UC-Hexanon 35mm L-mount

[angeloks]

Hi,

I'm interested in this lens. Anyone here used it? I read a few posts where it is compared to the M-Hexanon, they seem rather similar. Bokeh is supposedly better on the M version, the UC is more compact and should be more flare resistant. Is there something else? I also want to use it on my screw-mount camera. Is it better wide open that the 35mm f1.7 Ultron?

Regards,

 

[Krosya]

I used to have one. Great lens. Small, well built. I sold it after I got M-Hexanon - it's a bit larger, but gives a better bokeh (for my taste) and focuses down to 0.7m, vs 0.9m UC-Hex. I also have a like Ultron 35/1.7. Ultron is not as well built as either Hexes, but image quality is pretty close. IMO M-Hex 35 beats them all - I think its closest lens to Leica ASPH LUX.

Here are a few samples from my UC-Hex from when I had it:

 

[Krosya]

All above shots are wide open at f2

 

[dogberryjr]

I got mine here at RFF and I really like it. It is solid as can be, compact (without the shade, that is) and a bit different than the run of the mill 35s out there.

f2, bright sunlight:

 

[angeloks]

Oki, sounds like a good lens! Also, I saw a few on eBay for about 1k, 1.2k. In the used market, how much should I be expecting to pay?

 

[ferider]

UC an M-Hexanon are very different. The biggest differences are size, min. focus and distortion. And price. If you don't insist on the small size and L-mount, the M-Hexanon is technically better in all respects.

The UC is a re-born classic lens from the 50s (Nikkor 35/1.8) with modern coatings. The M-Hex 35/2 is a modern lens from the 90s, designed from scratch.

Check out the flickr M-mount forum for sample photos.

Roland.

 

[dogberryjr]

Oki, sounds like a good lens! Also, I saw a few on eBay for about 1k, 1.2k. In the used market, how much should I be expecting to pay?

Sounds about right. I'm surprised to hear about "a few" on eBay; while they are not exceedingly rare, they are not exactly everyday items on there. Be aware that it takes 43mm filters, and if you buy one, make sure it's the full kit (esp. the shade) or is priced accordingly. I don't know where you'd find a replacement shade.

 

[johannielscom]

Look at item nr. 130371325842. It's the original Hexanon 35/2.0 from 1996. 1000 made. Not all lens elements are coated on this lens and it resembles the vintage Nikkor lens the most. 46mm filter size, the exact twin sister of the Hexar AF lens.

The 43mm filtered UC-Hexanon is apparently fully coated, and resembling the Summicron 35/2.0 in IQ. From wide open to f5.6, the Hexanon beats the Summicron in sharpness, after that the Summicron is a tad sharper. Apparently and according to Dante Stella et. al. that is, I shoot the original L-Hexanon 35/2.0 and have never seen a UC-Hexanon in the flesh yet! YMMV!

There's an article on the original Hexanon 35/2.0 on my website.

 

[__hh]

Great lens - compact, solid build, very tactile. I miss it.

However, being a 35mm shooter most of the time, I needed a more versatile lens and the .7m min focusing distance of the 35mm Summicron wins over the UV-Hex's .9m (the extra 20cm does make a big difference).

 

[chenzhaohy]

The canon Screw mount 35mm/f2 is a better choice. It is much cheaper and the performance are similar.
Even a VC 35/2.5 will not make you fell dissapointed.
M-Hexanon 35mm f2 is the best 35mm I ever used.

 

[tbarker13]

I'm a huge fan of the 35 UC hexanon. I can't think of many lenses that feel better, in terms of build. Incredibly smooth. And it creates wonderful images.
It's one lens I sold that I sometimes wish I hadn't. Just so many great 35mm lenses out there - can't own them all.

And I'd say that $1,000-$1,200 is pretty much what you'd expect to pay for one when they pop up for sale.

 

[zleica]

I'm a huge fan of the 35 UC hexanon. I can't think of many lenses that feel better, in terms of build. Incredibly smooth. And it creates wonderful images.
It's one lens I sold that I sometimes wish I hadn't. Just so many great 35mm lenses out there - can't own them all.

And I'd say that $1,000-$1,200 is pretty much what you'd expect to pay for one when they pop up for sale.

I totally agree. I love mine! The only downside of the lens is the minimum focusing distance.

 

[peter_n]

I had a UC-Hexanon and it's a little jewel of a lens, but I sold it for usability reasons, the 0.9M closest focus and the shallow focusing tab. If you're wearing gloves in winter you can't use the UC-Hexanon and the Leica lenses have tabs that are much deeper and easier to use. It does render beautifully though and is built like a brick. You can get a 43mm shallow hood from Cameraquest that will replace the hood that comes with the lens. $1.0K-1.2K sounds about right.

 

[Paul T.]

All of these comments remind me what an absolute bargain the Hexar AF is. If I keep reading more threads like this, I might have to buy a second one.

 

[furcafe]

Just to clarify, it was the pre-aspherical Summicron (v.4) that Dante referred to in his article on the UC.

If you're looking for a modern LTM 35/2, Leica did make a small batch of the 35/2 Summicron ASPH in LTM for Lemon Camera (?) in Japan (also the 50/2 Summicron & 50/1.4 pre-aspherical Summilux). They can be found on eBay in the US$1800-2000 range.

Look at item nr. 130371325842. It's the original Hexanon 35/2.0 from 1996. 1000 made. Not all lens elements are coated on this lens and it resembles the vintage Nikkor lens the most. 46mm filter size, the exact twin sister of the Hexar AF lens.

The 43mm filtered UC-Hexanon is apparently fully coated, and resembling the Summicron 35/2.0 in IQ. From wide open to f5.6, the Hexanon beats the Summicron in sharpness, after that the Summicron is a tad sharper. Apparently and according to Dante Stella et. al. that is, I shoot the original L-Hexanon 35/2.0 and have never seen a UC-Hexanon in the flesh yet! YMMV!

There's an article on the original Hexanon 35/2.0 on my website.

 

[furcafe]

FYI, the last 1 that went on eBay (#250593594094), complete w/box, caps, hood, etc., sold for over 750 GBP.

I had a UC-Hexanon and it's a little jewel of a lens, but I sold it for usability reasons, the 0.9M closest focus and the shallow focusing tab. If you're wearing gloves in winter you can't use the UC-Hexanon and the Leica lenses have tabs that are much deeper and easier to use. It does render beautifully though and is built like a brick. You can get a 43mm shallow hood from Cameraquest that will replace the hood that comes with the lens. $1.0K-1.2K sounds about right.

 

[Gary Sandhu]

I have it. It's light, easy to focus, and has a beautiful shiny black finish which matches very well with my black laquer MP. No quibbles with the image quality on my M8 and shooting provia and velvia, casually compared to my 35 asph lux and cron as well as v4 cron. I've meant to do a few more detailed comparisons but haven't had time. It makes for a neat little package on my iiif.

 

[jmkelly]

I have two 35mm lenses for RF, the UC-Hexanon and the Summilux ASPH. I probably use the UC-Hex 4-5x more often than the Leica.

 

[dap]

I had one and sold it due to the longish minimum focusing distance. The lens was very well built and the images were nice (as long as you don't place any straight lines near the edges of the frame - it had some wicked distortion), but I always found myself wanting to get closer to the subject than was possible. It sounds like I wasn't alone in this respect. It was a nice compact little lens, but I don't miss it much.

 

[Srono]

I have been using this lens a lot. You can see many of photos from it at my flickr http://www.flickr.com/search/show/?q=uc-hexanon&w=15213885@N00&s=int