My first 35mm SLR lens! I bought it with a Minolta SRT-101 at an estate auction. I think I paid about $35 for the camera and lens about 35 years ago or so. Loved the lens but sold the camera and lens a few years later to help finance a foray into medium format.
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 My first medium format camera was a Kowa Six with the 80mm lens. It was something of a fault magnet and never did work properly. The next camera, a Mamiya 645J, was a keeper though!
Gotcha! I’ve mainly dived in with a Bronica SQ with 6x6 and 645 backs. And I also got a family heirloom, hassleblad 500c, a few years ago. I’m curious about a more compact 645 system though. Or going the other direction to a 6x7 (like the Bronica GS-1).
The info on my version is: Minolta MC Rokkor PG 58mm F1.2 Hawk Eye MF Lens MC II 1967-72 (SN 2555433) Radioactive 1246 CPM Notice Radioactive 1246 CPM...
Interesting. Based on your experience, is there any noticeable difference in the performance of the MC III? Or were they able to keep the image quality the same without the radioactivity?
Well, here are all my f1.2 lenses, so I cannot compare the Hawk Eye, but the Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 I can. My experience with the the OM lenses is that there is a difference in performance. Fast Lenses f1.2 Canon FL 55mm f1.2 Fluorite Lens elements 1968 (1.05822 lbs) {$105: 2-2022} Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 103050 Radioactive 3549 CPM Front, 2862 CPM Rear {$220: 4-2024} Like New Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 117492 Radioactive 3389 CPM {$315: 6-2022} Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 135479 NOT or (lightly, maybe Lanthanum?) Radioactive {$225: 1-2024} Minolta MC Rokkor PG 58mm F1.2 Hawk Eye MF Lens MC II 1967-72 (SN 2555433) Radioactive 1246 CPM {$300: 9-2022} -
I haven’t measured it yet. Don’t have a Geiger counter at the moment. But I did order one! So I’m mainly going off second hand accounts and content (not the most reliable I know).
You can't rely on that. Just look at my list of Olympus lenses. All the same model. All different levels of radioactivity. This is also true with my Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 lenses. Over the period of their production they changed in this parameter. Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 SN 52974 Radioactive 1682 CPM, 10.41 uSv/h {$130: 1-2023} Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 SN 302757 Not-Radioactive -- Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 103050 Radioactive 3549 CPM Front, 2862 CPM Rear {$220: 4-2024} Like New Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 117492 Radioactive 3389 CPM {$315: 6-2022} Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 135479 NOT or (lightly, maybe Lanthanum?) Radioactive {$225: 1-2024} There is a special way to store radioactive lenses using 1/2 inch plexiglass sheets. When you get to that place let me know.
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 I would say people hype the earlier versions but in my experience, all versions are excellent. Sharp, amazing colors, good contrast. I use the 24 and 35 on almost every project.
I was lucky enough to grab a 50mm 1.2 Rokkor on ebay about 3 months ago or so, for less than 200. I also have a few 55 and 58 mm 1.4 Rokkors. Looking forward to the fall light with these. Although the obvious advantage your lens has over mine is that it's a longer lens, and what makes you prefer a 58 over a 50, especially if you are shooting APSC? (I could not tell what camera you used)
That is a great deal! I'm curious how the 50mm F/1.2 compares. For the cameras I'm shooting, I'm using a Canon R5c, EOS R and an RP, so all Full Frame. I do really like the 50mm focal length. But I find that I like the reach of the 58mm a bit more. It's not a big difference, but it is noticeable. It also adds a little to the telephoto look to the bokeh. It is mostly slight nuances, but I find it a bit more appealing for my personal style. Thank you for watching!
It's a shame they didn't make it into the digital age. Collecting vintage glass I've become quite fond of Minolta and their history. From my understanding they were way ahead of the competition with regards to coatings and they did everything on their own in-house, no outsourcing of any kind. I got the not quite as exotic MD 50 1.2 III which exhibits the typical vintage fast fifty flaws such as chromatic aberration, softness etc, but unlike many other vintage lenses it is very sharp stopped down and perfectly usable for landscape which is more than can be said for many others.
Minolta was really industry leading for a long time. Sadly, they just couldn't compete in the digital market. Which really is a shame because their optical designs and lens performance have always been stellar. But, looking to the silver lining, we have gorgeous vintage lenses to use. I'm curious to do a side-by-side comparison of the MD 50mm F/1.2 vs the Hawkeye. Could be very interesting... Thank you for watching!!!
