Fr3d wrote:
Not alt but fast and rare Canon 50mm f/1.0 L USM wide open on FF:
sweet!
freaklikeme wrote:
Actually, the only 50 I own now (aside from a Minolta Maxx 50/1.7 I used to test AF on the a900) is in the middle of the 35-70/4. I prefer 60mm for a normal, which is another reason I\'m attracted to the 58, since that would likely be close enough. I\'m sure could come up with a few more rationalizations if I really need them.
I\'m curious about something. I know you prefer the older body style with the knurled focus ring, but I really like the SOOC colors of the plasticy 45/2. Can you get the same color rendering out of either of the 58/1.2s? Is the mount the same on the newer style or is it just the older style that lends itself to simple conversion?
Nice shot from the 42. I think you\'re right about the similarities between it and the 60, but I will say the 60 could never be that subtle in the tonal range. It\'s a strong contrast lens (the 25/2.8 is about the same), strong to the point where, when I think about using them, I\'m usually shooting for a B&W conversion.
the conversion is the same for both the rubber focus ring and the metal focus ring versions. both of mine were metal focus ring versions, however one was radioactive and the other was not. the radioactive one was lower contrast due to the yellowing that i did not correct. my non-radioactive one seems to have more color pop to it as well. it\'s very similar to the MC PG 50/1.4, which i believe you\'ve shot with? all my non-radioactive minolta glass seems to have a very similar color palate, but the MD 45 and MD 24/2.8 seem to have more pop and and color separation. maybe it\'s just because those are my two slow rokkor lenses and they are really the same as the faster ones at matching apertures, maybe it\'s because they are newer and have better coatings, or maybe it\'s because they\'re slower allowing them to be higher contrast. anyway, if you want i can shoot the same basic shot on the 45/2 and 58/1.2 at say f/2 and f/5.6 for a comparison.
the OM 42/1.2 is definitely not a high contrast lens. probably the lowest contrast zuiko i\'ve shot with. another shot from it:
Apr 22, 2012 at 04:00 PM
Previous versions of sebboh's message #10568465 « f/1.2 or faster lenses wide open »
