Konica 57mm 1.2 AR vs. Minolta Rokkor 58mm 1.2 Characteristics

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by TBK, Feb 14, 2014.

  1. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012
    Hello,

    I'm hoping to gain some insight on the characteristic differences of these two lenses.

    Color, contrast, sharpness, bokeh rendering, CA, variance in amount of glow and overall appearance. Particularly from F1.2 - F2.0.

    This in mind for a GX7 used primarily as a portrait lens, secondarily as a low light tool for the likes of local jazz clubs, both in the F1.2 - F2.0 range.

    I really thought I would find threads somewhere in the forum, but have come up short. No question they are both deemed wonderful lenses expecially for slower paced portrait work. However, I'm really hoping to gain feedback on how these two lenses draw at wider aperatures.

    I also welcome any image samples for same.


    Many thanks in advance,
    Brian
     
  2. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    MC ROKKOR PG f1.2 58mm >>>> I shot all of these at f1.2-2 on an EM1
    12527497954_d1f73cf334_b.
    K34N0883 by k34n3r, on Flickr
    12527126763_10fcd2f71a_b.
    K34N0845 by k34n3r, on Flickr
    12527009905_9062db9e95_b.
    K34N0862 by k34n3r, on Flickr
    12527128633_b6acf1ca6f_b.
    K34N0855 by k34n3r, on Flickr
    12527016225_3e0d211945_b.
    K34N0902 by k34n3r, on Flickr

    Sorry they are compressed versions but they are straight OOC JPEG's
    In some shots I haven't uploaded, green colour fringing can be seen if you pixel peep more than anything. This is only noticeable in certain lighting i think and a combination of failing to nail focus. I never thought of torture testing such flaws....I wouldn't dare torture this lovely lens so instead i just used it like i would normally! Now you might think no point on pixel peeping with this lens in the f1.2-2 bracket but I'm really impressed with it's character for clarity while retaining dreamy shallow DOF it's a natural look that i think is admirable, bokeh is also really nice.
    I used an FL-600R because of poor lighting and because I didn't want noise spoiling the efforts of the lens. I also have Noise Reduction set to OFF on my camera.

    The images this lens produces are of course usable, you might prefer a lens that is more contrasty. In PP with this lens it would be easy peasy to boost the images compared to sharpening an image in PP. Other lenses might not render bokeh as good which you can't do nothing with in PP
     
  3. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    Expected a more in depth reply?
    On holiday?
    Hoped for more replies so gave up on your own thread?
    Hmmf :)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  4. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012
    Sorry... Did seem a bit of a post and bail there didn't it? Busy three day weekend with this and that, largely my unexpectedly needing to try and repair a 36 year old Maytag washing machine handed down from my great grandmother. Still a work in progress...

    Many thanks as your reply was thorough, insightful, and having the images to put into context is much appreciated. May I ask if it's the version 1 metal focus ring or the version 2 rubber focus ring?

    This type of scenario is one of the three or so I anticipate I would use the lens for most. In my mind, it would be used for outdoor portraits, indoor jazz club type environments and indoor around the house/family gatherings such as the ones you provide.

    I'm seeking out a fast lens in the 110mm - 135mm, 35mm film equivalent focal length. This is the focal range I felt most comfortable shooting portraits with back in the days of film.

    I've seen a few samples from the Hexanon and the Rokkor, and from what I've seen I admire them both. One other lens I came across online but have only seen a few samples of is the Porst Color Reflex 55 F1.2 Pentax PK mount. A bit on the short side of what I'm looking for, but the overall rendering (color, bokeh etc.) looked nice.

    In terms of sharpness and contrast, I understand that these lenses will be a bit on the soft and glowing side (especially on the 1.2 side of things). From what I've seen, 1.8 - 2.0 seems to hit a sweet spot between soft/glowing and sharpness. When it comes to portraits, I don't necessarily always need sharp, biting, wrinkle revealing glass. Nor do I necessarily always need in your face contrast. This to say I don't find the Hexanon and Rokkors excessively low in contrast, especially for portrait type work.

    Many thanks again for your reply and the images.

    Cheers,
    Brian
     
  5. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    Also look at the Voigtlander 58mm f1.4.

    Or an 85mm lens on a Speedbooster for 120mm effective.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. RDM

    RDM Mu-43 All-Pro

    Yea , you see to me that's makes a huge difference, Since you can get a speed booster for the Minolta MD mount but they do not offer one for the Konica AR mount, nor do they have plans for one any time soon. Keep in mind that i am someone who loves and cherishes sets of both Minolta Rokkor and Konica Hexanon lenses.
    Both Rokkor and Henanon lenses are fantastic. I tend to lean a little more towards Rokkor glass, tho I can not explain why..
     
