This is especially true for older versions that have coatings not as good as the newer ones. Like with most telephoto lenses and their big and not recessed front elements, the consequent use of a lens hood is recommended to avoid loss of contrast due to stray light. Image quality of both constructions is very similar. No barrel or pincushion distortions are visible. This last variation of the Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3,5 still came with a matching leather case, but it had a standard Konica lens cap, not the metal cap of the earlier variations.īoth constructions of the Hexanon / Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3,5 provide good image quality and make sharp images with high contrast and good colour rendition. The use of a deeper screw-in accesory hood can improve results quite frequently. Different from the older variations, it has a built in hood, which is a bit too shallow and does not prevent stray light in many situations. The new Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3.5 is much more compact and more leightweight than the older variations. This new lens again has a widest aperture of 1:3.5 and consists of 4 elements in 4 groups, but is optically different from the earlier variations. Some years later, at the time of the Autoreflex T4, the Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3.2 was again replaced by a new construction. Up to this point, there already were a lot of different variations of the Hexanon 135 mm / 1:3.5, but all had the same optical formula, only the coatings had been improved. The new F3.2 lens was built more complex with 5 elements in 4 groups and is visibly sharper. The lens was taken out of the line-up and replaced by the newer and slightly faster Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3.2 at the end of the time of the Autoreflex T2. In this way, lens, hood, and cap fit into the leather lens case. The lens hood can be put onto the lens vice-versa for storage, the lens cap is then put onto the screw thread of the hood. Both Preset and Auto versions for the F bayonet are optically identical.īoth Preset and Auto variations for the F bayonet were supplied with a metal cap, a screw-in lens hood, and a leather case. Both versions were sold simultaneously for some time. The Hexanon 135 mm / 1:3.5 was first offered as a preset lens, later it was also available in an auto-aperture version. There is no version of this lens for the coupled light meter of the Konica F, however. It was available quite early – it supplanted the earlier Hexanon 135 mm / 1:2.8 while the early F bayonet was still in use. Strictly speaking, there are different lenses with different optical construction. The Konica Hexanon / Hexanon AR 135 mm / F3.5 is the most common telephoto lens in the Konica SLR line. "Bad" copy of PL 12mm f1.4 "fixed".Front view late f22 version Konishiroku Hexanon 135 mm / 1:3.5 Killer combo: MC-20+Pixco16mm tube+60mm OLY Macro+Raynox505 Is the 60mm f2.8 the best Olympus macro or is it really the ZD 50mm f2 with mmf3? Using your MC-20 Teleconverter with your OLY 60mm Macro lens Hint for (some) owners of the E-M5 Mark III re AF points The truth about the focus stacking feature of the EM-1 ii
#Konica autoreflex a aperture 3.5 iso#
HOW-TO: LiveND, 14 stops DR, ISO 25 RAW on any Olympus camera Macro Photography and the EM1 mark 2 / 60mm macro combo Photographing Hummingbirds Feeding From Flowers: Setup and Camera Settings. Manual focus tele lens techniques with m4/3 for birds and BIF'sĭigitizing slides with Olympus 60mm macro and Olympus Capture Going beyond f/8 is never a good idea on MFT unless you absolutely have to in order to get enough DoF. That's the point where the lens is likely to do best and gives you DoF comparable to f/11 or f/16 on FF. Frequently used it for repro work but I am afraid I have no experience with slide/negative copying.Īs to the aperture, why don't you try at somewhere between f/5.6 or f/8 to begin with. I had one for more than 30 years for use with my Konica Autoreflex SLRs. Nice to hear that the old Hexanon 55/3.5 macro is still doing service. I will be starting out with copying 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 BW negatives at 1:2 ratio and then going to 35mm BW and Color negatives and slides with the extension tube between 1:2 and 1:1 ratio. I am sure there is probably some happy medium where the balance between diffraction loss and being a little oof or not exactly perpendicular to the target will give optimal results. Haven't done any slide copy in years and the last time I did it was with a small sensor point and shoot with better DOF.Ĭan a couple of you that do regular macro tell me what aperture you would normally use for slide/negative copy? If it weren't for diffraction I would just use f:22 and press on. I just did a few test shots with the lens at 1:2 and discovered how shallow DOF is.