Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

A mysterious lens : Konica Hexanon SL 35mm F:2.8 M42
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:19 am    Post subject: A mysterious lens : Konica Hexanon SL 35mm F:2.8 M42 Reply with quote

A mysterious lens : Konica Hexanon SL 35mm F:2.8

Nothing can be find in GOOGLE or any paper.






Yes,It's M42 mount!!! you can't find any other konica lens in M42 mount.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's different in Konica hexanon SL?

1.the min. focus is 1.5M
2.the min. aperture is F11



PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And the aperture is also interesting.

It's octagon shape(normal is hexagon or circle)
and it's double layer blades design.



PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From the missing DOF scale, large aperture value spacing and long MFD, I think it may be designed to use on some surveillance camera.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting configuration.

Is it possible that somebody switched out the name plate for some reason?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JJB wrote:
Interesting configuration.

Is it possible that somebody switched out the name plate for some reason?



I don't think this name plate has been switched. The name plate itself is unlike that of any other Hexanon lens known to me. I have never seen a Hexanon "SL" lens, or one of this vintage with such a short SN. But I am convinced it is a genuine Hexanon item. It has the typical Hexanon finish, proportions, general style, lettering, and color. Most importantly, it has a bona fide looking Konica production code on the mount side: 9T (June 1979).
What the lens' purpose was I have no idea. Calvin83's suggestion sounds very possible. Perhaps the letter "S" in "S"L stands for surveillance? What puzzles me is why such a wide range of apertures for a surveillance lens. On such a lens one would wish for everything to be in focus, right?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not intended as an SLR lens it seems, as it has no auto mechanism ( no pin).
Also that aperture only goes to f/11 marked.
Would be useful to know if it actually has M42 back focus.
The 42mm thread could just be coincidental. A handy thread to use for whatever equipment it was made for.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SL = Surveillance Lens imho.

Schneider made a version of the C-Curtagon 2.8/35 in a similarly stripped down, industrial barrel with M42 mount, nd thatlens was used in surveillance systems.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2016 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I recently found this lens and it indeed has M42 back focus distance. I'm using it with a thin heliciod on my A7II and I get infinity to quasi-macro. This little lens renders beautifully!



PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like that image a lot, that's a very interesting lens.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

An example has popped up on ebay - https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/REAR-MINT-Konica-Hexanon-SL-35mm-F-2-8-for-M42-from-japan/173035761567

From a quick google I found a reference to 'SL' in context of stereolithography on a konicaminolta site - https://www.konicaminolta.com.au/glossary

I don't know anything about industrial processes - but it could be a clue.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beautiful shot kuato.
Do you have a Konica AR 35/2.8 to compare to?
I'm curious what differences between them are, specifically optics and IQ.
Looks similar to the older version...




PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The serial numbers are close. I would say it is optically the same.