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

Konica Hexanon 24mm f2.8 discovering the bavarian country
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 8:08 pm    Post subject: Konica Hexanon 24mm f2.8 discovering the bavarian country Reply with quote
Hello Forum,

hereby I want to present some pictures taken with my new Hexanon 24 f2.8. I'm still not sure if the lense is ok. But I have no experience with old wide-angle lenses adapted on modern m4/3 cameras. I use the lense still only with lense hood (original) but with out sky filter or CPL filter because with filter I'm not able to mount the lense hood. The weather was cloudy. At open aperture it is difficult for me to get the right focus.
The first pics are from Kelheim with the so-called Befreinungshalle. A nice theme to get practice despite the architecture may be boring somebody. The second series of pics is from monastery Banz. Here, we got full sunshine. It seems that this condition makes benefit for the lense.








And now the Monastery Banz pictures:








PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The 24mm is one of my favourite Hexanons and an excellent lens.


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:
The 24mm is one of my favourite Hexanons and an excellent lens.


It would be quite interesting to see a comparison between the Hexanon and the Minolta Rokkor (also available as Leica-R) lens.
Unfortunately I don't have a Hexanon on hand to do that. The prices for both are almost the same nowadays, except for the Leica branded one which sells for much more, although there is only Minolta inside.
Actually I don't have any Hexanons for 35mm film at all. Only for my Konica Omega 6X7 camera.


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a Rokkor MC 24 2.8. My sample is terrible , never sharp out the center . I don't recommend this lens on the A7.


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks good to me.


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
I have a Rokkor MC 24 2.8. My sample is terrible , never sharp out the center . I don't recommend this lens on the A7.


Surprise, surprise. Maybe it's somehow defective?
Especially the 1st version you have is said to be the best 24mm lens for SLRs at all. Even Leica gave up to do it better and sold instead the Minolta ones (identical to your MC version). It is said that it is super sharp in the middle and very sharp in the corners. That are known differences, especially wide open. I have the later modell (MD II) and I am very satisfied with it. Also the AF-model which is slightly different is very good (at least my copy). However, this lens is more evenly sharp as the first model but not as sharp in the middle as before. Compared to the competition still sharp enough....
I don't know what you are considering as terrible. Do you have a better lens in 24mm? That would give me some idea about your preferences.
However, as I have some different lenses in 24mm I could eventually do a comparison. If my memory serves me right, I should at least have also a Pentax and a Tokina lens in this focus range, besides the 2 different Minolta ones. Maybe another one too. Would have to search around...


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My sample is really bad . Corners and borders are never sharp even stopped down. It might be my sample but meanwhile I read some tests on A7 rating poorly this lens too.
I bought mine due to its reputation ( Leica bla bla bla, Artaphot ) . A big deception. The center is outstanding but that is all. It must work on a cropped sensor.

I have some good 28mms and an excellent one ( Pentax K 28mm 3.5 ) plus a nice 20mm ( Canon FD 2.8 ). For 24/25 mm I shall probably buy the new Batis 25mm and stop looking for a MF lens.


PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
My sample is really bad . Corners and borders are never sharp even stopped down. It might be my sample but meanwhile I read some tests on A7 rating poorly this lens too.
I bought mine due to its reputation ( Leica bla bla bla, Artaphot ) . A big deception. The center is outstanding but that is all. It must work on a cropped sensor.

I have some good 28mms and an excellent one ( Pentax K 28mm 3.5 ) plus a nice 20mm ( Canon FD 2.8 ). For 24/25 mm I shall probably buy the new Batis 25mm and stop looking for a MF lens.


I rather think that the A7 is the problem and not the lens. There are quite a lot of reports of bad performance of wide angles on the A7. The very short flange focal distance of the E-mount would need a special sensor design to resolve the problem. Similar as Ricoh did with their GXR-M, where even 12mm lenses can be used without any troubles or restriction. I don't care about the A7 until further because of that. However, somebody reported here that the new A7II should be at least slightly better on that.
I will do a test on my A850 and see how it performs there. My MD version should work for middle distances even on the FF SLR body. I'll try and report back. On APSC and Film it's just fine. As I also have the AF version of the lens I will compare it anyway. I think I have also some others too (Pentax and Tokina). Maybe the CV 25mm would be an option for you? That is also an excellent lens (at least on my cameras).


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would be keen to hear reports on the Konica 24mm on a A7 series sensor with the Kolari mod.

I have the 2nd version and it performs decently on cropped sensors, unfortunately Metabones seems reluctant in making a Konica Speedbooster Sad


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 5:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
memetph wrote:
My sample is really bad . Corners and borders are never sharp even stopped down. It might be my sample but meanwhile I read some tests on A7 rating poorly this lens too.
I bought mine due to its reputation ( Leica bla bla bla, Artaphot ) . A big deception. The center is outstanding but that is all. It must work on a cropped sensor.

I have some good 28mms and an excellent one ( Pentax K 28mm 3.5 ) plus a nice 20mm ( Canon FD 2.8 ). For 24/25 mm I shall probably buy the new Batis 25mm and stop looking for a MF lens.


I rather think that the A7 is the problem and not the lens. There are quite a lot of reports of bad performance of wide angles on the A7. The very short flange focal distance of the E-mount would need a special sensor design to resolve the problem. Similar as Ricoh did with their GXR-M, where even 12mm lenses can be used without any troubles or restriction. I don't care about the A7 until further because of that. However, somebody reported here that the new A7II should be at least slightly better on that.
I will do a test on my A850 and see how it performs there. My MD version should work for middle distances even on the FF SLR body. I'll try and report back. On APSC and Film it's just fine. As I also have the AF version of the lens I will compare it anyway. I think I have also some others too (Pentax and Tokina). Maybe the CV 25mm would be an option for you? That is also an excellent lens (at least on my cameras).

i am not sure that the A7 is responsible for that as the A7 has no problem with many SLR UWA like the Canon FD 20mm and the Samyang 14mm . The reports that you read about WA problems are talking about RF lenses under 50mm not SLR lenses.
It is also not a faulty adapter because the problem exists in the 4 corners .
I tend to incriminate the lens ( or its condition ) in that case.
You can find a test of different Minolta lenses with A7 done by a certain Phillip Reeve . He tested the 24mm MD I ( identical to the MC) with the same results as me. By the way, I agree with his conclusions on every Rokkor I own.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 6:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:

i am not sure that the A7 is responsible for that as the A7 has no problem with many SLR UWA like the Canon FD 20mm and the Samyang 14mm . The reports that you read about WA problems are talking about RF lenses under 50mm not SLR lenses.
It is also not a faulty adapter because the problem exists in the 4 corners .
I tend to incriminate the lens ( or its condition ) in that case.
You can find a test of different Minolta lenses with A7 done by a certain Phillip Reeve . He tested the 24mm MD I ( identical to the MC) with the same results as me. By the way, I agree with his conclusions on every Rokkor I own.


I've looked at Reeve's conclusions. They seem to be O.K. So everything which is below Zeiss Otus is only average. That's also quite interesting. On the other hand, criterias like bokeh are rather subjective by the way.....
Maybe one additional reason more for me to forget about the A7 and rather play around with some of the old lenses only up to APSC. For FF on my A850 I've got a decent set of lenses anyway between 16 and 600mm in almost every focus length (without zooms, but both MF & AF).
Obviously there are natural limits and different perceptions too. The only prime lens presently available for Sony E-mount FF is the Zeiss 25mm one which sells for 1.300 Euros (cheapest offer) now. The question is, whether it would work good enough for you on A7? I don't know. Funny is, that not even Sony is offering something in this range. I am not considering low cost third party lenses to be a prime lens by the way (Sigma, etc.).
On the other hand some camera makers like Olympus or Panasonic have implemented decent software methods to overcome the shortcomings of their new produced lenses for their MFT systems. That's working quite good and leaves the prices for their new lenses in a rather affordable range.
I think at the end of the day you get what you pay for. If I like to achieve maximum quality I take one of my middle format cameras in combination with a high resolution film. Even an Zeiss Otus lens on the most expensive digital camera is looking poor against that.
Finally I will check how the combination of my 24mm lenses presently on hand is doing on my FF digital camera. I am quite curios now to find that out myself. Wink


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph,

I've just checked my Minolta 24mm AF on FF A850 and can confirm some weaknesses on F2.8 but as from 5.6 it reaches maximum performance which will not increase further if stopped down to 11 or even 22. The most obvious difference to Reeve's samples is, that there is no visible difference between the center and the corner as from F5.6. I cannot tell you whether it's sharper than the MF versions I have on hand because these lenses don't work on my A850. Even in Pentax I have the PK version and not M42. Bad luck for you in this case. For me the AF version on the A850 is more than fine anyway, what I now know for sure.
So that would be a valid alternative for your A7 if you want to improve in this focal length. Maybe you have a chance to borrow one and test it on your A7 or you find a trustworthy test of this combination in the web.
If you are interested, I could eventually provide and/or show my test shots. But I don't know whether this makes sense at all due to the very different flange focal distance of the different camera designs.
A complete comparison between my 5 24mm lenses I've found in my inventory up to now (2 different Minolta, 1 Pentax and 2 different Tokina) I can only do in MFT or APS-C.
Finally I've found one reason more to stay with my A850 until further. Wink


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm with vroger!
Looks pretty good.
Smile


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
DigiChromeEd wrote:
The 24mm is one of my favourite Hexanons and an excellent lens.


It would be quite interesting to see a comparison between the Hexanon and the Minolta Rokkor (also available as Leica-R) lens.
Unfortunately I don't have a Hexanon on hand to do that. The prices for both are almost the same nowadays, except for the Leica branded one which sells for much more, although there is only Minolta inside.
Actually I don't have any Hexanons for 35mm film at all. Only for my Konica Omega 6X7 camera.
.

