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 AR 1.4/50 or 1.4/57 which one to keep?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:25 pm    Post subject: Konica Hexanon AR 1.4/50 or 1.4/57 which one to keep? Reply with quote

Beside the great Hexanon 2.8/24 I got a Hexanon 1.4/57 in very good kondition from rbelyell.
The thing is I already have a Hexanon 1.4/50 which I got recently serviced by Foto Service Olbrich.
Because I got so many lenses I decited to keep only one of the two.
So tell me, which one would you let go and why?

Timo


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Both, they are quite different in character and among the very best 1.4s. If you must, get rid of something else.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

grrrr - That was not what I wanted to hear. It`s the reason why I already have the Summicron-R 50, The SMC Pentax M 1.4/50, The SMC Pentax M 1.7/50 and the Tomioka 1.4/55. They are all great lenses!


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just love the character of the 57 plus it is slightly longer than the rest of your 50's.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Tomioka 1.4/55 I had was a lot less good than the two Hexanon 1.4s, so maybe you will find your Tomioka isn't as much to your liking after you've tried the Hexanons.

All you can do is take some time to familiarise yourself with them and then make a decision based on personal preference.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

considering what they are currently worth on the markets I'd rather keep both, you have a nice set of 50's personally if one had to go it would be the 50mm 1.7 from Pentax, I didn't like the results I had from the 2 I tried.

I have the 50mm Konica and I haven't found any thing that could replace it and I imagine the 57mm would in the same league.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You should for certain keep both lenses because neither is a substitute for the other.

However

If you are insistent, if you are adamant, about keeping only one of the lenses, then you must first shoot photographs with both lenses. Only after having done that, and after reviewing carefully your results, should you sell one of the lenses. It's a highly subjective decision, so this is something only you can decide for yourself.

Prediction

If you sell one lens, regardless which it is, sellers remorse will assert itself early on . . . . and I'm thinking "weeks" not "months".


PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The lenses are cheap and small, keep them till you can decide which to keep & sell.
I'm well over 20 normal lenses and they are mostly all different in some way.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I totally get your situation cause like Lightshow and many other members here, I have a lot of 50ish mm lenses due to lens buying addiction. Hence I'm also struggling from this situation not sure which ones to get rid of. I like all of them because they all give different characteristics and are unique in some way just like what Lightshow said. But due to limited space of my dry cabinet and the constant complain from my girlfriend it's logical to get rid of some of the 50ish mm lenses first before thinking of getting rid of others cause they all cover the same or similar focal lengths.

I kind of agree with Ian, sell the Tomioka 55/1.4 unless you're like a Canon or Sony user and you aren't planning to modify your Pentax M lenses for Canon use without hitting mirror. I am trying to sell my Rikenon 55/1.4 as well among some other 50s and just trying to keep my Cosina 55/1.2 m42 modified for Canon use.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd keep both (because I have kept both). I've been shooting with the 50 lately and it's lighter/smaller than the 57. It's a great fast 50. The 57 has such a great character, hard to find in any other lens. So, keep both. Smile


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Take time, and make comparison shots both Konica lenses and Tomioka. Please post results. It might be interesting.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

guardian wrote:
You should for certain keep both lenses because neither is a substitute for the other.

However

If you are insistent, if you are adamant, about keeping only one of the lenses, then you must first shoot photographs with both lenses. Only after having done that, and after reviewing carefully your results, should you sell one of the lenses. It's a highly subjective decision, so this is something only you can decide for yourself.

Prediction

If you sell one lens, regardless which it is, sellers remorse will assert itself early on . . . . and I'm thinking "weeks" not "months".


To avoid sellers remorse take your time.

Arrange all your 50ies in a cubboard or on shelf in a row. Think which one you wouldlike to take for a shoot project or walk and pick it out from the row. whenever you return the lens is placed to right of the line and all others shifted to close the gap. If no lens occupies the left space permanently you need to keep all. If one lens permanently lives in the leftmost space, it is the right one to sell. Not because of the lens itself, but because you have a better active team.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
Take time, and make comparison shots both Konica lenses and Tomioka. Please post results. It might be interesting.


Agreed and please post results as I have been thinking of purchasing both those lenses for a while now but would like to see the differences compared to the 50mm konica.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Konica had fantastic QC, I've yet to find a less than great Konica lens and I have owned over 40 of them. However, Tomioka don't seem to have bothered much with QC as really bad copies of their lenses are not hard to find, the 1.4/55 I had was very poor despite being mint, like it had never been used so surely left the factory like that. That said, I doubt even a good copy of the Tomioka can match the Konicas.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alot of the guys here have said the 57mm has great character, I've never tried one but it has gotten my attention!!! would anyone care to elaborate a bit more, especially when comparing it to the 50mm konica


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

timo832000 wrote:
grrrr - That was not what I wanted to hear. It`s the reason why I already have the Summicron-R 50, The SMC Pentax M 1.4/50, The SMC Pentax M 1.7/50 and the Tomioka 1.4/55. They are all great lenses!


Don't worry.I have more than 20 differnet 50/1.4 lenses and more than forty 40/45/50/55/58/60mm lenses altogether,so you're excused Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shapencolour wrote:
timo832000 wrote:
grrrr - That was not what I wanted to hear. It`s the reason why I already have the Summicron-R 50, The SMC Pentax M 1.4/50, The SMC Pentax M 1.7/50 and the Tomioka 1.4/55. They are all great lenses!


Don't worry.I have more than 20 differnet 50/1.4 lenses and more than forty 40/45/50/55/58/60mm lenses altogether,so you're excused Very Happy


That's truly a lot of 50ishmm lenses Shocked have you thought of doing a test with at least some of them cause that would be great for your own reference and to others who are thinking of buying one.

I have thought of doing a test with maybe around 18-20 50ishmm lenses I have to determine which I should keep and which I'm getting rid of. But I think I'm never gonna do it cause I would rather spend the time actually shooting than doing tests... Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bruzzo wrote:
shapencolour wrote:
timo832000 wrote:
grrrr - That was not what I wanted to hear. It`s the reason why I already have the Summicron-R 50, The SMC Pentax M 1.4/50, The SMC Pentax M 1.7/50 and the Tomioka 1.4/55. They are all great lenses!


Don't worry.I have more than 20 differnet 50/1.4 lenses and more than forty 40/45/50/55/58/60mm lenses altogether,so you're excused Very Happy


That's truly a lot of 50ishmm lenses Shocked have you thought of doing a test with at least some of them cause that would be great for your own reference and to others who are thinking of buying one.

I have thought of doing a test with maybe around 18-20 50ishmm lenses I have to determine which I should keep and which I'm getting rid of. But I think I'm never gonna do it cause I would rather spend the time actually shooting than doing tests... Rolling Eyes


The problem is I have little time for photography,so if I get some,my preference goes to just taking real life pictures instead of tests.Vast majority of my approximately 180 lenses have never had a good go because of time shortage.So there are still some waiting for that. Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Side-by-side testing of 50mm lenses is close to pointless. I once did it with 13 of them and the differences were miniscule. The choice of which was 'best' became purely a matter of taste.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even though my Tomioka (Porst) 1.4/55 is not in the best shape and I don`t use it very often, I will not give it away. I was given this lens from my father who used it in the early eighties to take images of me when i was a baby child.


My first impression of the two Hexanons (50&57) is that my copy of the 57 has much better build quality than the 50, while the 50 is more contrasty and seems to have less abberations.


I am not going to shoot test images from test charts but I will try to make some comparision images.


Timo


PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, the 50 is multi-coated, the 57 single coated and the 50 is more highly corrected. however that means the 57 has more character at large apertures.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have both, the 57mm is the old 1.4 after that you only got 50/1.4's. The new version is rather sharper, but I love the splinned metal and soft character of the 57mm colour and contrast are on both lenses great. But I wouldn't sell either.
I have all the konica's 50's (AR's), you can never have enough 50's Smile


PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, the 50 is multi-coated, the 57 single coated and the 50 is more highly corrected. however that means the 57 has more character at large apertures.


