| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 1471
Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 1:56 pm Post subject: All three versions of Konica Hexanon AR 135 in pictures |
 |
|
Pontus wrote:
I took a few pictures of the three versions of the Konica Hexanon AR 135mm lens for comparison.
Konica Hexanon AR 135/3.5 (fourth and last version)
Konica Hexanon AR 135/3.2 (second version of three)
Konica Hexanon AR 135/2.5 (only version)
_________________
Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015)
Last edited by Pontus on Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:17 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
It would be nice to see some tests to compare them 
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
All same good 
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
They all look equally perfect.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Very nice. I have the 3.5 and 3.2, I had the same version of 3.5 shown here but sold it because i have an earlier all metal silver band 3.5 I preferred. I have the Hexar 3.5 too. They are all very good, trying to determine a 'best' is a waste of time imho as they are all more than capable.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Layer-cake
Joined: 18 Mar 2013
Posts: 560
Location: Cape Town
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Layer-cake wrote:
The 3.5 is a big lens as it is but that 2.8 looks like it has monster glass in comparison! Very nice:) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 1471
Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
| Layer-cake wrote: |
| The 3.5 is a big lens as it is but that 2.8 looks like it has monster glass in comparison! Very nice:) |
2.5 
_________________
Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 1471
Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
| Excalibur wrote: |
| It would be nice to see some tests to compare them |
Yes, I was planning to do some sort of a test but unfortunately I never find the time. And now I'm letting go of the larger part of my collection.
_________________
Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Layer-cake
Joined: 18 Mar 2013
Posts: 560
Location: Cape Town
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Layer-cake wrote:
| Pontus wrote: |
| Layer-cake wrote: |
| The 3.5 is a big lens as it is but that 2.8 looks like it has monster glass in comparison! Very nice:) |
2.5 |
 that is proper! I like your 28 1.8 didn't even know konica made them that fast! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 1471
Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
| Layer-cake wrote: |
| Pontus wrote: |
| Layer-cake wrote: |
| The 3.5 is a big lens as it is but that 2.8 looks like it has monster glass in comparison! Very nice:) |
2.5 |
that is proper! I like your 28 1.8 didn't even know konica made them that fast! |
The UC 28/1.8 is a very special lens. Very rare, very expensive, very good, very fast and has a close focus of only 18cm. Unique. But that is for another thread...
_________________
Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sceptic
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 255
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sceptic wrote:
Between the 3.5 and the 3.2, I prefer the 3.2 for two reasons: it has better build quality (less plastics used than for the 3.5) and it focuses down to 1 meter (1.5 m for the 3.5). That ½ m is quite alot when it comes to a 135 mm lens.
_________________
Sony A7R and wildly varying flora of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
