Lens test: M-Hexanon 35/2, 50/2, Summicron 35/2, Jupiter-3 50/1.5

Rust

Rust

Member
Local time
1:07 AM
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
33
Here is a comparison of four lenses:
Konica M-Hexanon 35mm f2
Leica Summicron v4 35mm f2
Konica M-Hexanon 50mm f2
Jupiter-3 50mm f1.5

Pictures taken with Leica M8.2. Full size pics of 35mm lens test you can download here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rus_tam/sets/72157627226578611/detail/

50mm lens test is for bokeh comparison only because pics from Hexanon have significant backfocus (my fault).

Resize:

6007011276_d3505e333d_o.jpg


100% crop:

6006434657_6c4425fbf8_o.jpg


Resize:

6006442557_6827f9a227_o.jpg


100% crop:

6006442359_20356691de_o.jpg


Resize:

6006442797_d0a2e4c427_o.jpg


More pictures taken with M-Hexanon 35mm f2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rus_tam/sets/72157627226499341/detail/
 
Jupiter-3 is not exactly "cheap" anymore, with sales north of $300..
 
It's interesting to see how much CA the 35mm Leica Summicron has versus the Hexanon, and it's so cool and cold, don't like it!
 
Welcome to the forum, nice test.

I've seen one J-3 go for over $300 on another forum, a KMZ lens that I worked on for a member.

Most are still going in the $150 to $200 range. The days of the $50 J-3 seem to be over.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
Welcome to the forum, nice test.

I've seen one J-3 go for over $300 on another forum, a KMZ lens that I worked on for a member.

Most are still going in the $150 to $200 range. The days of the $50 J-3 seem to be over.
Click to expand...

Only a guess, but maybe the 4/3 crowd don't really care about calibration of the focus cam, and only need the optical block to be good (and maybe the lens to reach infinity).
 
Rust said:
What do you think about differences in bokeh and sharpness of these lenses?

6008356034_74b4f354ee_o.jpg


...
Click to expand...

While the M-Hexanon is a bit harsher, the Summicron actually has a hint of a swirl in the foliage behind the tree trunk in the above shots.

I do not know what I would consider less desirable, but in real life situations I probably would not consider any of the two a major setback so it would be a tie and price would come in. (In effect, the before sentence says: gimme the M-Hex and I'll give you less money:p)
 
tritiated said:
The hexanon 35 looks really good, what's the price difference?
Click to expand...

Price difference is near $1000.

I think their sharpness almost equal. In the samples above m-hexanon was slightly backfocused, summicron frontfocused from the white card.
 
Last edited:
Well I've said it before, as soon as (well, people kind of have already) realize how good M-Hexanon lenses are, and the next to null difference between it and Leica lenses prices are going to skyrocket I would've thought.

And I see no difference in sharpness at all.
 
Last edited:
BTW: Picture from m-hexanon was one stop underexposed (1/750 vs 1/350). So I increased the exposure in LR.
 
The 35 Hexanon is an incredible lens but beware there are focus issues with Leica and I had a very bad sample that I had to return due to this problem.
 
While I prefer the warm colour of the Hex, I MUCH prefer the o-o-f rendering of the 'Cron. I'm a sucker for swirly bokeh :)
 
Pass the possible focusing issues, the only fault of the Hex is its size.
Given the price difference, I can live with that....

All the Hexanon M line is fantastic and apparently better built than the Zeiss options.
 
Luckily I use digital so cool and warm don't matter as much straight from the lens... I would never by a lens because it was warmer or cooler.
 
I had the Zeiss 35mm f2 Biogon. It had the lens wobble issue and I never cared for the build quality after that. Optically, it was great. I sold it and bought the Konica 35mm f2 M-Hexanon. The Konica is larger with the Konica hood. I would love to see a match up with the Zeiss 35mm f2 Biogon. I don't think the Konica 35mm would be slacking though. Great test! Thanks for sharing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom