Konica M-Hexanon 90/2.8

V

vrgard

Well-known
Local time
6:52 AM
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,716
Just got this lens last night (thanks again Roland!) and it sure looks to be a keeper. Not only is the feel and build quality excellent, but it also seems to take pretty nice shots. Here's a shot I took on my morning walk. Not quite completely wide open (either f4 or f5.6, I don't remember now) but was taken directly into some some sunlight coming through a tree. Interesting combination of sharpness around the limbs on the left and soft flare around the limbs on the right, not to mention the interesting star effect of the sunlight itself.

-Randy
 

Attachments

  • 9-26-2007-22.jpg
    9-26-2007-22.jpg
    176.9 KB · Views: 1
Thanks for the warning, Roland. And yeah, I assumed the star shape had something to do with the shape and number of the aperture blades. And just as you said, this lens sure feels good to use. Thanks again for selling it to me.

-Randy
 
If anyone would like to get rid of one, I think I would like to sell or trade my tele-elmarit for this lens.
 
Randy: Nice example of what this lens can do.

sirius: You might have to wait a while. Not letting go of mine, that's for certain. :)


- Barrett
 
The lens is terrific as Randy's really nice shot testifies. I was delighted recently to be able to buy a brand new one from Japan. I got one when I bought my first rangefinder 4 years ago and foolishly traded it for a Leica 90mm. Now this new Hexanon lens is replacing a Leica 90/2 AA. :)


attachment.php

Little boy​
 
FWIW...I really appreciate how compact it is. Compared to my other 90's it's a dwarf.

All the Hexanon lenses are keepers...lol

Bob
 
Nice lens. I use to own one. Interestingly, sharp but not quite as sharp as the 90/2.8 Sonnar for the Contax G series even though the optical design is the same and an optical rf is inherently more accurate than the passive AF system of the G series. Hexanon build quality is up there with the best lenses. The current 90/2.8 Elmarit-M is as good or better than the Sonnar yet a slightly simpler 4/4 design.
 
I think Hexanon 90 is the best 90 out there. While I have not used all of them , I used to have Canon 85, Nikkor 85/2, CV Lanthar 90/3.5, Fat TE 90-2.8 and while all are good lenses, 90 Hex is just awsome - great sharpness, tonality, bokeh, built, size, - just super lens any way you look at it. Here is a quick scan from a print from mine - wide open or very close to it, on Hexar RF:
1450061859_a8f094dc03_o.jpg
 
I think it's the best 90mm too. It is a Sonnar after all though... The only thing I don't like about it is the slide-out hood. I have a regular screw-in hood on mine.

I wonder if it's possible to remove the sliding hood?
 
Krosya said:
I think Hexanon 90 is the best 90 out there. While I have not used all of them , I used to have Canon 85, Nikkor 85/2, CV Lanthar 90/3.5
Click to expand...

I believe you had the chrome Nikkor 85/2. And you are probably
refering to the Canon 85/2 or 85/1.9.

At f2.8 the black Nikkor 85/2 can compete with the Hexanon, in size,
weight, signature, resolution, etc. And then it has the extra stop.

Also, I am still interested in a side-by-side comparison with the
Canon 85/1.8 and 100/2 ....

I got my v3 90/2 (last pre-asph Summicron) yesterday ... this is what I
traded the Hexanon for and I don't regret it. It feels like half the
size and weight of my v2.

Note: I don't care so much for the speed per see but like the very shallow
DOF f2 provides.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
peter_n said:
I think it's the best 90mm too. It is a Sonnar after all though... The only thing I don't like about it is the slide-out hood. I have a regular screw-in hood on mine.

I wonder if it's possible to remove the sliding hood?
Click to expand...

Not to challenge you, Peter, but are you sure it is a Sonnar? I would be happy if it was, I just wasn't aware of that if so.

-Randy
 
ferider said:
I believe you had the chrome Nikkor 85/2. And you are probably
refering to the Canon 85/2 or 85/1.9.

At f2.8 the black Nikkor 85/2 can compete with the Hexanon, in size,
weight, signature, resolution, etc. And then it has the extra stop.

Also, I am still interested in a side-by-side comparison with the
Canon 85/1.8 and 100/2 ....

I got my v3 90/2 (last pre-asph Summicron) yesterday ... this is what I
traded the Hexanon for and I don't regret it. It feels like half the
size and weight of my v2.

Note: I don't care so much for the speed per see but like the very shallow
DOF f2 provides.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right, I did have a Chrome Nikkor 85/2, Memphis has it now. It's a great lens and I would never sell it if it was not for weight and handling. Hexar works better for me in those respects. Canon I used to have was 1.9, if I'm not mistaken.
Do post some photos from your new 90 v3 pls. I'd like to see what kind of a signature is has.
 
vrgard said:
Not to challenge you, Peter, but are you sure it is a Sonnar? I would be happy if it was, I just wasn't aware of that if so.

-Randy
Click to expand...

It's an Ernostar, Randy, almost the same design as a Sonnar
(an older design, actually).

Much like other compact fast portrait lenses out there, for example
my Zuiko 85/2.

Best,

Roland.
 
vrgard said:
Not to challenge you, Peter, but are you sure it is a Sonnar? I would be happy if it was, I just wasn't aware of that if so.

-Randy
Click to expand...
Roland beat me to it Randy. The manual that comes with the lens describes it as an Ernostar lens (a Sonnar predecessor). I've read that Konica couldn't use the word "Sonnar" for the lens because that's a Zeiss TM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom