KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4

Started Apr 22, 2013 | Questions
ionutradulescu
Junior MemberPosts: 29Gear list
Like?
KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
Apr 22, 2013

hello.

I use a SONY NEX C3. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the CANON FD 50mm f:1.4SSC. Now i found an KONIKA HEXANON AR 40mm f:1.8.

I need only one lens.

Which should i keep?

I like my CANON, but is heavy and the manual focus ring is kind a stiff. The HEXANON is a pancake next to CANON and very light. Opinions?

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Mel Snyder
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,088Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Apr 22, 2013

ionutradulescu wrote:

hello.

I use a SONY NEX C3. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the CANON FD 50mm f:1.4SSC. Now i found an KONIKA HEXANON AR 40mm f:1.8.

I need only one lens.

Which should i keep?

I like my CANON, but is heavy and the manual focus ring is kind a stiff. The HEXANON is a pancake next to CANON and very light. Opinions?

Hard to tell without examples shot of the same subject with the same lighting. My guess would be the Canon would be sharpest; the 40mm Konica can be softer wide open.

 Mel Snyder's gear list:Mel Snyder's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
evoprox
Senior MemberPosts: 1,122Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Apr 23, 2013

I find my 40mm Konica unuseable below f4, but from there on it starts to sing. A relatively cheap and small alternative would be a 50mm/f1.8 Zuiko, especially later versions with 'Made in Japan' or 'MC' on the front ring.

-- hide signature --

'Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.' Dali

 evoprox's gear list:evoprox's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Fujifilm X-Pro1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ionutradulescu
Junior MemberPosts: 29Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to evoprox, Apr 23, 2013

evoprox wrote:

I find my 40mm Konica unuseable below f4, but from there on it starts to sing. A relatively cheap and small alternative would be a 50mm/f1.8 Zuiko, especially later versions with 'Made in Japan' or 'MC' on the front ring.

-- hide signature --

'Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.' Dali

on the net, there are only good things about this lens, "sharpest manual lens" and something like this. This is why i was thinking to keep it and sell the CANON FD SSC. I think i need to get an adapter and try it. i was wondering if someone had this 2 lenses and which one was better...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Knuhtsen
Contributing MemberPosts: 619
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Apr 23, 2013

Of course. Buy an adapter and check it out. I have the Konica Hexanon 24 F/2.8 (I have seen reviews stating that it something like a Voigtländer) and an adapter, but have not had time to play with it yet. I can compare it with Olympus 24 F/2.8. Canon 24 F/2.8 ssc was an alternative that I did not buy (can't buy it all).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
verybiglebowski
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,310Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Apr 23, 2013

ionutradulescu wrote:

evoprox wrote:

I find my 40mm Konica unuseable below f4, but from there on it starts to sing. A relatively cheap and small alternative would be a 50mm/f1.8 Zuiko, especially later versions with 'Made in Japan' or 'MC' on the front ring.

-- hide signature --

'Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.' Dali

on the net, there are only good things about this lens, "sharpest manual lens" and something like this. This is why i was thinking to keep it and sell the CANON FD SSC. I think i need to get an adapter and try it. i was wondering if someone had this 2 lenses and which one was better...

What means "better" for you? I have both lenses. In short - Canon is sharper across the frame, little bit faster and better built. Konica is smaller, lighter and wider. None of them have a bokeh to cry for.

From f4 and smaller, IQ differences are field irrelevant. I don't know about flaring though.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ionutradulescu
Junior MemberPosts: 29Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to verybiglebowski, Jun 6, 2013

better="Canon is sharper across the frame, little bit faster and better built"

this is better for me.

i like the konica because is smaller, but... this is not a reason to keep it and sell my canon...

thank you for your answer!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bzx
bzx
Regular MemberPosts: 213Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to verybiglebowski, Jun 6, 2013

verybiglebowski wrote:

None of them have a bokeh to cry for.

I have the Canon and while crying for bokeh is subjective, I must say that the one of Canon is pleasurable I saw your very nice extensive test of the 50mm manuals, and I can't really say if the winner lens does have the one to cry for - again this is subjective... Care to make some new test?

PS. oh crap, an old thread again

-- hide signature --

t[+]m

 bzx's gear list:bzx's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jokica
Contributing MemberPosts: 641Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Jun 7, 2013
Which should i keep?

I like my CANON, but is heavy and the manual focus ring is kind a stiff. The HEXANON is a pancake next to CANON and very light. Opinions?

Reading your requirements, what ever lens you decide to keep, it will not be 100% ideal solution for you.

IMHO, best of both worlds for you would be:

Konica Hexanon 1.7/50 and Canon (new)FD 1.4/50

Get it both, and then you can decide which one you will keep.

I have prefect copy of each, both are wonderful lenses. Somehow, I prefer Konica. It is subjective, of course.

 Jokica's gear list:Jokica's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PaulR
Regular MemberPosts: 338Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Jun 7, 2013

I have been on quite a binge buying old manual focus 35mm and 645 lenses and trying them out on my NEX-7.  I haven't had a chance to compare all combinations and my Konica AR adapter just came today but I have to tell you the Canon FD 50mm f1.4 SSC totally blew away every other lens I have had a chance to test it against.  Considering that there normally shouldn't be that much difference in high quality 50mm normal lenses I was really surprised.  The differences do tend to be very hard to see above f5.6 though.  And I picked that lens up from Goodwill for only $7! which is kind of a miracle.

I haven't had a chance to test my Konica 40mm f1.8 yet.  Since lenses very so much from sample to sample you really have to run your own tests and see what works best for you.

