Hexanon 21 mm

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Konica 35mm SLRs : One Thread

Does anybody have thoughts on the relative merits of the 2.8 versus the 4.0 Hexanon 21? I've seen a number of glowing assessments of the 4.0. Is the 2.8 as good.

In general, I would appreciate input on either of these lenses.

-- Anonymous, April 21, 1999


I don't have the 21mm 2.8 but do have the 21mm f/4. The f/4 resolves 100 lines per mm at f/5.6 (per Modern Photography test) The main reason the 2.8 is so popular (and expensive) is that it takes the 55mm filters. The f/4 takes 77mm filters and is, of course, a full stop slower.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 1999

Hexanon 21mm 2.8

I recently acquired the f2.8 21mm lens, and have had excellent results. Edge sharpness and color are very good, although the corners show a bit of distortion. But like the man said, it's a small lens and takes the "normal" 55mm filters, like most of the Hexanon line. I keep it in my camera bag for those landscapes and interiors where my 24mm just isn't quite wide enough.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 1999

Moderation questions? read the FAQ