Konica 50/2.4 LTM?

Mine is special

Mine is special

It was used by a very famous photographer in Santa Cruz ...

Seriously, buy one from Noriaki san, he is a pleasure to do business with. I didn't realize he was still selling them, I may pick up another.


Sonnar2 said:
That's 150$ more than @matsuiyastore
Click to expand...
 
I got mine few weeks ago from Matsuiyastore. I really like it. Compared with Leica Elmar 50/2.8, the Konica has more pleasing out-of-focus highlight. At f2.8, the Konica renders images more crispy than Leica. All and all, a lovely lens and it'a a keeper.
 
yes, amazingly crisp

yes, amazingly crisp

One of the few lenses that can out-resolve the sensor of an M8/M9.


zleica said:
I got mine few weeks ago from Matsuiyastore. I really like it. Compared with Leica Elmar 50/2.8, the Konica has more pleasing out-of-focus highlight. At f2.8, the Konica renders images more crispy than Leica. All and all, a lovely lens and it'a a keeper.
Click to expand...
 
zleica said:
I got mine few weeks ago from Matsuiyastore. I really like it. Compared with Leica Elmar 50/2.8, the Konica has more pleasing out-of-focus highlight. At f2.8, the Konica renders images more crispy than Leica. All and all, a lovely lens and it'a a keeper.
Click to expand...


Can you post some comparison shots so we can see? I have a modern Elmar 2.8 that I really like but I might again be tempted to try the Hex - if the price is right...
 
I don't have any slides scanned. I just used my M8 on tripod with the modern Elmar and Hex for a test shoot (Elmar first then Hex). The difference are very small at F2.8. But I like the color of the Hex very much, remind me of the Contax G 45/2 Planar.
 

Attachments

  • Elmar50-f28.jpg
    Elmar50-f28.jpg
    30.5 KB · Views: 7
  • Hex50-f28.jpg
    Hex50-f28.jpg
    29.4 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:
zleica said:
I don't have any slides scanned. I just used my M8 on tripod with the modern Elmar and Hex for a test shoot (Elmar first then Hex). The difference are very small at F2.8. But I like the color of the Hex very much, remind me of the Contax G 45/2 Planar.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, you're right there doesn't seem to be much difference, but the web images are a bit small to judge.
 
Nice Jon !! 🙂 where was it taken, looks like an interesting place !

(...wait, you got a 50/2.4 Hexanon ? 😱 ... that is no Nikkor, Sir ! 😀)
 
maddoc said:
Nice Jon !! 🙂 where was it taken, looks like an interesting place !

(...wait, you got a 50/2.4 Hexanon ? 😱 ... that is no Nikkor, Sir ! 😀)
Click to expand...

This is at a temple in Kita-Kamakura, Gabor. We should check it out sometime!

The lens is indeed not a Nikkor 😉 But its not mine. I'm just the temporary owner, until I send it to Jon in Taiwan (noimmunity).
 
Just got the lens in the mail today. Two days from Tokyo to Taipei, delivery on a Sunday. Now that's service for ya!

Took it out for a quick preview test spin on my M8. No PP, just conversion, shot without UV/IR filter, wide open.

Late fall, time for roasted sweet potato!

L1005337 1 by areality4all, on Flickr

L1005338 1 by areality4all, on Flickr

This lens is incredibly sharp, yet smooth. Reminds me of my former ZM Planar or perhaps even more the 75/2 cron. Colors are vivid, and much more neutral than the Rollei Sonnar, with which it competes in size (when collapsed).
 
Konica 50/2.4 LTM?

I haven't used either one, and I am curious which lens is better built and which is optically superior. Also, is the better lens comparable to a 50/2 Summicron?
 
Raid,

I owned both at one time years ago and their build is very good in either case.

The 2.0 stacks up to a Summicron in every aspect, the 2.4 to a Planar.

People have reported that some Hexanons did not register 100% on their Leicas (it was said to be variations in build that slipped through quality control), but I have not had that experience, nor have I ever heard of anyone who could not have a lens corrected to specs by a repairman.

You can hardly go wrong I'd say.

Over the years I've owned the 2.8/28mm KM, 2.0/50mm KM, 2.0/90mm KM, 2.4/50mm LTM and 2.0/35mm LTM Hexanons. I should do an article on them on my website...
 
I liked the 2.0 best. It was more ergonomic.

While the 2.4 seemed very versatile at first glance, its mount was oversized on a Barnack, the diameter is perfect for a Leica M but then why would it have an LTM mount...

Image quality wise, I found out I'm more of a Summicron person than a Planar person. The Planar was a bit more clinical.



I found a perfect 'compromise' for both lenses a few years ago: I purchased a nickel Heliar 2.0/50mm LTM from Stephen and it lives on my only Leica, a Leica II. Sharpness is as good as both Hexanons, but size and appearance are also a perfect match to the camera. It resembles a rigid Summar.

 
I found the 50/2.4 to be exceedingly sharp, if not clinically so. Curiously the 50/2 is not a direct copy of the v4 Summicron as its 6 elements come in 5 groups.

The L-Hexanon wobbles a bit when collapsed, that plus the fact it's not rigid after all, makes it not as confidence-inspiring as the M-Hexanon. That aside, the actual build quality of the two lenses are on par with each other.
 
Johan: You last post will save me some money. I also own a Heliar 50/2 ltm, so there is no need to get a Hexanon after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Konica 50mm and Topcor 5cm LTM
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1K
Young Shawn
Y
Steinberg2010
Curious about the W-Nikkor 35mm 1.8 ltm vs the Konica 35mm f2 ltm (chrome)
Replies
0
Views
561
Steinberg2010
Steinberg2010
D
Let's see your less common 50s in LTM
2
Replies
25
Views
872
rfaspen
rfaspen
M
Identification help sought Leica IIIc ?
Replies
10
Views
1K
WoodallP
WoodallP
ped
Lens carrying system
Replies
7
Views
287
Dralowid
Dralowid
Back
Top Bottom