At this point, my attitude is that simply acquiring and testing these old lenses is sort of a hobby all by itself.  Whether I will actually choose to shoot them versus the modern AF OSS lenses for the NEX is still an open question LOL.

ionutradulescu wrote:

hello.

I use a SONY NEX C3. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the CANON FD 50mm f:1.4SSC. Now i found an KONIKA HEXANON AR 40mm f:1.8.

I need only one lens.

Which should i keep?

I like my CANON, but is heavy and the manual focus ring is kind a stiff. The HEXANON is a pancake next to CANON and very light. Opinions?

 PaulR's gear list:PaulR's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Nikon D600 Sony Alpha 7R Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wictred
Senior MemberPosts: 1,056Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Jun 7, 2013

ionutradulescu wrote:

hello.

I use a SONY NEX C3. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the CANON FD 50mm f:1.4SSC. Now i found an KONIKA HEXANON AR 40mm f:1.8.

The Konica 40mm f1.8 results are much much better when using a lens hood (more contrast), so it's not that compact anyway.

And it's a different focal length of course - 60mm vs 75mm ... so even on the crop sensor it'S close to a "normal" lens.

I find it pretty OK with a lens hood even at f1.8, but the purple fringing can be really annoying.

 wictred's gear list:wictred's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN | Art +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
verybiglebowski
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,310Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to bzx, Jun 7, 2013

bzx wrote:

verybiglebowski wrote:

None of them have a bokeh to cry for.

I have the Canon and while crying for bokeh is subjective, I must say that the one of Canon is pleasurable I saw your very nice extensive test of the 50mm manuals, and I can't really say if the winner lens does have the one to cry for - again this is subjective... Care to make some new test?

PS. oh crap, an old thread again

-- hide signature --

t[+]m

I don't know if you have seen few 50mm shots in my gallery -

http://verybiglobo.blogspot.com/50mm at f1.8, and there are some bokeh test of 35mm lenses on my blog: 35mm bokeh comparison

Canon FD 50 f1.4 has ugly bokeh, but you should not mix the bokeh with the subject isolation abillity. Of course, you can get some nice smooth background with the lens in propper conditions.

I will make more 50mm tests in the future, there are many waiting for it, but I have to find the time.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bzx
bzx
Regular MemberPosts: 213Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to verybiglebowski, Jun 7, 2013

verybiglebowski wrote:

I don't know if you have seen few 50mm shots in my gallery -

Canon FD 50 f1.4 has ugly bokeh, but you should not mix the bokeh with the subject isolation abillity. Of course, you can get some nice smooth background with the lens in propper conditions.

I will make more 50mm tests in the future, there are many waiting for it, but I have to find the time.

Yes I have seen tests on your website and the shots at dpreview and I enjoy these very much. The Canon might have an ugly bokeh but then again, I think it depends on the background.. This one is done with the lens I haveat 2.8 I think - I can't complain much really but I can see on the right there's an area where the blur is kinda distracting. The distance to the background is not constant on this picture and the area which is farthest has a great blur imho. So in general it's not perfect but the overall boka is not that ugly, is it?

-- hide signature --

t[+]m

 bzx's gear list:bzx's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
boardsy
Senior MemberPosts: 2,204Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to ionutradulescu, Jun 7, 2013

ionutradulescu wrote:

hello.

I use a SONY NEX C3. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the CANON FD 50mm f:1.4SSC. Now i found an KONIKA HEXANON AR 40mm f:1.8.

I need only one lens.

Which should i keep?

I like my CANON, but is heavy and the manual focus ring is kind a stiff. The HEXANON is a pancake next to CANON and very light. Opinions?

If the weight & focus of the SSC bother you, get a newer FDn version of the 50/1.4 (the all-black plastic/resin body, marked FD) - apparently optically identical to the SSC, so super-sharp etc. and with similar SSC coatings, but significantly lighter and nice to handle:

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
verybiglebowski
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,310Gear list
Like?
Re: KONIKA 40 1.8 vs CANON 50 1.4
In reply to bzx, Jun 7, 2013

bzx wrote:

verybiglebowski wrote:

I don't know if you have seen few 50mm shots in my gallery -

Canon FD 50 f1.4 has ugly bokeh, but you should not mix the bokeh with the subject isolation abillity. Of course, you can get some nice smooth background with the lens in propper conditions.

I will make more 50mm tests in the future, there are many waiting for it, but I have to find the time.

Yes I have seen tests on your website and the shots at dpreview and I enjoy these very much. The Canon might have an ugly bokeh but then again, I think it depends on the background.. This one is done with the lens I haveat 2.8 I think - I can't complain much really but I can see on the right there's an area where the blur is kinda distracting. The distance to the background is not constant on this picture and the area which is farthest has a great blur imho. So in general it's not perfect but the overall boka is not that ugly, is it?

-- hide signature --

t[+]m

Bokeh is certainly subjective thing.

Sometimes, you want to recognize a shapes in the background, sometimes you want to blur it to the extreme, someimes you want background to be nervous, but lens bokeh is only partialy going to influence the result.

Selection of the background, distance from it, selected aperture, colors and most of all - lighting, will participate on the final look more. But that is subject isolation issue, not the bokeh.

Bokeh is a lens way of rendering transitions between focus and out of focus plane. That is a part of the image that you are reffering to as slightly distracting and this is where Canon FD 50 does not excell.

But as I said, you can make great subject isolation and smooth looking background with almost any lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads