tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Or there is another alternative. A person could just buy a rangefinder lens that does focus to .7 meters.
There are enough of them out there that a person won't have to swear off rangefinders just because they prefer to get a little closer.
venchka
Veteran
I rounded off. I'm going to dig out a 35mm lens that focuses to 12"-18". Try to see for myself just how HORRIBLE those extra 8 inches really are.
peter n hit the nail on the head. Excess capacity in 35mm lens and significant appreciation. The UC-Hexanon is the only modern 35mm lens I have. I will have to muddle along with it's short comings.
peter n hit the nail on the head. Excess capacity in 35mm lens and significant appreciation. The UC-Hexanon is the only modern 35mm lens I have. I will have to muddle along with it's short comings.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Bump.
Anyone in for a nice Leica IIIc, N-L engraved, Stepper model, Red Curtain, Matching Elmar, leather cased, Excellent condition?
I'll trade it for a UC-Hexanon lens in perfect condition!?!?
Anyone in for a nice Leica IIIc, N-L engraved, Stepper model, Red Curtain, Matching Elmar, leather cased, Excellent condition?
I'll trade it for a UC-Hexanon lens in perfect condition!?!?
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
It's only "horrible" when you are trying to do detail shots. I've always been a big fan of the lens. The only thing that keeps it from being perfect - in my opinion - is the minimum focus thing.
I have the uc hexanon and a 35 pre-asph lux - which also only focuses to .9 meters. Eventually, I'll probable sell one of the two, as I'd prefer to not have duplicate focal lengths.
venchka
Veteran
Maybe I need to see what I'm missing by getting in closer.
kermaier
Well-known
I have the UC-Hex and Summaron 35/2.8 (and the Canon 35/2.8, but that's a different question). I use the Summaron more often, as I shoot mostly in B&W, and I like the slight vintage look it produces. I use the UC-Hex more for color or when I want a more "modern" (read "high contrast") look, or when I think I'll need the extra stop.
Thing is, my Summaron is the LTM version, which only focuses down to 1m. I like to be up close a lot, so I just got the M mount version of the Summaron, which focuses down to 0.7m -- and I actually find myself using the extra range in the scale. So the difference between 0.7m and 0.9m, while less than 0.7m vs. 1m, is not completely academic or psychological.
::Ari
peter_n
Veteran
I'm left with two ASPH lenses and a v.1, all of which go to 0.7M. Ridiculous I know but I want to keep them all for different reasons. The UC-Hex was the only 35mm I could find fault with so when I figured I could sell it for a lot more than I paid for it I let it go. This is a legacy of buying lenses to try them out (rather than depending on other's opinions) then being lazy about selling them off rather than any acquisitive leanings.
dap
Established
You can add me to the list of former UC owners who sold it due to the .9M min focusing distance. It was an amazing lens in every other respect...I just found myself thinking "if only I could get a bit closer" a little bit too often.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Anyone else wanna join the 'former UC-Hexanon owner-list'? 
venchka
Veteran
Nobody has addressed my question: How well does the UC-Hexanon lens perform at 5.6 & 8.0?
CLE-RF, Give it up Bro! You will hate it. It has a tab. The tab is too big. The tab is too small. It won't focus close enough. It has threads. It does not have the M mount.
Terrible, horrible, no good, very bad lens.
CLE-RF, Give it up Bro! You will hate it. It has a tab. The tab is too big. The tab is too small. It won't focus close enough. It has threads. It does not have the M mount.
Terrible, horrible, no good, very bad lens.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Wayne! I wanna be the one to answer your questions, man!
I'd slap it on my Leica III with the Voigtlander mini-finder. It would be sweet, as nice as a Digital Pen, with a shoe mounted viewfinder
Anyway, thank you for trying to ease my GAS
EDIT: That worked for about forty minutes, GAS is back
Last edited:
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I don't mean this to sound rude, but you do own the lens. You are one of only 1,000 people in the world that do. That seems to put you in better position than most to answer the question yourself.
As for myself, I seldom record lens apertures, so I personally don't have a reliable way to contribute to the f5/6 and f8.0 analysis. I generally use mine wide open or close to it. And there, it performs as well as I could ask. If only it get a little closer.
jmkelly
rangefinder user
Wayne - I almost always shoot the UC Hex between f2 and f4. The few shots I have at f5.6-f16 seem acceptably sharp - whatever that means to you. I amy have to do some side-by-side with the Summilux now to see if it is sharper than the Hex in that range.
Know what I do when 0.9m isn't close enough? Switch to a 50mm lens.
Know what I do when 0.9m isn't close enough? Switch to a 50mm lens.
venchka
Veteran
Of course. Silly me. I shall happily use the lens anyway I see fit. I know it doesn't turn to mush at f/16. I shot almost an entire roll of Tmax 3200 at noon on a cloudless day. f/16 @ 1/1000. Those negatives look fine.
I have a DR Summicron, Nikkor LTM 50/1.4, Canon macro lens and Zome VI field camera for "Up close & personal".
Too bad customer number 1,001 can't find a lens.
I have a DR Summicron, Nikkor LTM 50/1.4, Canon macro lens and Zome VI field camera for "Up close & personal".
Too bad customer number 1,001 can't find a lens.
venchka
Veteran
Yo! CLE-RF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yo! CLE-RF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The answer to your GAS attack is listed in the Classifieds. Right here. At RFF! Go for it!
Yo! CLE-RF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The answer to your GAS attack is listed in the Classifieds. Right here. At RFF! Go for it!