Minolta Rokkor 58mm 1.2 Vs Konica Hexanon 57mm 1.2

sajualex1 · Joined: 11 Sep 2011 Posts: 40

I would like to buy a 1.2 lens for some for some portrait use. At the end of a small rounding through most of 1.2 lenses i reach to two lenses, Rokkor 58mm 1.2 and Hexanon 57mm 1.2. I would like to have some comparison details about this two lenses from the experienced gentleman here, especially when shoot wide open @ 1.2, about the bokeh, color, sharpness, etc etc. Thank you.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

It's very hard to recommend you something as it is rather unlikely that somebody has both lenses at the same time to do an unbiased comparison under exactly the same conditions. So there are mainly Konica fans lacking of the Minolta lens or the other way round.
I am from the Minolta fraction and have of course the mentioned Lens in my collection. I've already shown test shots of my lens here.

So I can only talk about the Minolta lens and give you some hints to enable you further reading or investigation about this lens.
Here are some good sources:

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/Battle%20of%2050s1.htm
http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/#50
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/236-minolta-58mm-f12

I must say that the early Minolta lens (like my copy) is really fantastic and legendary. It delivers very good pictures already fully open although the maximum performance is reached at F5.6 (that is true for all of comparable lenses). As it is based on the "Planar" design from Zeiss it can easily hold up against all those extreme expensive "original" lenses. However, similar to the Leica Noctilux F1.0 and comparable lenses some vignetting occurs wide open but there is no lens in this league which is free from any weakness when used fully open.
For portraits this could eventually be also a positive feature.

What I have seen in the Konica specifications, this lens is equipped with 6 aperture blades whereas the Minolta has 8 blades. This has a direct influence on the bokeh. However, as the bokeh is only a matter of taste, it's hard to say something about this. I personally prefer always the more rounder bokeh effect of lenses with more blades. So the more blades the better the result will suit my taste.
I have no idea of the other performance details of the Konica lens. I only own Konica lenses for my middle format Koni Omega cameras and not even one for 35mm film.

Maybe you will find some helpful information here about the Konica lens:
https://sites.google.com/site/tks0en/3-hexanon-ar-lenses/-standard-lenses

As a general observation I would say that you should really overthink your need for a F1.2 lens as those lenses are nowadays expensive collector items and the prices are going up and up. Still reasonable and quite comparable are the F1.4 versions which are similar to the F1.2 versions very nice for portrait photography and more than good enough for a fraction of the price.
Especially the Minolta F1.4 lenses are all really excellent and can still be found for little money.

Watch that thread about the F1.4 ones:
http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-md-rokkor-50mm-f1-4-t71150.html
It includes also on page 2 a comparison of the F1.2 versus F1.4 and F1.7 versions....

If I wouldn't own the 58/1.2 already since ages I hardly would buy it for today's prices as the F1.4 versions are equally fulfilling my needs. Observe also the different sub versions. There are many around.
Also 4 different Konica versions are available, but I don't know their differences.

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

At first I have to say that I am fond of longer focal lenghts and prefer 58>55>50mm, due to the bokeh, but regular fifties are more versatile, for portraits, certraily 57-58mm are better (not as good as 80mm territory on full frame.

I have both lenses, however have not done head to head comparison yet.

My impressions so far:

Minolta:PROS: legend, sharpness wide open is great (the later versions better), smaller in size, smaller filers/hoods, more blades (better bokeh @f2.8 )
CONS: minimal focal distance:(MFD)0.6m
Konica:PROS:build like a tank, beautiful lens,MFD:0.45m, CONS: I think more glowy and less sharp, my copy gives yellowish tone to pictures (sometimes annoying, at times pleasant)
bokeh very nice as well

P.s. I will test both of them this weekend head to head

Rado

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

sajualex1 · Joined: 11 Sep 2011 Posts: 40

Thank you for the inputs. I have also heard about the yellow tone visible some times in Hexanon. Can you please post a sample, if you can? Sharpness, color and contrast are the main concerns for me in any case. Rolling Eyes

StyxD · Joined: 18 Nov 2014 Posts: 79 Location: Italia

I don't own any of those lenses, but from could be seen on Flickr pictures: Konica is sharper, but nothing beats the bokeh of Minolta.

hoanpham · Expire: 2015-01-18

I have none of these, but few others. Bokeh in certain distances has a light ring or blue ring, and looks a bit harsh to me. If f1.2 is not really needed, many f1.4 lenses are as good (or better).

RnR · Expire: 2019-08-29

At the prices that the f1.2 lenses are at, have a look at the Voigtlander 58mm f1.4.

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

I never had the hexanon 57/1,2.

But have the 1,2/58 rokkor.

It's my prefer lens. At F/4,8 to F/9,5 is very, very sharp. Correct contrast.

And with the FL of 58 mm, has beautiful rendering.

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

araucaria · Joined: 16 Jan 2014 Posts: 63

I like the first one, is it the minolta 58 1.2?

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

sajualex1 · Joined: 11 Sep 2011 Posts: 40

I guess that the first picture is from Nikkor, second from konica and third one from Minolta. Anyway sharpness is the first priority for any photographer, colors, bokeh etc are secondary. I think each versions having some kind of coating difference and it might not make much difference in the pictures.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

I can't speak to the minolta but here are a couple from my recently purchased Koniaca 57mm 1.2. On the A7ii
scaled:

and100%

scaled:

and 100%

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary

Looks good to me, hope you're happy with it.

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

Yes, those are a bit soft but taken wide open hand held in very bright sun with a bit of wind. I like the dreamy look and the "impressionistic" bokeh.

OccultDemonCassette · Joined: 12 Oct 2019 Posts: 7

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

I have both the Konica and the Minolta, i did some shooting of a friend, they are so similar that these two are the only ones i am sure about which one is the Konica and which one is Minolta, dare to guess? Laugh 1

The ones under i am not sure if they are from the same lens or i change it
Laugh 1

Looks that the next time i ll have to ask her to hold a piece of paper with the lens name Laugh 1

blotafton · Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1554 Location: Sweden

I only have the Rokkor. But i recognize the irregular shaped bokeh that it makes. The smoother, rounder shaped bokeh must be the Hexanon.

Great shots Like 1 small

tomasg · Expire: 2014-04-28

Thank you. Interesting, i find them on par, the other variables in the pics like subject distance, background distance, light, seem to smudge the difference in rendering.