brobbins
Established
I just acquired a Chiyoko 50/2 ltm Super Rokkor. My first roll of film shot with it suggests that the lens is quite sharp and has relatively high contrast for a lens of its age, though I did notice some flare. Has anyone had experience with this type of lens? Could you tell me anything about its reputation? Also, I would be interested in knowing if there is a hood for the lens, and what the filter size is.
Thanks.
Thanks.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Nice lens, the text says early ones used 40.5 filters but 40mm is listed in the chart.
maybe this was for the later model of the same lens.
http://www.huffman.tk/id35.html
maybe this was for the later model of the same lens.
http://www.huffman.tk/id35.html
brobbins
Established
Interestingly, despte the chart, neither 40mm nor 40.5mm worked. It appears that a 43mm filter works.
brobbins
Established
Xayraa33,
Thanks for the link. I had not seen that site before.
Thanks for the link. I had not seen that site before.
dberger
Established
Chiyoko (or Chiyoda Kogaku, later Minolta) made 2 versions of this lens. The first has a 40.5mm filter ring and stops down to f16, and the second has a 43mm ring and stops down to f22. The 2 versions appear optically the same, based on weight, sizes of the elements, and the images they produce. I do not know why they changed filter size, but perhaps it was to match the filter size on the Super Rokkor 50/2 for the Minolta Super A (same glass). There are Minolta-made screw-in and clamp-on hoods that fit these lenses.
This lens' reputation is basically absent, probably because there were not very many made and it is not found very often today. That won't stop me from rendering my opinion, however, that the Super Rokkor 50/2 is an outstanding lens overall -- plenty sharp and contrasty as you have noted -- and as good as any f1.8-2 lens of the era. I have not encountered any flare problems, although I always use a hood and have not purposely "challenged" the lens in flare-prone situations. The later Super Rokkor 50/1.8 (in LTM and Super A mount) is even better, but harder to find.
Cheers,
David
This lens' reputation is basically absent, probably because there were not very many made and it is not found very often today. That won't stop me from rendering my opinion, however, that the Super Rokkor 50/2 is an outstanding lens overall -- plenty sharp and contrasty as you have noted -- and as good as any f1.8-2 lens of the era. I have not encountered any flare problems, although I always use a hood and have not purposely "challenged" the lens in flare-prone situations. The later Super Rokkor 50/1.8 (in LTM and Super A mount) is even better, but harder to find.
Cheers,
David
Last edited:
rolleinut
Newbie
Super Rokkor
Super Rokkor
In Jason Schneider's book two, He discusses this lens.
He thinks it is a Summicron copy and further states that in testing done by Modern Photography, shows it to be a excellent lens
Rolleinut
Super Rokkor
In Jason Schneider's book two, He discusses this lens.
He thinks it is a Summicron copy and further states that in testing done by Modern Photography, shows it to be a excellent lens
Rolleinut
dberger
Established
Yes, I remember reading that -- if I recall correctly, he liked the performance of the lens. Regarding its design, from old Minolta literature I've read, I think that its optical design more like a Summitar than a Summicron, but not a direct copy.
Cheers,
David