Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 AR
Monday, September 26, 2011 at 15:49 ;)
Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 & adapter on Panasonic GH2There's no denying that some old film era lenses produce images with a more unique character than many of the newer, designed for digital lenses. Character rarely implies perfection, however. Usually I don't find perfection that interesting to photograph, so it only makes sense not to demand it in a lens.
;)
Mirrored │ GH2 + Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 │ 40mm F2.8 1/1250s ISO160I've been shooting with several fully manual lenses on my GH2. The most spectacular was without a doubt the Voigtländer Nokton 25mm F0.95. But it didn't work for me: weighing nearly as much as the GH2 (already one of the heaviest mirrorless bodies) the Voigtländer had too much heft. I want a system that's light and unobtrusive and such a heavy lens compromised that. It's OK if some obscure telephoto that gets dragged out of the closet every once in a while is heavier, but not a normal prime which gets used regularly.
;)
Black & Blue │ GH2 + Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 │ 40mm F4.0 1/320s ISO160 Cost is also an issue. Personally, for my style of shooting and budget, a manual lens needs to be inexpensive. A lens that doesn't support autofocus, isn't as versatile as one that does. So I'm not willing to spend as much money on one. Recently, I acquired a rather nice and inexpensive Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 AR lens. So far, it's my favourite legacy lens. First of all, the Konica is very compact and weighs only 140g. Even with the adapter and lens cap, the total package adds up to a modest 215g. I also like the images it produces; the results are usable at F1.8 (click HERE for GH2 RAW file taken at F1.8) and very fine by F2.8.;)
Through the Bushes │ GH2 + Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 │ 40mm F4.0 1/60s ISO160 The 80mm equivalent focal length on the GH2 is workable, although I suspect that the 60mm equivalent it would yield on an APS-C camera would suit my needs better. Accurate focusing at larger apertures requires zooming into the preview to enlarge the area you want to focus on (focus assist). That takes time and so the technique is best suited for stationary subjects. It's not impossible to focus on moving subjects, but the hit rate drops quite a bit. Hopefully one day electronic viewfinders will be so detailed that you don't need to zoom in to confirm focus; just like it was possible on the cameras that lenses like the Konica Hexanon were originally used with.
;)
Dumped │ GH2 + Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 │ 40mm F2.8 1/4000s ISO160
Reader Comments (10)
Thanks for the update on this lens! I think I will definitely look for one. What I am seeing is good contrast, great bokeh, and not too sharp, but sharp enough--a nice combination. Agree about the weight--it's m4/3, you don't want to be lugging heavy glass around. I find the 14-140 too heavy.
Eric, you're absolutely right about the 14-140. I used to own that lens but also felt it was much too heavy, especially as an all-rounder. I still own the heavy 100-300, but will probably get rid of that as well. These behemoths make the little Hexanon look even better.
Well, my wife will not be happy. You convinced me to pick up one of these from eBay. At least they are affordable. :)
I also have the Hexanon 50mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.7 and they are nice, but a bit big and clunky. I think I actually prefer the f1.7 because it seems a bit sharper and has an interesting hexagonal bokeh. It sounds like the 40mm is of the same caliber.
I have also heard that some people use a 55mm to 28mm step down adapter to help cut down on lens flare. If I get around to trying this, I'll drop in and let you know if it makes an appreciable difference.
Dan, good thing she doesn't know what I look like ;-)
Great idea with the step-down adapter. Looking forward to hearing how that works.
Thanks Bjorn. Those lenses are at a very reasonable price used for a decent copy (< USD $100) and the adapters are $20 or so for Rainbow Imaging or Fotodiox on Amazon. You comments about size of kit are really making me realize that one of my "problems" with the GH2 is that even that is too big to carry around town just to have with me and putting it on the table at a restaurant it just is too bulky as if I'm a tourist or a photographer (don't want to be either unless I'm really out shooting). Same with lens. I'm loving the idea of this tiny 40mm and am going to give it a try!
Hi Bjorn --
Which adapter are you using with this? Rainbow Imaging? Other?
Really loving the colors. Any pp of RAW files or were these jpg OOC?
Thanks!
Bjorn, my sincere apologies about the multiple replies. They didn't work initially and now they all appear. Please feel free to delete any/all.
Hi Steve, no I'm just using a cheap adapter I bought on eBay. It has a decent build and finish and there's no play with the lens mounted. As to the post processing, I almost always start from RAW files. In fact, I usually delete the OOC JPEGs once I get home. In this case, I did some minimal tweaking in Lightroom before exporting them to Nik Software's Color Efex where I simulated a print film (not sure which one).
Hi Steve, there was a problem with the comments being blocked. Squarespace tells me they have fixed the issue. Please let me know if you still have problems.
I'm very curious to see how the Konica 40/1.8 will work on the NEX-7 (if I ever get one), both in terms of its image characteristics and the how efficient MF is with the high resolution EVF combined with focus peaking. The Konica 40/1.8 is a good lens, has a reasonable price and is one of the few relatively compact non-rangefinder lenses. Personally, I'd rather not spend a lot of money for non-AF lenses. Without an electronic coupling, they're not as versatile as modern system camera lenses. So I don't feel that the high prices some adapted lenses are fetching is justified. Thankfully there are still some cheaper options.
Likewise, I'm also looking for a good, not too large or expensive 28mm option.
Just posted on the NEX7 thread again. All good!
I have the FD 28/2.8. Quite light but not that small. Have to admit I rarely take it out. When going manual, I enjoy the Canon FD 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 so much more. For more normal focal length, I take 20/1.7. I'm not quite satisfied with that lens, but it IS small. I am currently looking into Voigtlander's wider lenses, as I want to figure out how I would shoot wide with NEX before making a move. V's wider lenses are not cheap like the used legacy manual ones from the big mfrs, but certainly not Leica prices and also much less pricey and much smaller / lighter than the 25/0.95. Also, the M mount adapters are very small, which will allow you to keep your kit small. I know some people laugh at Ken Rockwell, but he has a good overview of the manual Voigt lenses.