  7. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    :)
    It's a version 1 I think? It's metal and fluted. Looking at the third pic there is evidence of green fringing I didn't notice at first. The Rokkors won't let you set the aperture to f1.8 unfortunately. I prefer a softer look in portraiture as well. FYI manually focusing feels really good, i didn't feel the need to use magnify and even though peaking can help with some lenses in certain situations it was better to leave it off for this lens. I plan on getting a speed booster for MD only but that's due to the cost of the booster, my other option for legacy glass looks like M42 screw mount so I can adapt them to MD for boosting. In a few weeks I'll have another Rokkor pg to try its a 50 1.4. I'll try to compare them and upload some shots.
    Getting an old 85mm sounds good for low light ability but I have the Oly 60...... Maybe for the right price


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    I've heard the Rokkors are favoured for movie making by some folk. Maybe they have a 'cinematic' rendering? Heard the konicas are 'neutral'.

    For the OP - another lens to consider is the Hexanon 57mm f1.4. Heard it has a similar rendering as the f1.2. I have both, but never done a comparison myself... the speedbooster have made me neglect my konica's :(
     
  9. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012
    You know... Even though you mentioned the green fringing the first time I hadn't noticed it. But after pointing it out a second time I do notice it now. I'm use to seeing purple fringing but not green. Does that seem a common characteristic with florescent lighting? I'm also wondering how hard it is to correct in PP.

    Speaking of the Oly 60... I have to say, if the Sigma 60DN Art was a 1.8 or maybe even a 2.0 with the same performance, I would be very happy indeed. Even if it meant shelling out a little more.

    You mentioned no 1.8. Curious, does the 58mm Rokkor not do half stops?
     
  10. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012
    Thank you thank you for bringing this up. It's something I briefly thought about several months ago but then the last few months completely lost sight of. There is a MD 85 F2 on the bay. Stopped down a click to 2.8 to sharpen it up a bit, I would have an F2 lens with a 120mm 35mm effective focal length. That is a an exciting proposition for me. Or in a pinch, an F1.4. I could also of course lose the booster and have a 170mm equivalent.

    What I'm not sure on of course is how this would render. How would the images appear? How would the bokeh be and would the speed booster alter it? If so, for better or worse.

    I don't see any samples of such a setup in the forums and so I'll see if a general online search nets any results.

    Thanks again for bringing up this setup. : )
     
  11. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    There are half stops after f2. The green fringing was definitely less when I used a flash compared to the poor energy saving light in my house, good question I haven't shot with it outside yet.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    I put up a couple shots from mine (Minolta), havent had a chance to use it nearly as much as the 58 1.4 I have. Mine is a later version, so let me know if i can help out. No speedbooster yet.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012

    Thanks Cruzan. How happy are you with it based on the little you've shot? And could you direct me to the proper link for the 85mm images? I'm unable to find.
     
  14. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    The speedbooster is quite transparent in its effects. If the bokeh on the lens is smooth, it will remain smooth.

    Here are a couple of posts from an earlier thread on the Nikon Speedbooster -

    https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=48975&p=486145#post486145
    https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=48975&p=496742#post496742

    I think he is talking about the 58mm f1.2 - https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=11604&p=563591#post563591
     
  15. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Yes, sorry. Another 58 1.2 (hence the comparing it to the 1.4 little brother). There was an MD 85/2 on here for not too much a bit ago. The 85/1.7 and the speedbooster are on my radar though. Mostly it is due to the fact I click with the 45/2 right now, and the speedbooster would make the 58's have almost the same FoV (though much less pocketable).

    PS. Anyone else find they are using lenses in the common fstops? I have a 14-42 (1.4~4), a 20mm, a Vivitar 28, MD 45, MC 58, and thinking of a MD 85. Unfortunately the 135 is a half stop settting :rolleyes:. The upside of the speedbooster is that I would already know roughly the FoV each lens will give me, as everything moves down a stop.
     
  16. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    I'd like to try a 20mm I use a 28, 50, 58 and soon a 85 ;) I looked at the 135 but it's really expensive even more than a zeiss ! A 20 or 24 would be nice.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012

    No worries. After my posting I wondered if perhaps you meant 58mm 1.2 vs. 1.4.

    From what little I've gleamed (mostly from the Rokkor Files), the 85mm 1.7 MC offers slightly more neutral/softer bokeh over the F2, while the F2 is sharper in the corners and less prone to flair issues.

    Any reason half stop clicks are bad?

    Would imagine you're well aware but just in case, Speedbooster sight indicates no workie with the 135.
     
  18. TBK

    TBK Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Jun 1, 2012
    Chonbhoy, congrats on the 85. : )

    I would love to see some sample images of the 58mm 1.2 with the speedbooster.
     
  19. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    The half stop part was in reference to the focal length=fstops part as a joke. 20mm~f2, 28mm~f2.8, 45mm~f4, 58mm~f5.6, 85mm~f8, 135mm~f13 (half stop between f11-16). Nothing about the lens itself. Right now I have a Vivitar 135, and since I doubt I would need the extra stop (and have trouble justifying the price) instead of a Minolta 135/2.8, probably will trade up to the Close Focus version of the 135 from Vivitar.

    Considering this site lists 11 different variants of the MD 135mm's, not sure which one wouldn't play nice with the speedbooster. Also, I have yet to find any reference to them making a 35-70/f4 lens, so I am reluctant to fully trust that list.
     
  20. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    TBK cheers, I will but it might be a couple of weeks until I get paid and order the booster.
    Cruzan I kinda got it but thought it was still a question. Good spot on the 135 being incompatible!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk