Hexanon 40/1.8 slr Pancake
Old 02-07-2011   #1
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Hexanon 40/1.8 slr Pancake

Got this today with a Hexanon AR to nex adapter. Surprisingly small (for an SLR lens), nice focal length, close focus, and seems like a nice match for the NEX.

Anyone ever compare this lens with the Pen 38/1.8 or 40/1.4 on the NEX?

Now that I've got the adapter, any other Hexanon AR SLR lenses to keep an eye out for?
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-07-2011   #2
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
57/1.2 ouch No more Nocti-envy.

But seriously all of the AR lenses are amazing. 50/1.7 is a bokeh machine and the 100/2.8 is as nice a portrait lens as I have ever seen.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-08-2011   #3
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
57/1.2 ouch No more Nocti-envy.

But seriously all of the AR lenses are amazing. 50/1.7 is a bokeh machine and the 100/2.8 is as nice a portrait lens as I have ever seen.
Best of all: the Konica AR lenses are dirt cheap. It is like the Pentax thread-mount glass. Reeealy good optics at very low cost. I have

24/3.5
28/2.8
50/1.7
50/1.4
57/1.2
100/2.8

Except for the 57mm lens, I purchased them together from a dealer here in Burlington, who probably thought I was nuts. That group cost about $35 per lens, and I think I probably overpaid.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-08-2011   #4
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
 
batterytypehah!'s Avatar
 
batterytypehah! is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 1,794
I love that lens. I just bought another Konica TC-X body ($5, KEH as-is) to replace one I ruined when I put my finger through the shutter during a rushed film change

I just hope we're not driving up the prices. Nothing to see here, folks. Dead system. Dead company, even.
__________________
WANTED: Fujimoto/Lucky 70M negative carrier

“Hair-splitting, of course. But hey, it's a LEICA. Probably there are those who get excited about the colour of the hairs you split.” – Roger Hicks

Contax IIa + Leica IIIf + M3 (project) + Zorki-1 (project) + Fuji GS645 + FED-2 + Vitomatic II + Revue 400SE + Olympus XA + more + still more
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-08-2011   #5
Yashi
Registered User
 
Yashi's Avatar
 
Yashi is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 52
same here... Best investment you can make atm...GAS heeeeelp !!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg P1020059.jpg (38.1 KB, 45 views)
  Reply With Quote

Thanks Benjamin
Old 02-08-2011   #6
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Thanks Benjamin

How do the sizes on the 50s compare? It is interesting that these are still very low, while the Pen lens seem to have gone up possibly from m4/3 and nex users wanting the small size.

It's interesting that when looking at past sales of many of these lenses, they are cheaper if you take an old body with the lens. Perhaps someone lucky will get a nice vintage Konica film body for Christmas next year

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
Best of all: the Konica AR lenses are dirt cheap. It is like the Pentax thread-mount glass. Reeealy good optics at very low cost. I have

24/3.5
28/2.8
50/1.7
50/1.4
57/1.2
100/2.8

Except for the 57mm lens, I purchased them together from a dealer here in Burlington, who probably thought I was nuts. That group cost about $35 per lens, and I think I probably overpaid.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

nice collection
Old 02-08-2011   #7
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
nice collection

Yashi - amazing that you got all the caps with your lenses!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yashi View Post
same here... Best investment you can make atm...GAS heeeeelp !!!
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-08-2011   #8
Roberto V.
Le surrčalisme, c'est moi
 
Roberto V.'s Avatar
 
Roberto V. is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Monterrey, Mexico
Age: 28
Posts: 601
I second the 50 1.7, my best friend has one and it's a great lens. 57 1.2 is just amazing. The wide angles are good too and very inexpensive.

Sorry to go off topic, but if anyone has a battery holder for a Konica FT-1, or a cheap parts camera, please PM me
__________________
Black paint Leica M4 - Pentax 67 - Zeiss Ikon Contaflex I - Canon A2E (x2) - and my trusty old Canon 10D (Plus many others)

flickr
My RFF gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-08-2011   #9
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
I will try to post a comparative picture of the lens sizes, next to something known like a 50 Summicron or a Nikkor. The 40mm you started the thread off with is more pancake-y than the others and the most compact of the group I listed.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

AR Hexanons - size comparison
Old 02-10-2011   #10
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
AR Hexanons - size comparison

In the first and second pictures:
50/1.7
DR Summicron (for size comparison)
40/1.8
28/3.5
24/2.8
57/1.2

Third picture, clockwise from the lower-left corner:

40/1.8
100/2.8
57/1.2
28/3.5
50/1.7
24/2.8

Should give a sense of the relative sizes.

