Any Konica SLR experts here?

[bobatkins]

I picked up a Konica 57mm f1.2 lens recently. It was in a junk store,

very cheap, and seems to be in operational condition. All I need now

is a camera to put it on...

 

As far as I can tell all the older Konica SLRs use the unobtainable

mercury cells (or if they aren't unobtainable, they soon will be). I

now there are "substitutes", but I'd rather avoid them if possible.

 

Also, all the Konica SLRs seem to be shutter priority AE. Since the

whole point of an f1.2 lens is the ability to shoot at f1.2, aperture

priority AE would seem to be a better choice, but that seems not to

be an option.

 

Any advice on the best Konica SLR body would be appreciated. Also,

for any 57mm f1.2 lens users, is the lens "interesting" enough to

bother getting a camera to mount it on! I'd like to put it on my

Canon EOS bodies, but the flange to focal plane distance is much too

short, so it won't focus past about 5ft, making that one not an

option.

[martin_davidson9]

My first SLR's! -- still have one, with a clutch of lenses, which are superb. The 50 1.2 is supposed to be one of their best (I have the 50 1.4); the Hexanons were (justifiably) reckoned the absolute equal of their contemporary rivals from Nikon or Canon. The 40 1.8; 85 1.8; and 200 f/4 are the other stellar performers -- and last time I looked, they seemed to cost NOTHING. I bought all mine (and a 21, and a 35) for around the 50-90 UK pounds mark, some for a lot less. I am particuarly impressed by the 200 which is amazingly small, light, and sharp sharp sharp. They also give you that pre-Velvia era colour patina that I really like.

 

You are also right to say they are shutter priority, not aperture priority -- but there is no difficulty using them completely manually. Mine has the centre weighted "needle" so common from the period, and with print film, this is more than adequate. Otherwise, just use a hand meter. I have shot many rolls of slides without problem.

 

But you want to know about bodies; the T3 (one of the last all metal bodies anyone produced) is the one I have -- still working beautifully since acquired (by my father) in 1976. Most agree that this was one of their best; available for next to nothing usually. Solid as a tank, and with all the trappings of that mid-seventies moment!

 

The FC bodies were developed in the 80s as their budget range; they have more bells and whistles, but lack the longevity of the T3.

 

Last time I seriously added to my Konica complement of gear, there was Greg Webber operating out of Nebraska, who was acknowledged the king of this stuff. A quick google will no doubt confirm if he is still active.

 

Good luck! I spent years looking for the 1.2 and never found one I could afford.

[martin_davidson9]

Sorry, 57 f/1.2, not 50...

[martin_davidson9]

PPS -- of course if you dont find a body, or lose the urge to find one, I would happily buy the lens from you...

[bobatkins]

Martin

 

Thanks for the info. The lens is in good, but not great shape. I think there's evidence of maybe a little fungus infection, but nothing that's too serious (yet). I think I'm going to play with it to see how it performs, but if I decide to sell it, I'll let you know first!

 

I presume the T3 takes those 625 mercury batteries. No way around that one I guess.

[melresnick]

Bob,

 

I have a T2 that I bought new in 1971. It is a completely mechanical camera and will work without the battery. I assume the T3 is the same. Just set the speed and aperture manually.

 

Konica lost the battle they waged over the advantages of shutter priority over aperture priority. They used to advertise that aperture priority cameras would give you "a perfectly exposed blur."

[david_m]

The only reason aperture priority won is because its far easier to electronically vary the shutter speed than it is to vary the aperture. Shutter priority is obviously more useful - if it works.

[neild]

Bob, can I ask why you don't just seek out an f/1.2 lens from Canon? (I assume there is one made?). Else, there are some lens makes which can be fitted to EOS while preserving infinity focus: Nikon & Olympus to name two. I use an Olympus 50mm f/1.2 on my 10D via an adapter with no problems. Unlike you, I wouldn't seek to get a new body just to mount a lens I'd picked up unless that lens was unique...

[lex_jenkins]

Almost any camera originally designed for size 625 mercury button cells can be used with size 675 zinc air hearing aid button cells.

 

Unlike alkaline 625 cells, output from these zinc air batteries is close enough to mercury cells to ensure accurate metering. The more expensive Wein replacements are nothing more than zinc air batteries inside a metal collar that brings them up to the size of a 625 battery. A package of half a dozen or so 675 hearing aid batteries is much more cost effective. Each battery will last 3-12 months. If and when they leak the clear goo seems to be harmless and unlike most battery leakage doesn't corrode the terminals.

 

The 675 batteries are slightly smaller in diameter and very slightly thinner, but not enough to matter with most cameras. I use 'em in my OM-1, Canonets, used to use 'em in a Canon FTbn, and others. At most I might have needed to add a bit of tension to the battery spring (flat or coiled) to hold the 675 battery in place.

 

Good luck with the camera hunting. The Autoreflex T was a very advanced SLR for its time. I don't know whether the lens you found is compatible with that model but it's worth checking into.

[richard_kingston1]

The best Konica body ? Well Bob, you buy Hexanon lenses, and you *put up* with the

cameras, although they are solidly built.

 

IMHO there are three good choices

 

T3: Heavy and all mechanical. Takes mercury batteries.

 

 

T4: Smaller than the T3. Still all mechanical. Still takes mercury batteries.

 

FC-1: Electronically controlled shutter, takes 4x1.5 V batteries. Still has a manual film

wind (which is for the best, twenty five years after production).

 

All of them have shutter priority as the sole automatic mode. The shutters are LOUD.

There's not much to choose between the T4 and FC-1. Dante Stella has written a nice

comparison.

 

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/fc1.html

 

The T4 and FC-1 have pretty bright viewfinders, and a good split-prism focusing aids.

Many T3's lack this feature, which can make life difficult in low light situations.

 

R.

[richard_oleson]

David M wrote:

"The only reason aperture priority won is because its far easier to electronically vary the shutter speed than it is to vary the aperture. Shutter priority is obviously more useful - if it works."

 

I have yet to encounter a situation where I have found this to be the case. Depth of field is controlled by aperture, and for a specific effect it must be controlled precisely. Shutter speed, in most cases, is a question of "faster is better". For both of these purposes, I prefer aperture priority: the way to get the fastest possible shutter speed is to set the lens to full aperture, and the way to get the specific DOF you need is to set the aperture that provides it.... shutter priority can do neither of these.

 

What it DID do was provide exposure automation without electronic controls (besides a simple galvanometer light meter) in the days before such controls were available.... and, of course, an automatic camera that remained usable if its battery died.

 

Canon proved in 1976 that shutter priority can be done just as easily and cheaply as aperture priority with electronic controls, and they, like Konica, spent a lot of money trying to persuade the world that it was better. It was for many people, I guess - I'm sure it's simpler to set the shutter speed and pop away for snapshots - but it has never been better for me.

 

:)=

[bobatkins]

<em>Bob, can I ask why you don't just seek out an f/1.2 lens from Canon? </em>

<p>

Well, first they don't make one (other than the 85/1.2). Second, if they did, I couldn't afford it (the 85/1.2 is $1500).

<p>

This one was almost $1500 cheaper than the Canon....

<p>

BTW I agree with those who think shutter priority is essentially useless most of the time. I dounbt I've used it more than a couple of times in the last 15 years - and every camera I've owned (Canon EOS) has had it as an option. I use Aperture priority 95% of the time, manual 4.995% of the time and shutter priority the other 0.005%

[richard_oleson]

My first recommendation for a body would be a T4. For a lower price, a TC is a T4 with no shutter speeds below 1/8 and a few other concessions to cheapification.

 

The Autoreflex T, T3 (not sure if there was exactly a T2, I think it was a variant of the T), A and A3 are all good, sound (and big, heavy) cameras.... their Achilles' Heel is that the battery terminal breaks out of the battery box and leaves you meterless - and requires a major disassembly to repair. But if you don't plan to use the meter, the cameras keep working without the battery.

 

All of the above have mechanical shutters, so you should be able to keep them running without too much trouble.

 

rick :)=

[bobatkins]

Some good info here, so I've zapped the thread to the Camera Equipment forum so it goes into the archives.

 

BTW if anyone knows how to take the 57mm f1.2 lens apart, please let me know. There is some internal "gunk" (maybe the start of fungus?) in there and I'd like to clean it out.

 

I'd assumed that the front ring (the one with the name, serial number etc.) would unscrew, giving access to a ring that holds the front element in. However either I'm wrong, or someone has superglued it in place. It just won't budge.

[franka t.l.]

FOA, there is no Aperture AE Konica body of any sort. So I would go for the next best one. A reliable mechanicale that's fun, and my vote goes to the 24X36/24X18 switchable Autorex. Its both collectable and fun to use and certainly for its weight balance well with the 57/1.2

[richard_oleson]

Hi Bob:

 

I've never worked on the f/1.2. On the f/1.4, the front of the focusing ring unscrews and then the ID ring unscrews.... I don't know if there's a sequence to that, this is just how I made my sketch and it's too long ago now to remember.....

 

Feel free to email me if you'd like the sketch.

 

rick :)=

[bob oldendorf]

I'm coming late to this thread, so it's been pretty well covered.

 

My two cents: If you're really not happy with the Konica bodies that require

mercury cells, Konica's late FT-1 (1984?) used AAAs, or even AAs with an

optional grip/holder. The T3 was a brick, should be fine as a manual camera

even without batteries or metering.

 

The 57/1.2 was certainly fun if you need the speed, but not a good as the

Hexanon 50/1.4 or 1.7.

 

I have a real fondness for this lens, though - 30 years ago I was doing

concert-and-theater photography for my college paper, so this was the very

first add-on lens I ever bought. I got some some pretty good results with it,

many of them published.

[jean_jacques_granas1]

Bob, Just for the record, Canon made at least a couple of standard lenses with an aperture of 1.2 that I am aware of. I own an FL 55mm 1.2 that I just picked up last month for the equivalent of 125 US.

 

About the Hexanon 57mm 1.2: The lens is not as sharp as the 1.4 and the 1.7, the latter of which may just be the best standard lens Konica ever made, but if you are into potraits the 1.2's softness wide open will produce beautiful pictures. The bokeh on that lens is to die for.The 1.2 is very sought after and has held its value over the years. If you have one, hang on to it.

 

It is worth to get a Konica body to try this lens out, especially as you can usually get a body in very good shape for a fraction of what this lens fetches on ebay, when it shows up, which isn't very often. I recommend the T3, a traditional all metal camera with multiple exposure capability. I especially recommend its later version, called the T3n. I've had mine now for over 25 years and never had a single problem with it. In addition, a Konica body will give you access to the rest of the Hexanon range of lenses - some of the greatest optics on the market in the 70s and 80s - most of which can be had for extremely reasonable prices now.

 

For more info about Konica, check out the two following links:

 

http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eKonicaStart.html

 

http://hometown.aol.com/amfoto6/amfoto6_001.htm

 

Cheers,

 

Jean-Jacques Granas

[bobatkins]

Thanks for the info.

 

I have picked up a very cheap Konica Autoreflex T, which should be on it's way to me right now, so I'll get a chance to try out the 57/1.2.

 

Just out of interest, does anyone know what a 57mm f1.2 usually sells for? I tried ebay, including "past auctions" but couldn't find any information on one. The one I have appears to be the "early version" from what I have read, with a silver (rather than black) aperture ring.

[Mike Gammill]

Ah, Konica. When my family owned a camera store Konica was the first brand of SLR we sold. Started with T3's and stayed with them until they were only point and shoot makers. You did find with the Autoreflex T. The extra expense of a T3 would be worth it, though if you could find the T3N. The "N" model offered a split screen focusing aid.

As the for mercury cell problem, none of the later models that accept AA or AAA batteries really have the build quality of the T-series, although if you collect a few lenses, you might want a TC-X (takes an alkaline not mercury) as a backup.

Enjoy your lens.

[alan_myers]

Hi Bob,

 

You've gotten a lot of good answers and I might only be able to add a little more. If you get particularly interested in Konica, we have discussion group on Yahoo http://groups.yahoo.com/group/konicaslr/

 

The 57/1.2 Hexanon is a superb lens, particularly in the last version with the rubber focusing ring. The two earlier versions are pretty darned good, too, seem to be pretty similar optically. Yes, you have the earliest if it has a silver aperture ring and metal focus ring. The middle version is all black and all metal.

 

In truth, there apparently was a 58/1.2 Hexanon that predated all of these. It is mentioned in some early Auto-Reflex literature, but is scarce as hens' teeth. I know several Konica distributors and many collectors, but no one I know has ever seen this lens.

 

Some folks have noticed a bit of yellowing of the glass in their 57/1.2 Hexanons. I don't know if this is similar to the yellowing seen in some older Pentax lenses, apparently due to rare earth elements used in the glass. We have just recently been discussing this on the KonicaSLR group mentioned. I've not seen this in either of the two 57/1.2s I've got.

 

The T (whether version 1 or 2) is a good solid camera and should do well. Just use it with a handheld meter, if you wish. The shutters keep working forever. Autoreflex A are very similar to the Ts and T3, but some of the earlier ones only go to 1/500 shutter speed. T3 and T3N are even more durable and shock a lot of people how "buttery smooth" they operate. T3 or T3N have a brighter viewfinder, but that shouldn't be a huge problem on any Konica when using a 57/1.2. Actually, the split image finder was optional on the T2, T3 and T3N. It was just more common on the T3N than the earlier models. It became a standard feature on the TC, T4 and subsequent Konica (but was actually also used on the first Konica 35mm SLR - the F - in 1960).

 

My personal choice to use with the large and solid Hexanon 57/1.2 would be either a full size T3N or the downsized T4 with it's winder attached.

 

The T and T3/T3N can use silver oxide SR44 batteries in place of the original 675s, but will need to set the ASA dial to compensate or have the meter calibrated for the higher voltage.

 

TC and T4 used 625s, but a common trick of adding an o-ring to an SR44 will work. Same calibration or ASA compensation will be needed.

 

Alternatively, "hearing aid" 675 batteries are cheap and will work, sometimes can be found in 1.4 volts which is close to the original. They just don't last very long, maybe two months or so.

 

Don't use alkalines in any of the above, if you can find them in the right size, the meter will never be right.

 

FS-1, FC-1, FP-1 (program only), FT-1 and TC-X all take modern available batteries. I'd not recommend a TC-X with the 57/1.2, the very compact, lightweight camera would be unbalanced with the large and heavy lens. All these except for the TC-X are battery dependent.

 

FT-1 are darned good cameras, have excellent metering (still shutter priority AE or manual, though) and a bright viewfinder.

 

Your 57/1.2 is probably worth upwards of $150. The middle version often sells at auction for $175+, and the last version often goes for $225+.

 

Unfortunately, Konica lenses are not easily mounted on most other cameras. This is because they designed an unusually short flange to film register deliberately, so that many other makers lenses could easily be adapted to their cameras. Adapters were widely available for Practika, Pentax screw-mount and Nikon lenses to Konica bodies. The last one was quite popular when the first Nikkor PC lenses were introduced and it was discovered the Konica metered better with the lens than any of the Nikon bodies at the time.

 

There were a number of other excellent Hexanons that you might watch out for. I'd recommend in particular the 21/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/1.8, 35/2, 85/1.8, 100/2.8, 135/3.2 and 200/3.5. Among the other normals, the common and inexpensive 50/1.7 is a surprisingly good, sharp lens. I personally prefer the 50/1.4 for its color rendition with slide film.

 

Enjoy experimenting with the lens!

[alan_weiner1]

<p>I know I'm answering an old question, but I wanted to let you all know about an adapter for the old no-longer-available batteries.</p>

<p>I have a Konica Autoreflex T that I bought many, many years ago. It's built like a tank! I bought it used around 40 years ago, and it's still in terrific shape. It's heavy, but it *feels* like a real camera.</p>

<p>My daughter is taking a film course in college. She may use my Konica, so I've been looking for batteries. The batteries that are in it are Kodak KX675, and are 1.35 volts. </p>

<p>Radio Shack has a battery that should fit - I've bought some, but haven't actually put them in the camera yet. They are number 675. They're zinc-air batteries, and put out 1.4 volts. They are usable without changing the exposure. I've read they don't last long - 2-3 months.</p>

<p>It is possible to put a diode in series with a newer 1.5 volt battery, which will drop the battery to 1.35 volts. The camera itself can be modified, but that's something a pro should do. I found an adapter that sits around a (physically smaller) battery; the diode is built into the adapter. No modifying the camera. It should last pretty much forever, so it's a one-time cost. They're made by Criscam.com. The adapter for the Konica is at <a href="http://www.cris-store.com/servlet/the-5/MR9-MR-dsh-9-Mercury-Battery/Detail">http://www.cris-store.com/servlet/the-5/MR9-MR-dsh-9-Mercury-Battery/Detail</a> . It costs $36.99 (as of today, 11 Sept 2011.) The Konica uses two batteries; it's not clear to me if it will need one or two adapters. (I'm guessing two.)</p>

<p>NOTE VERY WELL: I have not purchased the adapter - I'm waiting until my daughter decides the Konica is ok for her course. If she does use it, I'll buy the adapter then. Since I haven't actually used it, I can't say anything about it except that it exists. (and the concept is sound - I'd thought of it myself, but wasn't about to take my camera apart!)</p>

<p>I've long since given up film for digital (and graduated to mostly family snapshots and a bit of stock photos and macro photography). Have to admit, the thought of Katie shooting film and working in a darkroom has me very envious!</p>

<p>All the best,<br>

- Al Weiner -</p>

 

[pancolart]

<p>I was impressed with it's performance in bright sun. I've tested few different F1.2 portrait lenses. None come even close.</p>