Overview 55mm f1.2 lenses?

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

Whereas PORST PK is known to include lemons, that doesn't happen with PORST Fujica-X which is better built. Is it of the same optical design?

And don't forget about lovely REVUENON PK 1.2/55mm. I think it matches the quality of "real" Tomiokas in every aspect.

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

blende8 · Joined: 29 Sep 2007 Posts: 260 Location: Bremen, Germany

I was in a shop with my friend yesterday and we looked at those f1.2 lenses. The shop owner had several of them. We could convince him that the prices he was asking (200 €) were way too high. Off we went with two Revuenon 55/1.2 for 85 € each. I took one, too, because I wanted to test it, and it looked good mechanically and is like new.
The dealer was quite knowledgeable and he also showed us some Porsts. These where clearly inferior mechanically. But then he showed us another Porst, which was labeled UMC and this one was better, like the Revuenons, but it was a 50mm lens.

Today I did a small test.
I compared the Revuenon 55/1.2 with the Pentax FA50/1.4.
One should expect the Revuenon to be half a stop brighter.
This is not the case.

ISO 200, fully open, 1/60 s
Both give about the same histogram, i.e. the same brightness of the image.
If I go up to 1/90 s for the Revuenon, the image is clearly darker.

I checked the images in Adobe Camera RAW where you can shift the exposure very acurately and I would say that the Revuenon is perhaps about 0,15 EV or 1/6 stop brighter.

This is what I expected: These no-name f1.2 lenses are just pretending to be fast, but losing light due to cheapo lens coating or whatever.

The only advantage of the 55mm is the slightly larger focal length. This is visible in the photos.
Just for the record I repeated the test with the Voigtlander Nokton 58/1.4, which gave the same result. Btw. the contrast of the Nokton is significantly better. Sharpness is excellent of all three lenses. No softness here.

Tomorrow I will check for possible DoF differences.

Here is the lens:

no-X · Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:29 pm Post subject:

I think you're right. The coating (light transmittance) can have higher impact than speed. It was also quite common, that the values were rounded - e.g. it could be in fact a f/1.25 design...

Anyway, if the problem is caused only by coating, depth of field shouldn't be affected.

The old (non UMC) Porsts 55/1.2 are based on the old optical design invented by Tomioka. I compared this porst to original Tomioka and I found, that it's multi-coating is less effective than the old Tomiokas single coating in terms of contrast.

Phenix jc · Joined: 19 Dec 2009 Posts: 398 Location: France

The 1:1.2/50mm UMC 55ø X-M G PORST COLOR REFLEX is exactly an EBC X-Fujinon 50/1.2, except the filter ring (55mm)
http://www.pentax-manuals.com/fujica/fujica.htm
(FUJICA-X)
Focal Length 50mm
Max aperture/Min aperture 1.2 16
Groups/Elements 7 7
Min Focus Meter/Feet 0.45 1.5
Filter (mm) 49

Is there a relationship with the Tomioka, that's another story...

For these 55/1.2 we are now considering that all the PK mount with MC, COSINON, REVUENON, RIKENON, VIVITAR, PORST + YASHICA ML mount, are coming from the old M42'S TOMIOKA sheme with no MC, CHINON, TOMINON, Revuenon, Cosinon, YASHINON

(NB : minimum aperture do vary between f16 & f22, and mfd too)

My first impression is to prefer the old Tomioka, when I see pictures on the net, but I didn't find a direct comparison with the same subject...[/u]

a20010494 · Joined: 15 Feb 2010 Posts: 396 Location: Perú.

I have 4 50-58mm f1.2.
Gotta get rid of'em!!!!!!

blende8 · Joined: 29 Sep 2007 Posts: 260 Location: Bremen, Germany

Before you sell them, could you please make photos of them and post them here with all additional info you have?

Perhaps someone who has an UMC Porst could test it the way I did above?

Phenix jc · Joined: 19 Dec 2009 Posts: 398 Location: France

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

I found PK Revuenon better then PK PORST in terms of optics, mechanics and aesthetics. Thus (and since i have 5 PORST samples) i dared to replace PK mount with EOS on one PORST recently. Much work was required to connect aperture ring directly to aperture blades mover skipping all those complicated springs and connections constituting auto PK function. Anyway i am pleased with results. Here a bit post-produced photos. Canon 5DMkII. ISO 800, 1/8000s (first photo), low rainy afternoon light outside, aperture probably not fully open (i made first f-stops closing with smaller grades so instead of 1:2.0 more like 1:1.3 Smile

.

Sculptoring

Nostalghia

caspert79 · Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3198 Location: The Netherlands

I used to own a Rikenon 55/1.2. It was pretty good, not even disappointing wide open. Performance comparable to S-M-C Tak 50/1.4. However, I hardly ever need an aperture of f/1.2, so I sticked to the Takumar, which build quality is a bit better.

Idilio Eterno · Joined: 08 Apr 2011 Posts: 14 Location: Los Angeles

I am the proud owner of a Porst 55mm f1.2 and have read lots of information on these f1.2 lenses. I think there is a steep learning curve to deal with the thin dof, but the lens is great for some creative work. I look forward to using it. I have found that using ND filters and CPL would reduce the fstops and allow to use it in bright sun light. The lens is ideal for indoor and night shots without flash. I do have a question for those who like to modify lenses. I got the lens from someone in Germany, it is a Pk mount. However, when I placed it on the Pentax Kx, it did not behave as a Pk, it does not need to be stopped down via green button or AV+/- button. You just chose the fstop using the fstop ring, focus and shoot. I wonder if the previous owner did any surgery to it. I look forward to discussing this lens some more.

Hibisco by Palenquero, on Flickr

Portrait by Palenquero, on Flickr

Kathmandu · Expire: 2012-04-08

Idilio Eterno · Joined: 08 Apr 2011 Posts: 14 Location: Los Angeles

Thank you. I wonder why my photos do not show in my message, but they show when quoted. Interesting.

Esomeliae by Palenquero, on Flickr

Kathmandu · Expire: 2012-04-08

DSG · Joined: 04 Mar 2007 Posts: 544 Location: London, UK.

I think you will find that the best 55mm f1.2 lenses are all made by Canon...The 1960's vintage Canon FL 55mm f1.2 is excellent. So good in fact that the same lens design was carried over into the first FD version into the 1970's, with the only difference being pehaps the addition of an extra lens coating (?)...Sharper than the Minolta Rokkor 58mm f1.2 wide open but with similar lovely smooth bokeh.
Later FD versions like the uber expensive Asperical SSC had a different optical formula and arguably have poorer bokeh quality and OOF highlight quality as a result. (Onion ring OOF highlights).
The Nikon versions (Ai and AiS) have really wacky and busy "marmite" bokeh (You either love it or loathe it)...Personally I dont like it, although I am a big fan of Nikon AiS lenses.
The Olympus version is softer than the Nikon but shares its iffy bokeh quality.
Porst and Tomioka versions are generally not considered as good as Canon, Nikon, Minolta or Oly versions but still fetch high prices, purely down to their f1.2 WO aperture. The Canon FL 55mm f1.2 can still sometimes be found at bargain prices but the Rokkor almost always fetches the highest second hand prices.
Sometimes you can get three really good 55mm f1.2 lenses for less than the average price of a single Rokkor! (about $600):

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-nFD-50mm-f1-2-FL-55mm-f1-2-Nikon-55mm-f1-2-/250831780004?pt=Camera_Lenses

Kathmandu · Expire: 2012-04-08

BRunner · Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic