Leica Hektor 135 vs Konica Hexanon AR 135

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by f6cvalkyrie, Feb 21, 2010.

  1. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    Hi,

    I own both lenses and don't use them enough :frown:
    Today, I justed wanted to compare them in a very simple test setup with my camelias.

    On tripod, iso100, f8 for both shots
    Automatic exposure and WB
    Identical RAW conversion parameters

    Here are the shots :

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    and 100% crops

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    Both lenses produce excellent images. The sharpness is very good for both, the Hektor becoming my favorite because it renders the colours and the contrast a little better. Nothing that cannot be corrected in PP however.

    Big plusses also for the Hexanon : almost a stop faster and build in lens shade.

    Both lenses can be easily adapted to ยต4/3, and are often offered on the evilbay for not a lot of money !

    Have fun,
    Rafael​
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Hi Rafael,

    which Hexanon 135mm do you have? There's a 135mm f3.2, an f3.5 and an f2.5

    I have the f3.2 and f2.5... the f3.2 is closer focusing - I haven't done this kind of test to see how they compare for sharpness & contrast.

    Cheers

    Brian
     
  3. BillN

    BillN Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Jan 19, 2010
    SW France
    If you can tell anything from the web, (experts say that you cannot and I'm not an expert) - I prefer the one labeled Leica Hektor

    What do you mean by 100% crops - I thought that meant no magnification?

    Thanks for posting the comparisons
     
  4. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    Mine is the f3.5, Brian. I bought it a year ago, together with the 50/1.7, both with their leathercase for 50 Euro all together !

    C U
    Rafael
     
  5. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Sounds like a bargain! :thumbup:

    Keep an eye out for the 135mm f3.2 - it's sharper and better for closeup work.

    Cheers

    Brian
     
  6. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    Indeed, Bill, the cutout is 1285 longest side and shown without any resizing.
    I also do prefer the Hektor !

    C U
    Rafael
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. hohoho

    hohoho Mu-43 Regular Charter Member

    170
    Jan 24, 2010
    Tokyo
    KEH has one in "EX" condition for $43. If you can settle for f/3.5, an "EX" example will put you back $15.

    (Note to self: Must remember such prices the next time somebody goes on about how the stunning success of m43 cameras is pushing up the price of any mountable and halfway decent old glassware. And yes, KEH has supplies of the 40/1.8 too.)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. ahuyevshi

    ahuyevshi Mu-43 Veteran

    454
    Feb 9, 2010
    Berkeley, CA
    From the web shots, I definitely prefer the leica.. Much more contrasty...
     
  9. genji

    genji Mu-43 Rookie

    12
    Feb 20, 2010
    I'm looking forward to using a 135mm lens that focuses as close as the Hexanon 85/1.8, having just picked up the 135/3.2, a 50/1.7, and an Autoreflex T3 body for USD 105.

    I'm impressed at how well the Hexanon holds its own against the Hektor -- I loaded each of the 100% crops into separate browser tabs and switched back and forth between them. I suspect that in a blind comparison, most people would be hard pressed to identify the respective lenses.