Konica 35 f2 first version chrome ltm


blacvios

Senior Member
Hi need some info from the konica gurus on how this lens fares when compared to the later version (U/C black version) in terms of price and performance. This is supposed to be the same lens from the Hexar fixed lens Rangefinder.

71305170d21aa514f14ed197156a200fcba8.jpg



,,,
 

Where are the Japanese lens experts? I am also interested in knowing more about this lens?
 

UC version is "more" exposed so more people know about it & people seem to like it especially in the West (very often in comparison to Cron35mm esp Bokeh King)
The chrome limited screw mount mainly seen in the Japanese market.
blacvious is right, they have the same optical formula -7 elements in 6 groups
Chrome filter 46mm; UC 43mm
Chrome: 145g; UC: 120g
Chrome: 1996; UC: 2001
Minimum focus for both: 0.9m
Minimum aperture for both: f16
I have no experience with both, so can't comment on performance.
sharkymachine has both both them, he should be able to help here.
Have seen both in his post in "show your Japanese RF gears" thread. See this link.
Calling sharkymachine......
 

Last edited:
Recently just discussed this with one of the Guru here about this lens, it was mentioned that the chrome is a earlier one whereas the UC is of later production. Optically should be of the same arrangement. Hee hee, nearly going to let go this sexy piece of glass. Think should hold back and do a comparison and see.
Frankly, i love the UC very much, have not really shot with the chrome one. Bought it cos it is rare and sexy and well built.
Calling Hacker too, think he has both too;)
 

Recently just discussed this with one of the Guru here about this lens, it was mentioned that the chrome is a earlier one whereas the UC is of later production. Optically should be of the same arrangement. Hee hee, nearly going to let go this sexy piece of glass. Think should hold back and do a comparison and see.
Frankly, i love the UC very much, have not really shot with the chrome one. Bought it cos it is rare and sexy and well built.
Calling Hacker too, think he has both too;)

Thanks man! You're fast!:thumbsup:
Hey, my technical info correct or not??
Do some comparative shots with both. Also wide-open. Kum sia, kum sia....
 

Last edited:
UC version is "more" exposed so more people know about it & people seem to like it especially in the West (very often in comparison to Cron35mm esp Bokeh King)
The chrome limited screw mount mainly seen in the Japanese market.
blacvious is right, they have the same optical formula -7 elements in 6 groups
Chrome filter 46mm; UC 43mm
Chrome: 145g; UC: 120g
Chrome: 1996; UC: 2001
Minimum focus for both: 0.9m
Minimum aperture for both: f16
I have no experience with both, so can't comment on performance.
sharkymachine has both both them, he should be able to help here.
Have seen both in his post in "show your Japanese RF gears" thread. See this link.
Calling sharkymachine......

Recently just discussed this with one of the Guru here about this lens, it was mentioned that the chrome is a earlier one whereas the UC is of later production. Optically should be of the same arrangement. Hee hee, nearly going to let go this sexy piece of glass. Think should hold back and do a comparison and see.
Frankly, i love the UC very much, have not really shot with the chrome one. Bought it cos it is rare and sexy and well built.
Calling Hacker too, think he has both too;)

The experts have spoken! Thanks for the info and looking forward to see the comparison shots.
 

Hi need some info from the konica gurus on how this lens fares when compared to the later version (U/C black version) in terms of price and performance. This is supposed to be the same lens from the Hexar fixed lens Rangefinder.

71305170d21aa514f14ed197156a200fcba8.jpg



,,,
i think gommy and sharkymachine have filled in most of the info regarding the chrome and the UC version.

as for whether this is the same lens as that found in the konica hexar af? i suspect that it is, given the production dates (which overlapped), same 7 element 6 group build, and 46mm filter.

however, noted differences are that the hexar af had a 6-blade diaphragm vs 10-blade of the L-mounts, and a smallest aperature of f/22 (vs f/16 of the L-mounts).
 

Is it really the same optical formula?

From what I read online:
L-Hex is similar to the Hexar AF lens, but no one knows the internal configuration of this lens
UC-Hex is similar to W Nikkor 35/1.8 (as seen on Dante Stella's site)

does anyone have the internal diagram of L-Hex or Hexar AF lens?

PS: I just got the UC-Hex :P
 

Thanks for the masters' input, now to see some comparison of pics especially the bokeh wide open.
 

Is it really the same optical formula?

From what I read online:
L-Hex is similar to the Hexar AF lens, but no one knows the internal configuration of this lens
UC-Hex is similar to W Nikkor 35/1.8 (as seen on Dante Stella's site)

does anyone have the internal diagram of L-Hex or Hexar AF lens?

PS: I just got the UC-Hex :P

I have the optical formula diagram of both L-Hex & UC. They are exactly the same.

 

Last edited:
I have the optical formula diagram of both L-Hex & UC. They are exactly the same.


Thank you Sir Gommy :)

I found an online reference to the Hexar AF lens diagram. That looks similar to this...

To fuel the rumour, I read on photo.net that the Hexar AF was originally manufactured by Konica on Leica's behest, but the L-company backed out at the last minute. Which might explain why the lens shows MTF behaviour similar to 35 'Cron pre-ASPH ver 4 (the design is inspired by it).
 

Thank you Sir Gommy :)

I found an online reference to the Hexar AF lens diagram. That looks similar to this...

To fuel the rumour, I read on photo.net that the Hexar AF was originally manufactured by Konica on Leica's behest, but the L-company backed out at the last minute. Which might explain why the lens shows MTF behaviour similar to 35 'Cron pre-ASPH ver 4 (the design is inspired by it).

You're welcome. :)
I used to have the Hexar AF many years ago. I like the pictures from that camera.
 

Back
Top