Need help to choose ultra-fast fifty

[tf]

This question can't gets a only one answer, because every of photographers has personal preferences, but I hope to create a list of opinions from this famous forum.
I have a normal experience in amateur photography (for friends and family, and travels may be..). And I have found that a two years ago I stopped to change lenses, as it was a few years earlier, and even more - 90% my last photos were taken with only one 50mm lens. My set is: Minolta MD 50mm f1.2 lens + Techart PRO (AF adapter) + Sony A7mk2.
And one more detail - half of pictures were taken with f1.2.

I need to get something better than Minolta MD 50mm f1.2.
Actually, this Minolta is great lens - it's sharp on 1.2, it has a nice bokeh, flare-resistance etc.. I use it for portraits, landscapes, streets, indoor. With average price about $300 it's absolutely gem. And my question is - what 50-60mm lens is best in $500-1000 ?
Important requirements: 48-65mm, at least f1.2. Non-radioactive, Leica's flange focal distance at least or longer. 'Collector's value' does not matter. Only optical characteristics are important.

My short list:

Canon FDn 50 1.2L
Canon 55 1.2 Aspherical (v2)
------ removed (Canon 55 1.2 Non-Aspherical (cheap and cool))
------ removed (Minolta Rokkor 58 1.2)
------ removed (7Artisans 50 1.1 (cheap, but if it takes photos like a Zeiss - why not?))
------ removed (Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1)
PORST UMC 50/1.2 or Fujinon EBC 50/1.2
------ removed (Pentax 50mm 1.2 A or SMC)
------ removed (Konica 57 1.2)
Minolta MD 50 1.2 (already owned, and idea to stay with it - looks better more and more)

Do I need to add something another into the list? Can you help me?
I am afraid of making a mistake when choosing such an expensive lens for so long period of using (may be for next 10 years or so..).

[cooltouch]

I don't know of any lenses faster than f/1.2 that will fit the Minolta MD mount. But you might want to consider buying a camera just so you can use a special lens. Like Canon EOS for example. It's possible to buy good solid EOS cameras for almost nothing these days. I mention EOS because of the legendary 50mm f/1.0 L lens.

You mention both the Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical and the FD 50mm f/1.2 L. These are probably the best normal lenses that Canon ever made, but I don't know if they will outperform your Minolta. I have a 55mm f/1.2 SSC (not aspherical) and I find mine to be plenty sharp wide open, but then I've never had the opportunity to compare it to one of those more expensive ones, so I just don't know. I would like to get an Aspherical one day, just so I could have a companion lens for my 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical, but the price is enough to make me wait for now.

[tf]

[Antoine]

I was also tempted by the AF techart...but have heard there were some technical issues with it and should be avoided until problem is solved. What is you take on this?

Minolta 58mm f1.2 is a great lens.

[newst]

I haven't had it long so I don't have a lot of experience with it but the 7Artisans lens works well with an A6500 and the TAP.

[tf]

[newst]

[RnR]

Contax Zeiss 55mm f1.2...

Sounds like you have a great copy of the Minolta MD 50mm f1.2. I have a feeling that any of the other lenses on your list will be either worse or equal to your Minolta. So you really have to step to the next level. And at this point, that means 10x price.

But... do you really need f1.2? If you need shutter speed, A7s?

Do you think there will be much of a difference to the look of your images in terms of subject isolation in going from f1.2 to f1.4? Investigating lenses with f1.4 will give you a host of new options, including the Voigtlander 58mm f1.4. Indeed the focal length changes from 50mm to 58mm will mean that the out of focus differences between f1.2 and f1.4 will be marginal. Some folk have called the Voigtlander the sharpest 58mm lens made. On crop sensors I have read that even wide open its too sharp for portraits of women.

The Voigtlander fits in your price range. If it doesn't work out for you, you should be able to sell for little if any loss.

[hoanpham]

I have voigtlander f1.1 in leica mount. It is a new lens, but heavy. The most compact is the canon ltm 50/1.2. I use 50mm for general purpose. Portrait is perferred 135mm.

[calvin83]

Noct 0.95 if you are rich,

Otherwise, stick to your own lens.

[cooltouch]

[blotafton]

I don't have the MD 50 1.2 myself. But isn't that one of the better fast 50's?

The Pentax 50mm 1.2 is supposed to be sharp.

[monkjason]

[Nordentro]

Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 in e-mount. great lens

http://manuellfokus.no/zhongyi-speedmaster-50mm-f0-95/

But this will be without your Techart of course...

