tom_f77
Tom Fenwick
Hi all.
I'm interested to hear opinions on the 28/2.8 Rokkor and M-Hexanon, even if nobody has used both...
I use the 28 Ultron and it's great, but big enough that I only use it when I really have to. The new biogon seems a bit excessive when my only excuse is to get a smaller lens, but these two are both available sort of reasonably.
Try to sell me on the Skopar as well if you like, but I think that is probably a bit *too* small for me; I'd like something I can get hold of - just not something that sticks out like a standard zoom.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Tom
I'm interested to hear opinions on the 28/2.8 Rokkor and M-Hexanon, even if nobody has used both...
I use the 28 Ultron and it's great, but big enough that I only use it when I really have to. The new biogon seems a bit excessive when my only excuse is to get a smaller lens, but these two are both available sort of reasonably.
Try to sell me on the Skopar as well if you like, but I think that is probably a bit *too* small for me; I'd like something I can get hold of - just not something that sticks out like a standard zoom.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Tom
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Both lenses are fairly sized: not too big, not too small. I don't own anything Minolta anymore, but I do have a Hexanon 35/2 (a rare kind, compared to the Hexanon 28/2.8 you're asking about). The Konica short lenses (28, 35 & 50) look about the same to me: at least they all have the same filter size (46mm). Their ergonomics are ideal: not incredibly big or heavy, and easy to handle on the camera. They don't have built-in hoods, so you must be careful never to take it off and risk losing it because they're hard to find. As for performance... never having owned a 35mm Leica I cannot compare, but I'm really happy with my Hexanon!
Minoltas have a problem with the coating or glass: they show small bubbles in the front element. Some never develop it badly and the problem only hurts their resale value (image quality never suffers), but there are cases of glass completely wrecked by these bubbles. Oddly enough, it seems only the Rokkor 28s have this problem. I've never seen it mentioned in regards to the 40mm or the 90mm lenses.
Good luck in your search!
Minoltas have a problem with the coating or glass: they show small bubbles in the front element. Some never develop it badly and the problem only hurts their resale value (image quality never suffers), but there are cases of glass completely wrecked by these bubbles. Oddly enough, it seems only the Rokkor 28s have this problem. I've never seen it mentioned in regards to the 40mm or the 90mm lenses.
Good luck in your search!
awilder
Alan Wilder
I own the 28/2.8 Hexanon M and optically it's superb as it should be since the optical design is a very close copy of the current version of the Elmarit M. Mechanically it's build quality is at least as good as anything I've seen from Leica. I can't comment on the Rokkor except that it's more compact and would be better than an Elmarit or Hexanon on my CLE because of partial blockage by the hood of the RF window at close distances. Not a big deal though, I can unscew the hood. The biggest drawback of the Rokkor are the formation of white spots on the coating of a rear element based on what I've read from some users of this lens. I can't personally attest to this but it's been mentioned on multiple threads on photonet.
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
I have the Hex 28. I've owned for maybe 3 months. I haven't had the opportunity to shoot as much with it as I would like (too friggin busy). My one rather extensive outing with it ended in a processing screw-up :bang: (it happens, but I would be too embarassed to post the results here). I can attest to the build quality and handling, however. Both are excellent. It's no where near as tiny as the CV 28/3.5, and like most Hex' lenses harder to find. I've never used the Rokkor 28, just the 40.
to post the results here). I can attest to the build quality and handling, however. Both are excellent. It's no where near as tiny as the CV 28/3.5, and like most Hex' lenses harder to find. I've never used the Rokkor 28, just the 40.tom_f77
Tom Fenwick
Thanks all...
As you say, the Hexanon's harder to find - I found several Rokkors straight away. But I don't recall much for them in the way of the kind of praise the 40 gets - just the white spot problem.
I think I'll wait for the Konica if anything - I have a feeling something will turn up if I'm patient...
Tom
As you say, the Hexanon's harder to find - I found several Rokkors straight away. But I don't recall much for them in the way of the kind of praise the 40 gets - just the white spot problem.
I think I'll wait for the Konica if anything - I have a feeling something will turn up if I'm patient...
Tom
peter_n
Veteran
It will Tom. I have the M-Hexanon 28 and would second the comments above. My first shots from it looked good and I'm piling up some rolls of film here to get developed in one go. The lens does not have a tab which is a major plus for me but YMMV.
I have the M-Hexanon 28 and would second the comments above. My first shots from it looked good and I'm piling up some rolls of film here to get developed in one go. The lens does not have a tab which is a major plus for me but YMMV.
R
rotzbremse
Guest
I have a Minolta 28mm lens without the white spots. It is small and relatively sharp. Overall, a good performer.
richard_l
Well-known
Same here, but I doubt that I use 28mm enough to justify buying a smaller lens which might be more expensive and not as good as the Ultron.tom_f77 said:
Richard
Last edited:
zeos 386sx
Well-known
Please excuse me for changing the direction of the thread but I have a question about the Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 Biogon.
The front rim of that lens looks almost mirror shiny to me. Has anyone had problems with flare from that? It looks to me like one of those very expensive ($127) optional lens hoods would be mandatory. Would a lens hood even stop flare if the front rim is shiny on the inside?
The front rim of that lens looks almost mirror shiny to me. Has anyone had problems with flare from that? It looks to me like one of those very expensive ($127) optional lens hoods would be mandatory. Would a lens hood even stop flare if the front rim is shiny on the inside?