Actually, only the earliest of the 57/1.4 are single coated. They are the ones with the amber/gold coating. Such lenses will invariably have (I’ve never seen any that didn’t) an aluminum ring on the barrel. Yet aluminum ring 57/1.4 can be found with either the single amber/gold coating or Konica’s blue/purple tinged multiple Color Dynamic Coating (CDC). Konica replaced aluminum ring lenses with entirely black ones around 1970, and this roughly coincided in time with the introduction of the second-version Autoreflex T. If the number of aluminum-ring 57/1.4 Hexanons with CDC are any indication, it would seem that Konica introduced its Color Dynamic Coating sometime in the late sixties, which was very early. Incidentally, the 57/1.4 was made until mid-1973 or so.

Ad OP: I would also keep both lenses. The 50/1.4 is a very sharp lens that is also famous for its beautiful color rendition. But the 57/1.4 has much more of an individual character. I especially like the smooth and contrasty B&W photographs it produces. They have what’s referred to in Polish as “great plasticity”, and the 3D effect is such that the scene seems to jump out of the picture. It’s one of my favorite lenses.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

konicamera wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, the 50 is multi-coated, the 57 single coated and the 50 is more highly corrected. however that means the 57 has more character at large apertures.


Actually, only the earliest of the 57/1.4 are single coated. They are the ones with the amber/gold coating. Such lenses will invariably have (I’ve never seen any that didn’t) an aluminum ring on the barrel. Yet aluminum ring 57/1.4 can be found with either the single amber/gold coating or Konica’s blue/purple tinged multiple Color Dynamic Coating (CDC). Konica replaced aluminum ring lenses with entirely black ones around 1970, and this roughly coincided in time with the introduction of the second-version Autoreflex T. If the number of aluminum-ring 57/1.4 Hexanons with CDC are any indication, it would seem that Konica introduced its Color Dynamic Coating sometime in the late sixties, which was very early. Incidentally, the 57/1.4 was made until mid-1973 or so.

Ad OP: I would also keep both lenses. The 50/1.4 is a very sharp lens that is also famous for its beautiful color rendition. But the 57/1.4 has much more of an individual character. I especially like the smooth and contrasty B&W photographs it produces. They have what’s referred to in Polish as “great plasticity”, and the 3D effect is such that the scene seems to jump out of the picture. It’s one of my favorite lenses.


Darn you, konicamera, you know way too much about Konica matters for my own good! Very Happy Laughing

Your post sent me straightaway off to my lens drawer to investigate. I have only one copy of the 57. Those things are really expensive. Anyway, mine has the blue/purple CDC along with the aluminum ring.

I have to wonder which version is owned by the OP. I don't think that has yet been revealed on this thread. If he has, as you do, the older amber/gold single coating version, that alone might be reason to keep the lens!! I'd not mind at all owning one of those myself!


PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

guardian wrote:

Darn you, konicamera, you know way too much about Konica matters for my own good! Very Happy Laughing

Your post sent me straightaway off to my lens drawer to investigate. I have only one copy of the 57. Those things are really expensive. Anyway, mine has the blue/purple CDC along with the aluminum ring.

I have to wonder which version is owned by the OP. I don't think that has yet been revealed on this thread. If he has, as you do, the older amber/gold single coating version, that alone might be reason to keep the lens!! I'd not mind at all owning one of those myself!


Actually, I don't know nearly as much as I'd like to. With the exception of a relatively small number of lens brochures, Konica hasn't published any information about its lenses, their different versions, etc. One is forced to rely on observation. Hexanons have been my main squeeze since the late seventies and, especially in the last 10 years, I've been looking at them very closely and taking careful notes. Smile

If you'd like to get one, the 57/1.4 Hexanon with amber/gold coatings is not that uncommon. One way to spot one on auction sites is by the inscriptions on the front ring. They are in BIG BLOCK LETTERS LIKE THESE. The switch from this font to the later more discrete one took place around the time the Autoreflex T - first version was introduced (1968), and seems to coincide with the introduction of the Color Dynamic Coating. I haven't been able to ascertain with any great certainty just how closely related the latter two developments are, but it looks fairly close.