Cosina MC Cosinon-W 2.8/24 vs. Konica Hexanon 2.8/24

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

I've got an occasion to have a Cosina MC Cosinon-W 2.8/24 for more than a decent price, so did not miss it. The first move was to compare it side by side with another 24mm, Konica Hexanon 2.8/24. Both lenses are well regarded, both have a 0.25m MFD, Cosinon bieng physically much smaller. Meanwhile Hexanon is undisputably seen as a gem of sharpness and ergonomics, and I share that feeling.

Full frame infinity shots look really similar at all apertures. The only visible difference is a slight propensity of Hexanon to magenta, while Cosinon tends to yellow. So, the latter gives a slightly vintage shade. But sharpness wise they they go close, without pixel peeping.

So here is some pixel peeping. I pass the full frames and go directly to 100% unprocessed crops.

#1 Cosinon-W 2.8/24, w/o, center of the frame

#2 Hexanon 2.8/24, w/o, center of the frame

#3 Cosinon-W 2.8/24, w/o, far left extremity (not the corner)

#4 Hexanon 2.8/24, w/o, far left extremity (not the corner)

#5 Cosinon-W 2.8/24, around 7 meters, f5.6, 2/3 of the frame

#6 Hexanon 2.8/24, around 7 meters, f5.6, 2/3 of the frame

#7 Cosinon-W 2.8/24, around the MFD, f4, center of the frame

#8 Hexanon 2.8/24, around the MFD, f4, center of the frame

I clearly see that Hexanon outresolves Cosinon in the center, but Cosinon has a more uniform sharpness distribution from WO. Both are very good lenses, with their small pecularities.

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

Which version of the Konica do you have? I had both, kept the later f22 version, which is better than the first f16 one, they are optically different:

https://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/Objektive/e24_28.html

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

I use the earlier AE f16 version. Can a 24mm lens be substantially better than that? I am intrigued. Could you please post some shots from your lens.

Physically the compact Cosinon looks similar to the latest f22 Hexanon.

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

Some quick hand handled test shots. When looking at sharpness of a wide angle lens, one has to be careful how much field curvature the lens has, in this respect the Konica isn t too bad, in my opinion. So here it goes:

The first pic is at f2.8 and i focused on the central part:

This is a 100% central crop:

The extreme left border:

The borderes and corners can be improved a bit by focusing on them, like here:

But look what happens to the central part due to the fiels curvature:

Actually not too bad, at f4 the field curvature becomes less problematic due to the larger DoF, here the focus is again on the central part, the border at f4 looks already ok:

No problems in the center at f4:

At f5.6 the sharpness is very good in my opinion, left border:

Left bottom corner at f5.6:

The really extreme corners are a bit soft at f5.6, like here in the foliage:

Even those improve at f11:

All in all a very good performer in terms of sharpnes.

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

I have a couple of copies of the Konica. I really like it. The second one I really lucked out as it was a short auction and the lens had a scratch on the front element (maybe a mm long OH MY!) set me back 63 dollars. Heh!

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

I had my new copy of the konica out for a spin today. A few shots from camera. A7rii. It's the 2.8 to 16 version.

If you find one of these at a reasonable price I highly recommend you snag it.

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

F8 IIRC. It would be hard to tell field curvature from that photo I would think as there isn't a straight line anywhere. I was focused on the trees behind the pond, (infinity) using the enlargement function in EVF. Even so much of the foreground is in focus.

Sciolist · Expire: 2021-04-16

That's a nice set jamaeolus Like 1

. The stillness is palpable.

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

Doh. I misread the question my brain was thinking distortion. I don't know how to explain the various focus and out of focus areas. It's hard to imagine a field curvature that egrigious. The trees in the middle were maybe 300 yards, while the trrees to the right maybe 500. The people maybe around 350 while the bushes in the lower right were 10 or less. Anybody got ideas?

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

Tomasg, very sharp! It's true that the first version of Hexanon renders in a slightly more vintage way. Your shots might be made with a modern lens.

Jamaeolus, magnificent! I think in this case the lens is really secondary.

Thanks you both for sharing these impressive examples.

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

y · Joined: 11 Aug 2013 Posts: 304 Location: EU

Yes, Canon nFD 24/2.8 should be notably sharper in towards the corners. I currently have no representative full-res example available, although phillipreeve.net got a few good ones like this one.

aidaho · Joined: 29 Apr 2018 Posts: 456 Location: Ukraine

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

Thank you for the sample, aidaho! It looks not that razor sharp for f8, doesn't it? That puts it in the same class with the earlier Hexanon.

I did not find a well lit landscape on FF with the latter. So, here is a close-mid range, not a plate surface, and still. It is either f2.8 or f4.

This one is taken with NEX at f4 IIRC, so no corner performance, though I think it gives an idea of a certain sharpness well maintained (without pixel peeping).

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

I add here two shots taken with the Cosinon at f4 on Nex, an indoor and an outdoor one. Both heavily processed. So that's not to boost or to deny the lens' sharpness. It's to check how it stands "expressive" re-rendering.

#1

#2

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1571

Adding here some more Hexanon experiences, impressionist by the force of lockdown: same place in different light situations.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5