sleepyhead
Well-known
The following post is a follow up to this thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50163
That thread was mostly about the 50mm f/1.2 Konica lens, which people often LUMP TOGETHER with the 60mm f/1.2, but of course they're different.
Here is a photo of the Konica 60mm and two other lenses (DR Summicron and Elmar-M):
Here is a side view with a film canister for size comparison:
Here is a portrait taken with the lens (Epson RD-1):
This boring shot was taken at minimum distance (0.8 meters) and wide open (Epson RD-1):
Another wide open shot (Epson RD-1):
Crop of above shot to show sharpness:
Night shot at f/2, I believe (Epson RD-1):
And last, the mandatory bokeh shot:
All pictures were taken handheld.
Here's what I wrote in the previous thread regarding this lens and the noctilux:
"I own the 60mm f/1.2 Konica lens (paid around $1600). I do not own a noctilux, but I've used one briefly. Even if the price of these two lenses were the same, I would still choose the Konica for several reasons:
It's lighter than the noctilux so not so bad to carry around all day (or night). The ergonomics on an M mount camera are great (for me). I use this lens most these days on an Epson RD-1 where the 50mm framelines fit the 60mm field of view P E R F E C T L Y. The build quality is excellent, but the noctilux is even a bit better.
The bokeh wide open is "more normal" - very very smooth and lovely, but not the unique, sometimes swirly, sometimes nauseating bokeh you get with the noctilux. This makes the Konica better for general use, but with a less unique look. Personally, I feel a strong photograph should stand on it's content, and not on a unique look. Ideally, one would want to own BOTH these lenses
There's very little vignetting wide open with the Konica. I know that noctilux lovers also preach that the vignetting wide open only adds to it's unique look. This is true, but I like the "default option" of no vignetting - I can always easily add it later in Photoshop. (Therefore, I also disagree with Irwin Putts' statement that the Noctilux is a true f/1.0 while the Konica lens is only f/1.4. The noctilux is f/1 in the centre, perhaps more like f/2 or less at the corners. Also, I've tested the Konica f/1.2 and the summilux at f/1.4 on my RD-1 where the EXACT shutter speed can be determined, and the Konica is half a stop faster than the Summilux.)
The noctilux is famous for it's resistance to flare. I can't comment much on the Konica except to say that I haven't seen any flare - I have never tried to "force" some by test shooting into a very strong light source. I'll get back to you on this after some testing.
LAST, but NOT LEAST, the Konica lens focuses down to 0.8 meters vs. 1.0 meters for the noctilux. This, combined with the slightly longer focal length actually gives you THINNER DOF than the noctilux, and better ability to fill the frame.
I've tested and used quite a few 50mm lenses over the past few years, and in the end I settled on the current 50mm f/2.8 Elmar-M in combination with the 60mm Konica Hexanon. The best of both worlds, in my opinion. I think I can live with these two lenses forever."
WHAT I REALLY WANT TO SHOW YOU, but don't have scans yet are photos from this lens on my Leica M3 shooting on film. Then it behaves more like a normal than a short tele as on the RD-1, and you can see that the vignetting on film is minimal.
That thread was mostly about the 50mm f/1.2 Konica lens, which people often LUMP TOGETHER with the 60mm f/1.2, but of course they're different.
Here is a photo of the Konica 60mm and two other lenses (DR Summicron and Elmar-M):
Here is a side view with a film canister for size comparison:
Here is a portrait taken with the lens (Epson RD-1):
This boring shot was taken at minimum distance (0.8 meters) and wide open (Epson RD-1):
Another wide open shot (Epson RD-1):
Crop of above shot to show sharpness:
Night shot at f/2, I believe (Epson RD-1):
And last, the mandatory bokeh shot:
All pictures were taken handheld.
Here's what I wrote in the previous thread regarding this lens and the noctilux:
"I own the 60mm f/1.2 Konica lens (paid around $1600). I do not own a noctilux, but I've used one briefly. Even if the price of these two lenses were the same, I would still choose the Konica for several reasons:
It's lighter than the noctilux so not so bad to carry around all day (or night). The ergonomics on an M mount camera are great (for me). I use this lens most these days on an Epson RD-1 where the 50mm framelines fit the 60mm field of view P E R F E C T L Y. The build quality is excellent, but the noctilux is even a bit better.
The bokeh wide open is "more normal" - very very smooth and lovely, but not the unique, sometimes swirly, sometimes nauseating bokeh you get with the noctilux. This makes the Konica better for general use, but with a less unique look. Personally, I feel a strong photograph should stand on it's content, and not on a unique look. Ideally, one would want to own BOTH these lenses
There's very little vignetting wide open with the Konica. I know that noctilux lovers also preach that the vignetting wide open only adds to it's unique look. This is true, but I like the "default option" of no vignetting - I can always easily add it later in Photoshop. (Therefore, I also disagree with Irwin Putts' statement that the Noctilux is a true f/1.0 while the Konica lens is only f/1.4. The noctilux is f/1 in the centre, perhaps more like f/2 or less at the corners. Also, I've tested the Konica f/1.2 and the summilux at f/1.4 on my RD-1 where the EXACT shutter speed can be determined, and the Konica is half a stop faster than the Summilux.)
The noctilux is famous for it's resistance to flare. I can't comment much on the Konica except to say that I haven't seen any flare - I have never tried to "force" some by test shooting into a very strong light source. I'll get back to you on this after some testing.
LAST, but NOT LEAST, the Konica lens focuses down to 0.8 meters vs. 1.0 meters for the noctilux. This, combined with the slightly longer focal length actually gives you THINNER DOF than the noctilux, and better ability to fill the frame.
I've tested and used quite a few 50mm lenses over the past few years, and in the end I settled on the current 50mm f/2.8 Elmar-M in combination with the 60mm Konica Hexanon. The best of both worlds, in my opinion. I think I can live with these two lenses forever."
WHAT I REALLY WANT TO SHOW YOU, but don't have scans yet are photos from this lens on my Leica M3 shooting on film. Then it behaves more like a normal than a short tele as on the RD-1, and you can see that the vignetting on film is minimal.