Ben
Attached Images
File Type: jpg AR Hexanons_-1.jpg (23.7 KB, 48 views)
File Type: jpg AR Hexanons_-2.jpg (29.1 KB, 37 views)
File Type: jpg AR Hexanons_-3.jpg (32.5 KB, 31 views)
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery

Last edited by Benjamin Marks : 02-10-2011 at 14:11.
  Reply With Quote

Thanks Benjamin
Old 02-10-2011   #11
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Thanks Benjamin

Very helpful.

I've got an AR 57/1.4 on the way. I'll let you know how it stacks up size wise to the 40/1.8, which I think is the only other lens I have out of your batch.

I think I'm adapter'd out for now with the M, C, F, and AR adapters. Had to order some extra caps!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
In the first and second pictures:
50/1.7
DR Summicron (for size comparison)
40/1.8
28/3.5
24/2.8
57/1.2

Third picture, clockwise from the lower-left corner:

40/1.8
100/2.8
55/1.2
28/3.5
50/1.7
24/2.8

Should give a sense of the relative sizes.

Ben
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-10-2011   #12
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
I think you will be really pleased with the 57. My completely uninformed speculation is that it is this lens (or 57/1.2) that led Konica to create the 60/1.2 in M-mount. It is great for isolating the subject and is sharper wide open than either the Nikon 50/1.2 or the Noctilux at f:1 (at least for the samples I have). The 40 is at the other end of the spectrum - super sharp, very compact -- a great "everyday" lens. With the Olympus EP-2's anti-shake tech, the 57 really is an "available darkness" lens. With the NEX? Don't know yet. My adapter arrives tomorrow, I hope.

Post some pix!

Ben
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery

Last edited by Benjamin Marks : 02-10-2011 at 14:21.
  Reply With Quote

Hi Benjamin
Old 02-11-2011   #13
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Hi Benjamin

I'm getting the 57/1.4, not the 1.2. I'm not sure what to expect, but the 57/1.2 is too pricey for me.

The 57/1.4 has one element and group less than the 1.2 (6/5), and weighs 10 oz. vs 16 oz. Not sure what the physical size, or image quality differences will be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
I think you will be really pleased with the 57. My completely uninformed speculation is that it is this lens (or 57/1.2) that led Konica to create the 60/1.2 in M-mount. It is great for isolating the subject and is sharper wide open than either the Nikon 50/1.2 or the Noctilux at f:1 (at least for the samples I have). The 40 is at the other end of the spectrum - super sharp, very compact -- a great "everyday" lens. With the Olympus EP-2's anti-shake tech, the 57 really is an "available darkness" lens. With the NEX? Don't know yet. My adapter arrives tomorrow, I hope.

Post some pix!

Ben
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-11-2011   #14
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
 
PatrickT's Avatar
 
PatrickT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 34
Posts: 776
Now you all have me wanting to buy a few Konica lenses...along with a new body...damn you!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-11-2011   #15
pesphoto
Registered User
 
pesphoto's Avatar
 
pesphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: R.I.
Age: 52
Posts: 3,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickT View Post
Now you all have me wanting to buy a few Konica lenses...along with a new body...damn you!
The FS-1 with 40mm 1.8 is my main shooter.....
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-11-2011   #16
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
My 40 is EXE in appearance but has a bit of fungus on the edges. Doesn't seem to bother it one bit. Allways surprises me with sharpness, even wide open. They say that 50 1.7 is really wicked sharp, but I have too many 50's now, hehe.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2011   #17
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Got my 57/1.4, can't wait to test it out. Size wise, it is around the same as the AR 50/1.4, much smaller than the 57/1.2, but there are some reviews that mention the 50/1.4 is much better than the 57/1.4:

http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eHexanonUebersicht.html

Below are some image comparisons from a dpreview forum member who prefers the 57/1.4, over his 57/1.2 though not sure if it's because of the IQ, or the size, or maybe individual sample variation.

I doubt I'll get the 57/1.2 to compare, but will be able to compare with the 40/1.8 sort of as it's much longer, and just a tad faster.

http://gf1.s3.amazonaws.com/grid/pictures.htm
__________________
My photo blog


Last edited by ampguy : 02-14-2011 at 22:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2011   #18
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,021
Here are some photos which show the relative sizes:

ps: note the distortion of the nex 16/2.8 (was taken super close - few inches away)

L to R: 40/1.8 pancake, 57/1.4, LTM Jupiter 3:



__________________
My photo blog


Last edited by ampguy : 02-14-2011 at 22:23.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 16:34.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.