Another great video! Not just a lens review like so many others out there. Nicely done! l enjoyed the way you explained what you wanted to do with this shoot, the ideas behind it and the BTS of the set up and you working with Claire. I own several 58mm lenses, including the Minolta 58/1.4 Rokkor-X. And now here you are tempting me to look at prices of the 58/1.2, DAMN YOU! LOL Thanks for a fun video!
I will not apologize! You should buy a Hawkeye! Lol. Thank you for watching and the kind words! I think I'm going to start doing more lighting intensive videos and covering thought process and intention more. We'll see how this goes!
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 I would totally watch those! I've been looking at rebuilding my Speedlite collection to use as quick, on the go lighting setups much like what you used here. Looking at a bracket to hold two speedlites in a softbox.
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 Well that's the thing. I am a long time Canon user, so I've always had Canon Speedlites. Back in the day when my kids were small and played basketball I would use two or three flashes on remote triggers pounding off the back wall of the gym to stop the action of a drive to the basket. Those were older Canon 540EZ units. But only one of them still works. RIP the other two. But as long as the light output is the same color, I don't really care what brand they are. I like those old Canon units because they were simple and easy to set up and use. But these newer, remotely controlled units seem like a God send! So at this point, I'm still looking at all the different ones out there these days!
I love the 600EX-RT’s! Easy to use and set up. Plus the wireless trigger is awesome. User interface is really similar to the older canon speedlites. I used to use the Photos Mitros+ flashes. They are also really good and have a wireless trigger. What are you going to be using the flashes for? Still sports shoots?
Thank you so much! I've been very interested in shooting the Nikon 50mm F/1.2 AIS. What are your thoughts on it?? One of my dream videos to do would be, I want to do a comparison of the Hawkeye, the Konica Hexanon 57mm F/1.2, the Canon 55mm F/1.2 SSC Aspherical and the Nikon 58mm F/1.2 Noct... Battle of the vintage fast glass!
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 the nikkor 50 f1.2 AIS is a lens that came out in 1981 I believe and was produced by Nikon until about 2020. It was that good of a vintage lens. Its awesome but for flairing is ok but nothing crazy. I also have a AI version of it 1977-80. Different coatings and 2 less blades. It also great. I only own it because my buddy sold it to me for peanuts and I never turn down a f1.2 vintage lens as the ceiling hasnt been reached on them yet.
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 Comparing to 50 ais to the NOCT? I wondered this myself and there is a video by a Australian elderly man with Red glasses who compares them too. The results were so close that I thanked him for saving me $3k. Its a dream lens for sure but the sheer amount it costs is enough for me to never want it as I would never use it.
It is definitely a dream. Both the Canon 55mm F/1.2 SSC Aspherical and the Nikon 58mm F/1.2 NOCT are so expensive. Maybe one day I'll get to try them. But I'm not going to hold my breath! Lol.
This echos my research. I thought one of the big changes to the MC-3 was stopping the use of thorium in the lens. I’ll still test with a Geiger counter once I get one for the first hand knowledge (and I have a few lenses I want to test that I know use thorium). I greatly appreciate the comment and additional info! Thank you!
@@Wilma5532 please check out Justin Phillips video about cinemodding Rokkor lenses where he reads from a Minolta published article. I admit that I was wrong. It was the late 1970’s. But all glass was made to the same specifications.
Very true. I want to compare it to the much more affordable Rokkor 58mm f/1.4 and see if there is a very noticeable performance difference. And while I’ll agree that $300-$400 is a bit expensive, personally, I think that’s a better deal vs the price of modern glass. And much better than the crazy prices of the Canon FD 55mm f1.2 SSC Aspherical or Nikon 58mm f/1.2 NOCT.
My first 35mm SLR lens! I bought it with a Minolta SRT-101 at an estate auction. I think I paid about $35 for the camera and lens about 35 years ago or so. Loved the lens but sold the camera and lens a few years later to help finance a foray into medium format.
That’s an amazing first 35mm setup!!!
What medium format did you start with?
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 My first medium format camera was a Kowa Six with the 80mm lens. It was something of a fault magnet and never did work properly. The next camera, a Mamiya 645J, was a keeper though!
Gotcha! I’ve mainly dived in with a Bronica SQ with 6x6 and 645 backs. And I also got a family heirloom, hassleblad 500c, a few years ago.
I’m curious about a more compact 645 system though. Or going the other direction to a 6x7 (like the Bronica GS-1).
The info on my version is:
Minolta MC Rokkor PG 58mm F1.2 Hawk Eye MF Lens MC II 1967-72 (SN 2555433) Radioactive 1246 CPM
Notice Radioactive 1246 CPM...
