konica hexanon 40mm physically smallest and affortable lens?

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by m43baby, Mar 18, 2011.

  1. m43baby

    m43baby Mu-43 Regular

    58
    Jan 1, 2011
    I am wondering if the Konica Hexanon 40mm 1.8 with m4/3 adapter is the best quality, physically smallest (least length coming from the camera) that I can get for under $120?
     
  2. Warren T.

    Warren T. Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    Mar 10, 2010
    San Francisco
    I just got one to use with my Lumix bodies. I don't know if it's the absolute smallest, but it is a real bargain these days, especially considering its quality. It certainly is small, and looks like it was meant to be on my G1. I had a chance to shoot some test shots the other day, and I find that I really like the imaging characteristics of this lens. When I have a chance, I'll post a few samples from my outing, but I'm sure you've seen samples from various galleries and forums.

    I found mine for < $50 in pristine condition.

    --Warren
     
  3. It is possibly the physically smallest SLR lens + adapter you can get. The lens is very compact the Konica AR mount has one of the shortest flange distances so the adapter will be small too. For something smaller and arguably better quality you need to go to Olympus Pen F or various rangefinder (m39 and Leica M) lenses but good luck finding any of those for less than $120. BTW, $120 is way too much to pay for a Konica Hexanon 40/1.8. Despite it's apparent cult status amongst digital users the demand hasn't pushed the prices that far above what a lens like this should be worth.
     
  4. Gwendal

    Gwendal Mu-43 Veteran

    300
    Jun 6, 2010
    I think there's also the Rokkor 40mm ? anyway, the Hexanon is really wonderful, and for the price you can't really go wrong.
     
  5. brunerww

    brunerww  

    53
    Mar 5, 2011
    I have one and it is a very good value for money. It's pretty small, but with the adapter, it's not a "pancake" by any stretch of the imagination. Here it is on the GH2 (pardon the tiny picture, I sized it for Craigslist):

    https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/T_i63FLCIHG19Znruh2HpdLWvia-KkjCX736NjsZ7a4?feat=directlinkk

    The Vivitar 28mm f2 is larger, but also inexpensive (here it is with the Minolta mount):

    https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/MnVjnrtXbI61mcB_j_20DNLWvia-KkjCX736NjsZ7a4?feat=directlink

    And, although it's a couple of hundred $ above your price limit, for those who have the budget and are looking for a high quality wide angle compact lens, I also recommend the Voigtlander Snapshot Skopar 25mm f/4 with Leica Screw Mount:

    https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/jffOwAJuMXyBtJ43vJLtvtLWvia-KkjCX736NjsZ7a4?feat=directlink
     
  6. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    for a couple of hundred over his price limit, he can have the 20/1.7!

    Those lenses are HUGE compared to the native pancakes! If size is really a concern, my recommendation would be to save up a couple more months and keep an eye on the for sale section
     
  7. m43baby

    m43baby Mu-43 Regular

    58
    Jan 1, 2011
    Thanks for all the info! The other thing I'm wondering, when you take off your lens that has an adapter attached (I buy an adapter for each lens so I dont have to take it on and off) how do you store the lens since it has an opening in the back? I bought this Fotodiox Rear Lens Cap for Canon FD lenses but realized it's after you take the adapter off, then you can put the cover on the back of the actual lens.
     
  8. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    Hexanon vs. Rokkor for size.

    To Luckypenguins point. The Hexanon adapter is shorter or stubbier than the Rokkor adapter by a bit. If I can overcome my desire to do a little work on the property, I'll take a photo of both with the adapter attached...


    P1010931.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I had a Konica 40/1.8 (twice in fact). It is a great little lens and it indeed one of the smaller adapted lenses you can find. The adapter itself is not particularly small but the the lens/adapter combo is smaller than most other options at that price. It also has a very short throw focus which is nice. Ultimately I ended up selling my Konica 40 and buying an Olympus Pen 40/1.4. It's a good bit more than the Konica but I preferred its sharpness and overall image quality. If you could up the price to around $175 you could pick up an Olympus Pen 38/1.8 which is IMHO sharper and renders the image a bit better than the Konica, and because the Pen to M43 adapters are very VERY thin the whole lens adapter package is small.

    As to the price...$120 is way too much to spend for a Konica 40. The last one I bought (in mint condition) was $40 and I wouldn't pay over $60 for one. If ultimate sharpness is what you're after, the Konica 50/1.7 is sharper than the 40 and it can be found for next to nothing. I think I bought my last one for something like $12.

    Finally, the Konica 40 is a short tele on m43 cameras (because of the crop factor). If you are looking for that fast normal lens experience then something like the Panasonic 20/1.7 or the Olympus 17/2.8 are the way to go. I realize they are more like $300 and $200 respectively but there really aren't any cheaper options for a fast normal prime on m43 at the moment.

    Good luck.
     
