of its L brother, but still seems to be a nice lens and is smaller than the 50 f/1.2L at 315 grams.
Olympus Pen 42mm f/1.2 - which weighs just 255g. This lens looks very nice from the samples I have seen.
There may be others that are worth considering as well, but these are the ones I have thought of. I have left off rangefinder lenses, because at this point it is not clear, to me at least, how well they work at this wide of an aperture on micro 4/3rds. If you had a ton of money the Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 (which has an aspherical element) or the Zeiss anniversary 55mm f/1.2 (which has a floating element) would likely be excellent, but I doubt you are think of spending that type of money.
Anyway, I hope this helps as you think about fast 50ish lenses. Keep us updated about your pursuits.
The Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 is supposed to be an excellent lens and if you look in the archive Dmitri had some pictures with it using his extensively mirror shaved 5D. It looked good as I remember, but was quite similar to the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2, which if I recall you liked fairly well, but ultimately sold. Keep in mind the Hexanon is 460 grams so a pretty big lens.
As I think of getting a GH-2, my first choice for a fast 50ish lens would probably be the nFD 50 f/1.2L. From samples I have seen with that lens, it is quite nice even wide open and it only weighs 380 grams. That lens and the Canon 55m f/1.2 Aspherical and the Zeiss 55mm f/1.2 anniversary lens are I believe the only 50s with a floating element which should improve close up performance, which I think is important for micro 4/3rds. It also has an aspherical element which may help a bit with wide open performance, again on micro 4/3rds wide open performance is likely to be pretty important. I also like the bokeh of from the lens.
But there are others strong contenders too. Including:
Pentax A mount 50mm f/1.2 which only weighs 345g and may be the sharpest of all the fast 50s. (the K mount version might not be a bad choice either but weighs a bit more at 385grams). The bokeh in my view is a little less than optimum on this lens perhaps, however.
Minolta MD 50mm f/1.2 which only weighs 310 grams and is very sharp. I have seen a number of nice shots with this lens from sebboh, but it does tend to have bright rings in the wide open bokeh.
Olympus OM 50mm f/1.2 which is weighs just 285 grams and has fairly nice bokeh, IMO--but with bokeh these things are very subjective.
Nikon 50mm f/1.2 AIS - which weighs 365 grams and is not a bad performer
nFD 50mm f/1.2 - which does not have the aspherical element or the floating element of its L brother, but still seems to be a nice lens and is smaller than the 50 f/1.2L at 315 grams.
Olympus Pen 42mm f/1.2 - which weighs just 255g. This lens looks very nice from the samples I have seen.
There may be others that are worth considering as well, but these are the ones I have thought of. I have left off rangefinder lenses, because at this point it is not clear, to me at least, how well they work at this wide of an aperture on micro 4/3rds. If you had a ton of money the Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 (which has an aspherical element) or the Zeiss anniversary 55mm f/1.2 (which has a floating element) would likely be excellent, but I doubt you are think of spending that type of money.
Anyway, I hope this helps as you think about fast 50ish lenses. Keep us updated about your pursuits.
Dec 16, 2010 at 02:48 PM
p.1 #4Hexanon Lenses?
Thanks! The pics I've seen from the Hexanon 57/1.2 look amazing...better than the Rokkor IMO, and sharper too. If I can find one for a good price I might just grab it. I was originally thinking, if I went all m4/3 and sold all my Canon kit, I'd get the Voigtlander 50/1.1, which appears to perform quite well on m4/3, but if there were great f/1.2 or f/1.4 50mm lenses for much less, it would be a better option. I'm going to stay away from the 40mm range, as I have the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4, which I love, but I prefer a longer lens for portraits generally. I have a Rokkor 50mm f/1.4, which is beautiful at f/2 and smaller, but doesn't hold up wide open with the really high pixel density of the GH2. I'd love to find a lens that has the same quality of the Rokkor 50 at f/2, but at f/1.4 or f/1.2. The shots I've seen of the Hexanon 57/1.2 look like that, so I'm somewhat hopeful. I've also heard wonderful things about the Hexanon 50/1.4 and 50/1.7, and even some good words on the 57/1.4. They're all really cheap, so I might just buy an adapter and buy all three and see if I like them.
Thanks for the insight, though. I have thought about the FD 50/1.2...I'll have to look a little closer at that.
Thanks for the insight, though. I have thought about the FD 50/1.2...I'll have to look a little closer at that.
Dec 16, 2010 at 03:10 PM
p.1 #5Hexanon Lenses?