Interesting. Based on your experience, is there any noticeable difference in the performance of the MC III? Or were they able to keep the image quality the same without the radioactivity?
Well, here are all my f1.2 lenses, so I cannot compare the Hawk Eye, but the Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 I can.
My experience with the the OM lenses is that there is a difference in performance.
Fast Lenses f1.2
Canon FL 55mm f1.2 Fluorite Lens elements 1968 (1.05822 lbs) {$105: 2-2022}
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 103050 Radioactive 3549 CPM Front, 2862 CPM Rear {$220: 4-2024} Like New
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 117492 Radioactive 3389 CPM {$315: 6-2022}
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 135479 NOT or (lightly, maybe Lanthanum?) Radioactive {$225: 1-2024}
Minolta MC Rokkor PG 58mm F1.2 Hawk Eye MF Lens MC II 1967-72 (SN 2555433) Radioactive 1246 CPM {$300: 9-2022}
-
And how do you know your MC III is not radioactive? Did you measure it? I measure all my lenses when I get them.
I haven’t measured it yet. Don’t have a Geiger counter at the moment. But I did order one! So I’m mainly going off second hand accounts and content (not the most reliable I know).
You can't rely on that. Just look at my list of Olympus lenses. All the same model. All different levels of radioactivity.
This is also true with my Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 lenses. Over the period of their production they changed in this parameter.
Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 SN 52974 Radioactive 1682 CPM, 10.41 uSv/h {$130: 1-2023}
Auto Rikenon 55mm f1.4 SN 302757 Not-Radioactive
--
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 103050 Radioactive 3549 CPM Front, 2862 CPM Rear {$220: 4-2024} Like New
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 117492 Radioactive 3389 CPM {$315: 6-2022}
Olympus OM-System G.Zuiko Auto-S 55mm f1.2 1974 SN 135479 NOT or (lightly, maybe Lanthanum?) Radioactive {$225: 1-2024}
There is a special way to store radioactive lenses using 1/2 inch plexiglass sheets. When you get to that place let me know.
Very cool shots, beautiful model - congrats for the engagement 🤞👍
Thank you so much! I appreciate the watch!
And thank you for the engagement congrats!
Been using this lens for cinematography for many years. Great lens.
It’s such an amazing lens! What other lenses do you pair it up with for your cinematography?
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 Normally I use the MD 24,35,and 58. Sometimes the 70-210
I’m heavily considering building out a Rokkor set myself. What are your thoughts on the 24mm and 35mm?
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 I would say people hype the earlier versions but in my experience, all versions are excellent. Sharp, amazing colors, good contrast. I use the 24 and 35 on almost every project.
I’m particularly interested in the Rokkor 35mm f/1.8. Which 35mm are you using?
I was lucky enough to grab a 50mm 1.2 Rokkor on ebay about 3 months ago or so, for less than 200. I also have a few 55 and 58 mm 1.4 Rokkors. Looking forward to the fall light with these. Although the obvious advantage your lens has over mine is that it's a longer lens, and what makes you prefer a 58 over a 50, especially if you are shooting APSC? (I could not tell what camera you used)
That is a great deal! I'm curious how the 50mm F/1.2 compares. For the cameras I'm shooting, I'm using a Canon R5c, EOS R and an RP, so all Full Frame. I do really like the 50mm focal length. But I find that I like the reach of the 58mm a bit more. It's not a big difference, but it is noticeable. It also adds a little to the telephoto look to the bokeh. It is mostly slight nuances, but I find it a bit more appealing for my personal style.
Thank you for watching!
It's a shame they didn't make it into the digital age. Collecting vintage glass I've become quite fond of Minolta and their history. From my understanding they were way ahead of the competition with regards to coatings and they did everything on their own in-house, no outsourcing of any kind. I got the not quite as exotic MD 50 1.2 III which exhibits the typical vintage fast fifty flaws such as chromatic aberration, softness etc, but unlike many other vintage lenses it is very sharp stopped down and perfectly usable for landscape which is more than can be said for many others.
Minolta was really industry leading for a long time. Sadly, they just couldn't compete in the digital market. Which really is a shame because their optical designs and lens performance have always been stellar.
But, looking to the silver lining, we have gorgeous vintage lenses to use. I'm curious to do a side-by-side comparison of the MD 50mm F/1.2 vs the Hawkeye. Could be very interesting...
Thank you for watching!!!
Another great video! Not just a lens review like so many others out there. Nicely done! l enjoyed the way you explained what you wanted to do with this shoot, the ideas behind it and the BTS of the set up and you working with Claire.
I own several 58mm lenses, including the Minolta 58/1.4 Rokkor-X. And now here you are tempting me to look at prices of the 58/1.2, DAMN YOU! LOL
Thanks for a fun video!
I will not apologize! You should buy a Hawkeye! Lol.
Thank you for watching and the kind words! I think I'm going to start doing more lighting intensive videos and covering thought process and intention more. We'll see how this goes!
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 I would totally watch those!
I've been looking at rebuilding my Speedlite collection to use as quick, on the go lighting setups much like what you used here. Looking at a bracket to hold two speedlites in a softbox.
Awesome! What Speedlites are you using? I will definitely work on a lighting series!
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 Well that's the thing. I am a long time Canon user, so I've always had Canon Speedlites. Back in the day when my kids were small and played basketball I would use two or three flashes on remote triggers pounding off the back wall of the gym to stop the action of a drive to the basket. Those were older Canon 540EZ units. But only one of them still works. RIP the other two.
But as long as the light output is the same color, I don't really care what brand they are. I like those old Canon units because they were simple and easy to set up and use.
But these newer, remotely controlled units seem like a God send!
So at this point, I'm still looking at all the different ones out there these days!
I love the 600EX-RT’s! Easy to use and set up. Plus the wireless trigger is awesome. User interface is really similar to the older canon speedlites.
I used to use the Photos Mitros+ flashes. They are also really good and have a wireless trigger.
What are you going to be using the flashes for? Still sports shoots?
Nice review. Always wondered about this lens as I have the nikkor 50 f1.2 AIS and Canon FD 55mm f1.2 chrome nose.
Thank you so much!
I've been very interested in shooting the Nikon 50mm F/1.2 AIS. What are your thoughts on it??
One of my dream videos to do would be, I want to do a comparison of the Hawkeye, the Konica Hexanon 57mm F/1.2, the Canon 55mm F/1.2 SSC Aspherical and the Nikon 58mm F/1.2 Noct... Battle of the vintage fast glass!
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 the nikkor 50 f1.2 AIS is a lens that came out in 1981 I believe and was produced by Nikon until about 2020. It was that good of a vintage lens. Its awesome but for flairing is ok but nothing crazy. I also have a AI version of it 1977-80. Different coatings and 2 less blades. It also great. I only own it because my buddy sold it to me for peanuts and I never turn down a f1.2 vintage lens as the ceiling hasnt been reached on them yet.
@@michaelmarshallphotography5515 Comparing to 50 ais to the NOCT? I wondered this myself and there is a video by a Australian elderly man with Red glasses who compares them too. The results were so close that I thanked him for saving me $3k.
Its a dream lens for sure but the sheer amount it costs is enough for me to never want it as I would never use it.
Definitely sounds like a lens I want to try! And I completely get it, and agree, never can turn down so fast vintage glass!
It is definitely a dream. Both the Canon 55mm F/1.2 SSC Aspherical and the Nikon 58mm F/1.2 NOCT are so expensive. Maybe one day I'll get to try them. But I'm not going to hold my breath! Lol.
Thank you for this!
My pleasure! Thank you for watching!
Great review on the lens and a very, merry congratulations on your engagement. 👍
Thank you so much for the congratulations! We appreciate it so much!
And thank you for watching!
Claire definitely wore it better! Cool vid, broski.
Lmao! I agree! Claire definitely wore it better.
Radio active material was use on all Rokkor lens to early 80's.
Interesting. So there’s a good probability that there is thorium in my version too. Hmmmm. Cool. Another lens to test out once I get a Geiger counter!
thats simply incorrect. the ONLY rokkors that had significant amounts of thorium or Lanthan were the 58mm f1.2 (MC-1 - MC-2), 28mm f2.5 and 100mm f2
This echos my research. I thought one of the big changes to the MC-3 was stopping the use of thorium in the lens.
I’ll still test with a Geiger counter once I get one for the first hand knowledge (and I have a few lenses I want to test that I know use thorium).
I greatly appreciate the comment and additional info! Thank you!
@@Wilma5532 please check out Justin Phillips video about cinemodding Rokkor lenses where he reads from a Minolta published article. I admit that I was wrong. It was the late 1970’s. But all glass was made to the same specifications.
Nice! But, a little expensive now at $300 to $400
Very true. I want to compare it to the much more affordable Rokkor 58mm f/1.4 and see if there is a very noticeable performance difference.
And while I’ll agree that $300-$400 is a bit expensive, personally, I think that’s a better deal vs the price of modern glass. And much better than the crazy prices of the Canon FD 55mm f1.2 SSC Aspherical or Nikon 58mm f/1.2 NOCT.