  10. Warren T.

    Warren T. Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    Mar 10, 2010
    San Francisco
    The combination of pancake profile and slim adapter makes for a very appealing package. When I read about this lens and saw some gallery samples, I had to find one to try it for myself. I like to shoot prime lenses, so my thinking was that the Hexanon 40mm would be the perfect, fast short-tele for a compact, prime-based kit. I'm sure there are sharper and/or more compact lenses, but probably not for this price ($50). What a bargain :thumbup:.

    While I was reading about the 40mm, I also read about Konica Hexanon AR lenses in general, and I found out that the 50mm f1.7 is legendary for its sharpness, so of course in a fit of GAS, I found one of those too, and it was attached to a Konica FS-1 film body :smile:. I have not had time to try that lens out on my Lumix bodies. It has been rainy in SF lately, and will be raining for at least another full week, so I won't be able to put the 50mm and film body through their paces until later. Oh, BTW, I only paid $70 for the 50mm, body, an off-brand 80-200mm zoom, and a 2x teleconverter.

    And here as promised, a sample from my first outing with the 40mm f1.8. The lens becomes incredibly sharp once stopped down to f2.8. At its full open aperture (f1.8), I think it would be an ideal portrait lens because of its soft and interesting image rendering. This lens has interesting 'character' that so far, I like very much.

    Lumix G1, Konica 40mm f1.8, North Lake at Dusk in Golden Gate Park:

    http://fototime.com/CADD67FADE8BCC3/orig.jpg" border=0 alt="Hosting provided by FotoTime">

    --Warren
     
  11. iliakoltsov

    iliakoltsov Mu-43 Regular

    195
    Aug 7, 2010
    Paris
    If you are in search of a pancake the smallest lens made on DSLR the industar 50-2 F3.5 , maybe it will not have the sharpness of the Konica hexanon but it is really good and costs peanuts. In my opinion it is better than the 45mm rokkor that i own as well. For ultimate sharpness i would go down the route of FD lenses a 50 1.8 and the adapter you get that for around 40 dollars altogether.
     
  12. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    • Like Like x 2
  13. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    All these lenses are absolute monsters due to the huge adapters. If you want small, you should look at either a Pentax 110 lens, a c mount lens or a Industar 69 lens. The Pentax 110 is by far the smallest lens but does have a major handicap in that it has no aperature. I just carry a few in my pocket with preset aperatures. They are quite small at the size of a bottle cap. The quality is excellent as you would expect from a Pentax lens. They are also cheaper than dirt at a few dollars a lens. I picked up one for 25 cents.

    The C Mount lenses have been well documented. You can get 25mm or higher focal lenses with full coverage for much less than $120. The adapter itself is the smallest you can find for a M43 camera. It's a sliver. The downside is the "unique" bokeh from these lenses. They tend to be swirly.

    The smallest "real" lens is an Industar 69. It has a M39 mount but is not a real M39 lens due to the shorter registration distance. M39 mount adapters are far smaller than a SLR adapter due to the shorter registration distance. The Industar 69 + the M39 adapter is about the size of a SLR mount adapter alone. Due to the shorter registration distance you have to either file down the lens or the M39 adapter to get it to focus to infinity. If you file down the adapter, it'll make the solution even shorter.

    All of these solutions are well under $120 unless you spring for a F0.95 C Mount lens. That can get pricey.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    Hi Lenshoarder (I love your handle) If anyone should know, it ought to be you!

    How about some photos of the above mentioned glass.

    I'm not advocating for the lens I took a photo of, but, I did take the photo so folks would have some idea...

    Alan
     
  15. Brian S

    Brian S Mu-43 Top Veteran

    714
    Apr 11, 2009
    The GN-Nikkor 45/2.8 is smaller than the Konica. Slower, but smaller.
     
  16. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    i can tell you personal experience, the Konica 50/1.7 is amazingly sharp...so much so it it almost hurts to look at stuff. It's really pretty amazing. The Konica 40 is sharp but not even close to the 50. If I was going back into Konica gear I think I would start with the 50.
     
  17. m43baby

    m43baby Mu-43 Regular

    58
    Jan 1, 2011
    I already have a Canon FD 28mm 2.8 and Canon FD 50mm 1.8 so I'm looking for something in between. Also looking for a good zoom lens that's not too large and under $100?
     
  18. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    Here you go.

    From left to right. Pentax 110, 25mm C Mount, Industar 69 and a Rokkor 45mm for size comparison.

    abbc9834.
    6c0e39f6.
     
  19. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    The one on the extreme left is the size of a coat button.... LOL

    What are they, left to right??? I think I can make most out from the photo, second from left??
     
  20. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    From left to right. Pentax 110, 25mm C Mount(Super Comat), Industar 69 and a Rokkor 45mm for size comparison.

    I really love the Pentax 110 lenses. If they had an aperature, it would be a done deal. I still hope that someone will come up with an adapter with a aperature. The M43 Pentax 110 adapter is somewhat thin, about the thickness of the body cap, but the NEX one is thicker due to the shorter NEX registration distance. It should be possible to wedge one in that.
     
    • Like Like x 1