[kds315*]

[tf]

[TrueLoveOne]

A big plus for the Porst / Fujinon 1.2/50 !

That is one amazing lens (and i have the Minolta 1.2/58 as well), even though mine has a little problem after being completely dismantled for a clean and re-lube it still takes great shots. (i have to open it up again and fix the issue)

See here: http://forum.mflenses.com/porst-fujinon-50mm-f-1-2-question-t77826,highlight,%2Bporst.html

Cheers, René.

[Koen Nhz]

Hi, my vote goes to the Canon FD 55mm 1:1.2 S.S.C. ASPHERICAL, I made a topic about it here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-55mm-11-2-s-s-c-aspherical-samples-on-a7-many-t74050.html

There is also a link to a test of my Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 vs my Canon in there, the Canon has much better contrast and colors at f/1.2 imo (I also use it wide open most of the time), but the Rokkor has better resolution outside the image center, but always needs PP to make the pictures look attractive for me, the Canon doesn't, not even in bright sunlight as long as you don't blow the highlights too much.

One thing to notice is that it has a 'floating' element (the rear element is actually stationary), this means that it won't work optimally if you use a TAP AF adapter to focus it, it probably only matters much near MFD (where this lens is really good!), but you might want to look at that for some of the other lenses you're looking into as well (for example the Planar 55 1.2 was some kind of a copy of this lens I thought?)

The good news is that this lens doesn't seem to be quite as expensive as most people seem to think is (800-1000€ vs 300-550€ in reality)!

Couple of samples: first 2 resized (with small usm of about 0.3px at 35%) but otherwise unedited:


DSC09512_1920px by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr


DSC02825_2048px by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr

Edited but full resolution:


DSC01783_(1)_copyright by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr

Many more images here: https://flic.kr/s/aHskryu5NC
Mostly wide open and unedited unless otherwise mentioned.

You might also want to watch pictures from as many ultra fast lenses as you can here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1104043

Some of those modern 'cheap' Chinese lenses look quite good (nearer to the end of that tread), they might not last as long as the classics though.

[Lightshow]

The Konica 57/1.2, Noct Nikkor 58/1.2, Canon S 50/1.2 LTM

[tf]

[Koen Nhz]

I'm sorry you don't think is't good optically, I think it's probably still (one of) the best ultra fast '50' (better than Noct or Canon EF 50 L for example going by most tests) and it's on my A7 most of the time, so I think your only option will be some modern optics like Sigma Art of Zeiss Otus and forget about f/1.2.

Edit: it would be interesting to show some of your pics with the Minolta so we know what kind of things you want to do with it and what quality has to be improved upon.

Some tests:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/hslenses.html
https://towarzystwonieustraszonychsoczewek.blogspot.be/2017/08/standard-wedug-canona-czyli-soczewka.html

[tf]

About Aspherical 55 1.2 - I need to think a lot and research all another options

[Koen Nhz]

Ok, I see, I think you actually look for almost the same things I do in a photo
And I understand you can't show more recognizable portraits, it's the same for me.
I think your Minolta is probably one of the better lenses for this, in general I think the 'newer' 50mm's are usually sharper outside the image center than the older 55-58mm lenses, but I like the bokeh from the older ones better and they could be slightly better in the center and have a bit more contrast (not scientifically proven, just a feeling from seeing lots of pictures).

The 55 Asph is also great for '3D' rendering at those distances imo, but best if you keep your subject near the center (better than my C/Y Zeiss 50 1.7 for example), if I processed my images it can probably do something like that picture you linked to (great one btw, but probably edited quite a bit, this can make a huge difference in apparent rendering)

This might be closer to what you where looking for, but remember, again unedited:


DSC03744_2048px by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr


DSC01785_1920px by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr


DSC01612_1920px by Koen Nieuwenhuize, on Flickr


There was one sold locally for about €350 just this week with some extension tubes and a Canon 500d close up lens, and I shouldn't say what I paid for mine, but I'm sure I wouldn't have paid close to a 1000 for it, but I wouldn't sell it for that much either now that I have it.

The FD 55 1.2 non-asph is said to be very close but with slightly wilder bokeh, so that might be worth looking in to, with some luck and patience they can be found for about €150-200!

Edit: if you didn't try/think about this this already you should also consider any 85-105mm f/1.2-f/2.5, the small dof effect is usually even better with these (but I don't have a fast 85 yet myself, but even a 'cheap' Vivitar S1/Tokina 90mm f/2.5 is very good for this!

[tf]