Jman13 wrote:
Thanks! The pics I've seen from the Hexanon 57/1.2 look amazing...better than the Rokkor IMO, and sharper too. If I can find one for a good price I might just grab it. I was originally thinking, if I went all m4/3 and sold all my Canon kit, I'd get the Voigtlander 50/1.1, which appears to perform quite well on m4/3, but if there were great f/1.2 or f/1.4 50mm lenses for much less, it would be a better option. I'm going to stay away from the 40mm range, as I have the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4, which I love, but I...Show more →
ah, i always liked 40mm better than 50mm on 4/3 (and a lot better than 55-58mm). sadly, i suspect that while the hexanon 57/1.2 is very sharp for an f/1.2 lens, it probably won't be any sharper than the rokkor 50/1.4 at f/1.4. from what i've heard the hexanon a bit sharper than the rokkor f/1.2s and about equal with the canons. the sharpest f/1.2 lens i've used is the pen f 42/1.2 (at least in the center), however it's not a good focal length for you and it definitely has bokeh that must be adjusted for. i will say, just to add one more option, that my smc takumar 50/1.4 is noticeably sharper and more contrasty than my rokkor 50/1.4 at f/1.4 and has a nice bokeh (not as nice as the rokkor though). sadly i suspect that for maximum sharpness around f/1.4 and minimum ghosting on the 4/3 sensor the cv 50/1.1 will almost certainly be the best performer (excluding the even more expensive options).
Thanks! The pics I've seen from the Hexanon 57/1.2 look amazing...better than the Rokkor IMO, and sharper too. If I can find one for a good price I might just grab it. I was originally thinking, if I went all m4/3 and sold all my Canon kit, I'd get the Voigtlander 50/1.1, which appears to perform quite well on m4/3, but if there were great f/1.2 or f/1.4 50mm lenses for much less, it would be a better option. I'm going to stay away from the 40mm range, as I have the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4, which I love, but I...Show more →
ah, i always liked 40mm better than 50mm on 4/3 (and a lot better than 55-58mm). sadly, i suspect that while the hexanon 57/1.2 is very sharp for an f/1.2 lens, it probably won't be any sharper than the rokkor 50/1.4 at f/1.4. from what i've heard the hexanon a bit sharper than the rokkor f/1.2s and about equal with the canons. the sharpest f/1.2 lens i've used is the pen f 42/1.2 (at least in the center), however it's not a good focal length for you and it definitely has bokeh that must be adjusted for. i will say, just to add one more option, that my smc takumar 50/1.4 is noticeably sharper and more contrasty than my rokkor 50/1.4 at f/1.4 and has a nice bokeh (not as nice as the rokkor though). sadly i suspect that for maximum sharpness around f/1.4 and minimum ghosting on the 4/3 sensor the cv 50/1.1 will almost certainly be the best performer (excluding the even more expensive options).
Dec 16, 2010 at 03:34 PM
p.1 #6Hexanon Lenses?
I like my 40, and I plan on keeping it if/when I get a 50. The Nokton 40 is a great little lens with a really nice drawing style, but I do prefer a longer lens for portraits most of the time.
I had thought about picking up another smc takumar, but wasn't sure. I owned one a few years ago, but sold it when I went full frame because of mirror issues. I loved that lens, but wasn't sure if it would be that sharp on m4/3. If it is, I'll probably go that route. I really loved my tak...beautiful lens, both in images and construction.
I had thought about picking up another smc takumar, but wasn't sure. I owned one a few years ago, but sold it when I went full frame because of mirror issues. I loved that lens, but wasn't sure if it would be that sharp on m4/3. If it is, I'll probably go that route. I really loved my tak...beautiful lens, both in images and construction.
Dec 16, 2010 at 06:13 PM
p.1 #7Hexanon Lenses?
I have the Hexanon 57/1.2 and have used it on both Panny and Oly m4/3 bodies. It has ended up being permanently attached to an E-P2 because of the Oly IBIS. (Another story now that the GH2 has a supposedly higher acceptable ISO range).
It is really a beautiful lens. Unfortunately the price has gone up on these quite a bit over the past few years.
Another lens to throw into the mix, though, is the Contax C/Y 50/1.4.....really a quite remarkable lens for half the price of the Konica.
Something to consider......
R
It is really a beautiful lens. Unfortunately the price has gone up on these quite a bit over the past few years.
Another lens to throw into the mix, though, is the Contax C/Y 50/1.4.....really a quite remarkable lens for half the price of the Konica.
Something to consider......
R
Dec 16, 2010 at 07:04 PM
p.1 #8Hexanon Lenses?
Do you have any images and crops to share at f/1.2 on m4/3? That would be most helpful.
I've thought about the C/Y 50/1.4. I owned the 50/1.7, and it was blisteringly sharp, but the bokeh left something to be desired. The 50/1.4 I understand isn't quite as sharp but may have a more pleasant rendering for portraits...
I've thought about the C/Y 50/1.4. I owned the 50/1.7, and it was blisteringly sharp, but the bokeh left something to be desired. The 50/1.4 I understand isn't quite as sharp but may have a more pleasant rendering for portraits...
Dec 16, 2010 at 07:06 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.1 #9Hexanon Lenses?
Ed Sawyer had some konica stuff on edsawyer.com/lenstests, I am prettty sure, but I can't find it now. Perhaps it is in with another test and not listed. I've been really happy with Oly 50/1.8 and 1.4, and personally might not bother with others. I would think the Konica would be good as well, though.
Dec 16, 2010 at 07:33 PM
p.1 #10Hexanon Lenses?
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.4 on EOS APS-C. Converted.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4992481769_7b5eeed601_b.jpg
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD
, but gets smoother on other occassions.
Good light,
sI
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4992481769_7b5eeed601_b.jpg
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD
, but gets smoother on other occassions.Good light,
sI
Dec 17, 2010 at 01:48 AM
p.1 #11Hexanon Lenses?
I used to work for a lady that did wedding work with Konicas, she used the F1,2 lens often. The photos were outstanding, extremely sharp. They did in home processing and printing, so had complete control over the product/results. Her husband shot Pentax and i shot Canon. The Konica shots with here 1.2 were winners every time.
Dec 18, 2010 at 06:34 AM
p.1 #12Hexanon Lenses?
staticInc wrote:
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.4 on EOS APS-C. Converted.
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD, but gets smoother on other occassions.
Good light,
sI
Static, Could you please let me know how you achieved conversion of Konica Hexanon to EOS? Thank you
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.4 on EOS APS-C. Converted.
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD
, but gets smoother on other occassions.Good light,
sI
Static, Could you please let me know how you achieved conversion of Konica Hexanon to EOS? Thank you
Dec 31, 2010 at 04:35 PM
p.1 #13Hexanon Lenses?
Hexanon to EOS is a real bitch, there's something like 4.5mm of difference in back-focus that have to be removed from the Konica lens. Almost guaranteed to hit an unshaved full-frame mirror, I'd think.
-Ed
-Ed
Dec 31, 2010 at 07:16 PM
p.1 #14Hexanon Lenses?
Back in the 70's my friend had a Konica Autoreflex T and his images were startlingly sharp. Even more so than my Nikkor and Minolta and Pentax lenses. They really had the crispness that I finally found with a Leics 50 f2 Summicron.
Later in the mid 80's I saw a Modern Photography test of the 45mm pancake that claimed it was the sharpest lens they had ever tested.
For me that was no surprise as I had felt their lens designers had their "secret sauce" going for years.
Konica was really underrated.
Later in the mid 80's I saw a Modern Photography test of the 45mm pancake that claimed it was the sharpest lens they had ever tested.
For me that was no surprise as I had felt their lens designers had their "secret sauce" going for years.
Konica was really underrated.
Dec 31, 2010 at 08:56 PM
p.1 #15Hexanon Lenses?
I have a 57mm 1.2 lying about as well as a 52mm 1.8 (or 1.7 I'm not sure).
I bought the 57mm first and then got a Konica camera to use it on shortly after. That camera came with the 52mm.
I never actually got around to developing the rolls of 25 ISO B&W that I put through it. And that was 18 months ago.
I bought the 57mm first and then got a Konica camera to use it on shortly after. That camera came with the 52mm.
I never actually got around to developing the rolls of 25 ISO B&W that I put through it. And that was 18 months ago.
Jan 03, 2011 at 06:18 AM
p.1 #16Hexanon Lenses?
cricketman wrote:
Static, Could you please let me know how you achieved conversion of Konica Hexanon to EOS? Thank you
Here is a guide. Good luck, in case you give it a try! https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/795170
Static, Could you please let me know how you achieved conversion of Konica Hexanon to EOS? Thank you
Here is a guide. Good luck, in case you give it a try! https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/795170
Jan 03, 2011 at 02:55 PM
p.1 #17Hexanon Lenses?
staticInc wrote:
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.4 on EOS APS-C. Converted.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4992481769_7b5eeed601_b.jpg
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD, but gets smoother on other occassions.
Good light,
sI
Whoa!
Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.4 on EOS APS-C. Converted.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4992481769_7b5eeed601_b.jpg
the bokeh is a "bit" funky with this one at MFD
, but gets smoother on other occassions.Good light,
sI
Whoa!
Jan 03, 2011 at 05:51 PM
p.1 #18Hexanon Lenses?
So, Ronan was the most amazing FM member ever and I now have his Hexanon 57 f/1.2. I haven't had a whole lot of time to use it, but here are my first impressions:
1. This is not a landscape lens, at least not in the snow. While plenty sharp for landscape use at any relatively small aperture, the lens exhibits severe longitudinal chromatic aberration in these conditions, such that very bright green/cyan halos appear around white. This is not a problem indoors or in less severe contrast, but is bad enough that I would not bring this lens on a hiking trip.
2. This lens is a FANTASTIC portrait lens. Beautiful bokeh and a very nice rendering at all apertures. The CA evidenced in some of my snow shots has been essentially absent in my people shots. At f/1.2, the lens is a little soft (at least on the GH2...I'd imagine it would be quite sharp on full frame), with a healthy glow, but it makes for a gorgeous soft focus effect that's wonderful. By f/1.8, the lens is really, really sharp, the glow is mostly gone, but the skin tones are still very, very nice...also, with the longer focal length, a nice healthy background blur is still maintained at this aperture. While I would prefer to bring my new 40/1.8 with me as my everyday lens, this lens will get a lot of use for portraiture.
A quick sample...this is at f/1.2. This lens focuses very closely for a 57mm f/1.2 (0.45mm)...I can get quite close. Though, f/1.2 is probably too wide an aperture for this shot. Her eyelashes are in focus, but the iris is already outside the focus plane.
http://www.jordansteele.com/2011/chloe_hex57.jpg
I'm not showing the full pic here (my daughter is sick, and while I was able to clone the redness and junk on her lip in the above shot, I couldn't really do it for this shot), but here is a 100% crop straight from Lightroom at f/1.8...very impressive, IMO:
http://www.jordansteele.com/2011/hex57-crop18.jpg
1. This is not a landscape lens, at least not in the snow. While plenty sharp for landscape use at any relatively small aperture, the lens exhibits severe longitudinal chromatic aberration in these conditions, such that very bright green/cyan halos appear around white. This is not a problem indoors or in less severe contrast, but is bad enough that I would not bring this lens on a hiking trip.
2. This lens is a FANTASTIC portrait lens. Beautiful bokeh and a very nice rendering at all apertures. The CA evidenced in some of my snow shots has been essentially absent in my people shots. At f/1.2, the lens is a little soft (at least on the GH2...I'd imagine it would be quite sharp on full frame), with a healthy glow, but it makes for a gorgeous soft focus effect that's wonderful. By f/1.8, the lens is really, really sharp, the glow is mostly gone, but the skin tones are still very, very nice...also, with the longer focal length, a nice healthy background blur is still maintained at this aperture. While I would prefer to bring my new 40/1.8 with me as my everyday lens, this lens will get a lot of use for portraiture.
A quick sample...this is at f/1.2. This lens focuses very closely for a 57mm f/1.2 (0.45mm)...I can get quite close. Though, f/1.2 is probably too wide an aperture for this shot. Her eyelashes are in focus, but the iris is already outside the focus plane.
http://www.jordansteele.com/2011/chloe_hex57.jpg
I'm not showing the full pic here (my daughter is sick, and while I was able to clone the redness and junk on her lip in the above shot, I couldn't really do it for this shot), but here is a 100% crop straight from Lightroom at f/1.8...very impressive, IMO:
http://www.jordansteele.com/2011/hex57-crop18.jpg
Jan 20, 2011 at 05:40 PM
p.1 #19Hexanon Lenses?
Rich M wrote:
.... Unfortunately the price has gone up on these quite a bit over the past few years.....
Yeah I wonder why. All you digital folks are eating up the stock! Meanwhile, us folks with an actual Konica camera are looking at lens prices sky rocket. Dang I should have bout a 1.2 3 years ago. Just remember folks, please treat your Hexanons nicely so should you ever eBay them, us Konica collectors can finish picking them up at a nice price. 
Here are a few shots with the 50mm at 1.4 on Kodak BW400CN. And these 50s are relatively well priced.
.... Unfortunately the price has gone up on these quite a bit over the past few years.....
Yeah I wonder why. All you digital folks are eating up the stock! Meanwhile, us folks with an actual Konica camera are looking at lens prices sky rocket. Dang I should have bout a 1.2 3 years ago. Just remember folks, please treat your Hexanons nicely so should you ever eBay them, us Konica collectors can finish picking them up at a nice price.
Here are a few shots with the 50mm at 1.4 on Kodak BW400CN. And these 50s are relatively well priced.
Jan 20, 2011 at 10:09 PM
p.1 #20Hexanon Lenses?
markd61 wrote:
For me that was no surprise as I had felt their lens designers had their "secret sauce" going for years.
Konica was really underrated.
agreed!
For me that was no surprise as I had felt their lens designers had their "secret sauce" going for years.
Konica was really underrated.
agreed!
Jan 20, 2011 at 10:29 PM