57-58/1,4 mm lens- Minolta or Konica?

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

I have buy again the 57/1,4 hexanon lens.

It´s the chrome focus ring one. With intermerdiate cliks between apertures and last coated (it,s seems to be the intermediate version).

I saw a lot of pics taken with the Minolta MC II 58/1,4 lens and I like them very much.

Which of both to choose?

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

Buy both, then sell one if you need to.

Oldhand

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

Papasito, I agree with Calvin and Tom, unless you wish to be really spartan and leave only one survivor.

I have the Hexanon under question and a younger version of Minolta, the 1.4/50 one, which both give a close IQ. From 5m to infinity you'll hardly tell which one is which. They differ more in bokeh and in some extent in colour saturation (different accents). I use both pretty randomly, finding in this particular moment that f1.8 Planars are more versatile. So, it's more a question of joy of choice rather than of IQ championship.

Alun Thomas · Joined: 20 Aug 2018 Posts: 632 Location: New Zealand

With the Minolta there are apparently two slightly differening versions, the Auto-Rokkor and the MC version. The Auto-Rokkor has 2 variants, one with 6 aperture blades and a 52mm filter ring, and an earlier one with 8 blades and the standard 55mm filter. The later MC version is supposed to be the better version to get.

Mr.Bittacy · Joined: 16 Jun 2019 Posts: 76

I have owned a Konica 57 1.4 and the later hill and valley Minolta 58 1.4. In short the 57 has an exciting personality with a lot of character and the 58 was very “blah” to me. Maybe it’s because the 58 1.2 Minolta is so good as is the 55 1.7 but the 1.4 just did not seem to really have any character or strong points, I would much rather shoot the 55 1.7. My lens takes are very subjective though, I only keep lenses that have something special that makes me want to shoot them and non of the images I got with the 1.4 had that special something, it just seemed boring. It may be down to sample variation or just to taste. All you can do is shoot as many lenses as you can and keep the ones that feel special to you. For anyone who is considering these lenses I would recommend trying the canon FL 55 1.2 which is a very good lens and surprisingly affordable.

Oldhand · Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2020 9:07 am Post subject:

The Minolta is a lens that produces lovely rendering and is especially suitable as a portrait lens on APSc. From f2 it is sharp without losing the rendering that is so appropriate to ladies and children.
The Hexanon is sharper at widest aperture in my experience, and its colour render seems richer.
This isn't always what is required, but it is probably more versatile than the Minolta in these circumstances.
I find the Minolta to be softer in its colour palette at wider apertures, and this is a plus when you want that effect.
I have both lenses and am glad I don't have to choose between them.
Tom

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

These are both still ridiculously cheap IMHO. Especially with Canikon going mirrorless. So much so that I picked up a half dozen copies of each just as speculation. They render differently. I would give minolta a narrow sharpness edge wide open, but smoother bokeh to the Konica. I have not done any side by sides though.

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

Thanks guys.

I will stay with my Konica in this range (57_58 mm).

I have two new lenses. MC Apo Telezenitar 135/2,8 and Nikkor Ais 28/2,8.

Two nice lenses, I hope so.

Oldhand · Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2020 10:30 pm Post subject:

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

cbass · Joined: 27 Jul 2019 Posts: 441

I have both. On paper the Konica is better. Closer minimum focus distance to the Minolta. Half stops throughout the range. Minolta goes from f/1.4 to f/2. However, I have been unable to part with the Minolta. The bokeh is always smooth from the Minolta and there is just something about the rendering.

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

I have read all the post and cos that I purchased the minolta MCII 58/1,4.

I'm waiting for it now. In June 4th will arrive.

Will have the two. Konica 57/1 4 and Rokkor MC 58/1 4.

So can see the rendering of both by miself

Oldhand · Posted: Fri May 22, 2020 3:15 am Post subject:

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

Apart from some bokeh tests, i've never carefully compared these lenses. I don't expect many differences, but i will have a closer look at them tomorrow. Complementary to Oldhands images, i will go for the infinity range.

S

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

cbass · Joined: 27 Jul 2019 Posts: 441

So what is your impression? Konica or Minolta?

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

Here we are:

100 % crops from the center (upper row) and the extreme corners (lower rows) of the 24MP JPGs from A7II:

Click twice on the image to see it in its original size!

Stephan

caspert79 · Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2926 Location: The Netherlands

You could also look for a Tomioka made 55/1.4. I have the Revuenon version and it held up really good against other fast lenses and it's a joy to use really. Here is a test i did a while back:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?p=1524033#1524033

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658