The Hexanon si the best of the two.

WhY?

The Rokkor can be a bit sharp at center but at the 2/3 the hexanon begins to win, and more at the extreme corners.

The Hexanon has better resistance to flare.

The Konica 24 has less CA (especially this theme) is one of the greater difference among these lenses.

The rokkors 24 I'm talking about are the MC-X and the firt version of the MD. They have similar formula, but the second has smaller componentes, and the rendering is better for the CA, but less contrast and in the colder side colors than the MC-X.

Horacio.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My Rokkor MC fits this description ...but worse. A bad sample.
I may consider the Hexanon but it is a rare lens compared to the Rokkor.
Is your feed back based on FF ?


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's based on FF (in film the rendering is something better) digital (sony 7) and film (minolta xg9 and xd5 on kodak slide film)

With the nex 5 N, the aberrations aren't so great, but they are there.


PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2015 9:09 pm    Post subject: Back to the Hexanon 24mm f2.8 Reply with quote
Hello forum, very interesting to read all these postings. I cannot compare with all these other lenses. My question is more: Is my Hexanon good enough. What can I expect from such wide-angle lense on a m4/3 camera. Here are now some pictures more from the Hexanon, showing Regensburg. Conditions: freehand, sometimes leaning on a handrail, cloudy light. ISO 200 setting. For indoor I increased the ISO to 400.
The lense is equipped with a vivitar skylight filter (from ebay).















For the last situation in the concert hall (church) I changed the lense. Here the same situation seen by an Hexanon 85mm f1.8:

In my eyes this shows the performance of the 85mm lense.
Smile


PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2015 9:41 pm    Post subject: Re: Back to the Hexanon 24mm f2.8 Reply with quote
Dachs wrote:
My question is more: Is my Hexanon good enough. What can I expect from such wide-angle lense on a m4/3 camera.


As you have already proved the Hexanon is more than good enough. What else would you expect from a lens?

The 24mm lens on your camera is more or less a "normal" lens representing approximately the same FOV as a 50mm lens on FF. The only question for me in this case would be if e.g. the Lumix 20mm/F1.7 lens or the Zuiko 25mm/F1.8 which are constructed for that sensor format would be of any advantage compared to any of the old 24mm SLR lenses i.e. your Hexanon.
As only the center of a SLR lens is used on MFT I think that more or less all the existing prime lenses of the well known manufacturers will perform very good and the differences would hardly be visible in the final picture.

The only possibility I would have is to compare the 20mm lens from Panasonic with other SLR lenses of comparable focus length on MFT. I didn't do that before because I would not see any advantage to use a SLR lens instead of the original one. Would be interesting though. Maybe I'll try that.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
memetph wrote:
My sample is really bad . Corners and borders are never sharp even stopped down. It might be my sample but meanwhile I read some tests on A7 rating poorly this lens too.
I bought mine due to its reputation ( Leica bla bla bla, Artaphot ) . A big deception. The center is outstanding but that is all. It must work on a cropped sensor.


I rather think that the A7 is the problem and not the lens. There are quite a lot of reports of bad performance of wide angles on the A7. The very short flange focal distance of the E-mount would need a special sensor design to resolve the problem.
...

1) The Minolta MC 2.8/24mm certainly was OK at its time, but on a 24MP FF sensor it has corner problems
2) Lenses such as the Minolta MD-III 2.8/24mm and the Canon new FD 2.8/24mm do perform better (even though the MC 2.8/24 has a better reputation than the latter)
3) The A7 is NOT the problem! While RF wideangles do perform VERY badly on the A7 (compared to the Leica M240), possibly critical SLR lenses such as MD 2/28mm, MD 1.2/50mm and MC 1.2/58mm did perfom identically on Sony A7II and Leica M240.

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

1) The Minolta MC 2.8/24mm certainly was OK at its time, but on a 24MP FF sensor it has corner problems
2) Lenses such as the Minolta MD-III 2.8/24mm and the Canon new FD 2.8/24mm do perform better (even though the MC 2.8/24 has a better reputation than the latter)
3) The A7 is NOT the problem! While RF wideangles do perform VERY badly on the A7 (compared to the Leica M240), possibly critical SLR lenses such as MD 2/28mm, MD 1.2/50mm and MC 1.2/58mm did perfom identically on Sony A7II and Leica M240.


Stephan,

Well, I cannot test my MD 24mm on FF on my A850, however I've tested the AF version of this lens and at least as from F5.6 it seems to be (almost) perfect on FF, though I don't know whether the optical formular is identical on both lenses. On my Ricoh GXR-M the MD version works also more than fine without visible shortcomings when stopped down a little bit.

You're absolutely right that the wide RF lenses are causing the most problems on the A7. However, some folks also reported already problems with some SLR wide angles on this camera. I don't know to be honest. On my A850 which is most probably equipped with a similar sensor as the A7 I didn't realize any specific problem up to now. So at least my SLR lenses work fine on it.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1