Konica AR Hexanon Lens

[SForg33]

Brand new to photography, got a Konica FT-1 and some long range lenses the other day. I'm looking to add some shorter range lenses to my collection. Based on research alone I've come up with a couple different lenses. 28mm 2.8 sigma mini, 40mm 1.8 hexanon and 57mm 1.4 hexanon. If I get these 3 do you think I need a 50mm as well? I've read a lot about the 1.7 50mm recently. Please let me know if these look like good everyday lenses. I need close-ups and landscape as well. Thanks for your time!

 

[zuikologist]

Welcome to the forum.

I would suggest just getting a 50mm and using your camera a while to see what your shooting style is - whether more wide angle or telephoto based. Then buy the lenses to suit.

Konica made amongst the best lenses and the Sigma is good, so your choices are good. The 40, 50 and 57 are close in focal length. Ne of the three should be sufficient. They do vary in size though.

 

[rhl-oregon]

If as Z advises above less is more, go for the 40 of the 3 you mentioned. Best compromise iin focal length, speed, flexibility. A few steps back, its a wide angle; step closer and the f1.8 is good for portraits. The 57 1.4 is not compact, and at nearly 60mm its focus/dof at f1.4 can be quite hard to control. I have the 40, the 57, and the stunningly wide-eyed (82mm filter size) Vivitar 20 3.8. If you decide you want to try really really wide, let me know....

 

[ampguy]

I have the 40/1.8 and 57/1.4 and they're quite different lenses in size, and usage. The 40 is probably more flexible, but the 57/1.4 has has more character, and as mentioned, almost no dof at close distances wide open.

I also have the 50/1.8, which seems like a slightly longer 40/1.8. I've heard the 50/1.7 is the sharpest of the 50s, but haven't used it.

 

[konicaman]

The 50/1.7 is indeed the sharpest of the 50´ies. The 40/1.8 is not only light weight but probably on of the sharpest lenses made by Konica for the AR mount. The 85/1.8 is also very nice. If you have not already been there, a visit to: http://buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eKonicaStart.html
is recommended.

And welcome to this nice and friendly forum!

Have fun
Henrik

 

[petronius]

Welcome here!
I am a great fan of the 40mm/1,8, a overall sexy lens. I own the 28mm/3,5 and the 135mm/3,2 which has a focussing range down to 1 meter and is very sharp.
All three do a great job adapted to a m4/3 camera too!

 

[Mablo]

I have the 28mm/3.5, 40mm/1.8 and the 50mm/1.7. All of them are really really sharp and very enjoyable to use. Especially the 28mm/3.5 AR can be bought for little money. Just make sure you pick up the rectangle 24/28mm hood with it.

 

[SForg33]

Thanks for all the great feedback! Much appreciated for sure. I won a 40mm on eBay for $30 last night. I can't wait for it! My camera came with the 135mm hexanon which I've been using a lot. I'm excited to try the 40 and also the 28mm and 57mm. I'm still unsure whether I need to get the 50 1.7 if I get the 40 and 57. I'll probably just end up getting them all and selling the unnecessary ones..

 

[Joe Vitessa]

Thanks for all the great feedback! Much appreciated for sure. I won a 40mm on eBay for $30 last night. I can't wait for it! My camera came with the 135mm hexanon which I've been using a lot. I'm excited to try the 40 and also the 28mm and 57mm. I'm still unsure whether I need to get the 50 1.7 if I get the 40 and 57. I'll probably just end up getting them all and selling the unnecessary ones..

The good thing about Konica lenses is that they're still cheap, so you can afford to do that. My vote is for the 50mm 1.7. I prefer it over the 40mm. Just a great lens, available for next to nothing.

 

[rbelyell]

the 57/1.4 is one of the sharpest normal slr lenses ive ever shot.

 

[Robin P]

Make sure you get a hood for that 40mm. A pity it needs one as it defeats the pancake size advantage but although a very sharp lens it is somewhat characterless and prone to flare with a light source close to the edge of the frame.
If you find the slightly wider than normal view suits your style then consider a 35mm lens. When I was using Konica SLRs I found the Vivitar 35mm f1.9 to be excellent - even better than the Hexanon f2!

 

[Dirk]

I can't advise you on the Sigma 28, as I have no experience with it. But I can recommend all the Hexanons the OP mentioned, plus the 50/1.7 which in its EE guise is one of the top 5 normal lenses I know. The 28/3.5 Hexanon is a great lens with beautiful contrast and color rendition. You gotta be careful though not to get the later f22 version, or the Hexar version. Those are 5 element designs and not as good as the earlier f16, 6 element version.

The 135mm f/3.2 is fantastic, as well, having a very useful 1 meter minimum close focusing distance and those beautiful Hexanon colors.

 

[Trius]

Make sure you get a hood for that 40mm. A pity it needs one as it defeats the pancake size advantage but although a very sharp lens it is somewhat characterless and prone to flare with a light source close to the edge of the frame.
If you find the slightly wider than normal view suits your style then consider a 35mm lens. When I was using Konica SLRs I found the Vivitar 35mm f1.9 to be excellent - even better than the Hexanon f2!

Old thread, but ... the original hood for the 40/1.8 is very shallow and adds almost nothing. If you weren't familiar with the combination, you might think it was simply a part of the lens.

Over on the manual focus forum I saw a lot of people talking down the 40/1.8, at least in comparison to several other normal lenses, especially the 50/1.7. Personally I think there may have been some variability in samples of the 40 - mine seems very sharp, though I haven't don't any rigorous testing. I just shoot with it.

I do have the 50/1.7 which I agree is excellent. I also have the 35/2.8 but haven't really used it.