You are absolutely spot on. I am 65 years old and got my first SLR, Konica Autoreflex T w/ 57mm f1.4 Hexanon lens, from a friend in 1972 who brought it back from overseas duty in the Pacific then sold it to me cheap. I was fifteen at the time and being on the Yearbook staff I used it daily throughout High School. I have over the years added to my Konica cache and although I have other brand cameras and glass, most of the time I will give priority to use either my Konica cameras or Konica glass. My 50mm f1.4 is currently on my Sony NEX 7 and is very suitable. By the way, I've owned my (2x) 50mm f1.4 Hexanon for many decades now and I am in good health, all my four children, adults now, are in good health. I have not realized any compromise to myself or any of my family members caused by any radiation emitting from this lens. Please be comforted by this testimony.
Back in these days, there were quite some obvious differences between identical lenses. I seem to have grabbed one of the sharpest Konica 50mm f1. 4 on planet earth! It has become my gold standard. Not wide open, where an Olympus 50mm f1. 8 is way sharper, but stopped down to f4, it becomes unbeatable. I even compared it to the Sony fe24-70 f2. 8 GM at 50mm, both at f11 and to my utmost amazement, the 60 years younger professional Sony masterpiece was in no way sharper! Even zoomed in 500%, the endresult was at least on par! I have some 80 to 100 lenses to choose from at home, from vintage to modern, and nothing ever came close to better the sharpness of this vintage old beauty!
Wouldn’t ya know it; the day after I get this lens I find this video! Like you had I known that this lens was radioactive before I bought it probably wouldn’t have. But after shooting it for the day, I’m so glad I got it. Make room for me In the Badass mobile and let’s check our Badass selves!
Indeed it is, but there is a latter version of this lens, optically identical, yet slightly smaller and lighter, loosing the half stop clicks and closing all the way down to f22, which is not radioactive.
@@1kwords Thanks for that clarification. I’ll have to check, but I’m pretty sure I have the f/22 version. Since I was ready to keep and shoot with the radioactive version I’m still going to claim Badass status!
I just got a Konica Hexanon 57mm 1.2. The radioactive tint is very alluring. It's built like a tank. The focus ring is smooth and the aperture ring is precise. Looking forward to testing it out.
Even the Hexanons that are considered "stinkers" are better than the budget and mid-tier offerings from most other lens makers of the time. The AR 50/1.4 is lovely. The older 57/1.4 is sublime. The 55/1.2 is pure magic. (And those are just a few 50s). My best advice to anyone is buy one of these attached to an Autoreflex camera and spend some time with those bodies; they don't get the amazing due that they should receive. Konica made exceptional photographic equipment and the world deserves to be reminded. Please.... don't worry yourself over the rare-earth. There lens models with far more (the older Takumar 67 105/2.4) and are still entirely safe. Just don't sleep with it underneath your pillow every night for years. The level of radiation is *completely* negligible. Don't be anxious.
Hello , yes me , a one of the people . I love your female portraits very much . And B.G.M. Is also very dreamingly . Thank you very much . Feb. 18th 2024 Sun. 12:33 from Yokohama City Japan
I measured my Hexanon 50 f1.4 .Dosimeter was put on the back of the lens. It measured 5.22 uSv/h. It is 17 times more than normal. Just note that average radiation in my apartment is 0,04 uSv/h
I agree that you can get a film look/feel in digital photography. I shoot with vintage lenses on my Fuji X-E3 & the "imperfections" in the vintage glass tend to give a filmic/vintage feel to the images. I also apply film simulations, in camera, to add to this filmic look. I also agree that you should not grind up the glass & eat it. 😆 I suppose I should stop taping my radioactive lenses to my forehead! 🤔😆
I very much enjoy your videos. Your English is excellent and I wonder where you have learned some of your expressions. Wonderful images, especially the b&w. Wow! Peace & be well.
Thanks so much for your kind words. Regarding where I learned the expressions, while I can't say because I don't know which expressions you mean, I can tell you that I watch and read a lot of English language content, and always have since I was basically 12.
I'm brand new to owning a manual camera but snacked up a Hexanon 40 1.8 which I'm going to match with a Canon EOS D10. I think that will give me the correct... uhmmm.. Attitude for learning and shooting. Your review is ...lovely, and sooo supportive of me .. already and I'm still waiting for the freaking camera to arrive. Please be safe and thank you soooo much, sir. I bow in your general direction. I'm an ole punk rocker on Soc Sec so... maybe I'll go for that beautiful lens you're talking about in a month or two. Peace.
Hey Radu and thanks again for another engaging and charming presentation, you’ve got such an open and honest approach your videos and opinions are very easy watching. For what it’s worth, I hope that you’re able to face down your anxiety over the radioactive qualities of this lens, and if it helps to know that anecdotally I have also heard that such glass might be an issue only if the elements are smashed and you somehow manage to ingest the particles, but as long as you don’t sleep with it beneath your pillow you’ll likely be fine. …that said, if you grow another head don’t come crying ha! I ordered this and another Konica Hexanon earlier this week so I was very pleased to see you had covered it and it’s reassuring and making the anticipation of its’ arrival all the more exciting, although mine is the later f22 version without the radioactive angle, but also without the half stops so as ever, life gives and it takes away. I have tried many, many similar lenses, but the search for the perfect optical sidekicks continues … it’s an ego thing I think, the ego is never satisfied with what it has always wanting more and new, but just occasionally it finds somewhere calm to rest a while and maybe the Konica may be such a refuge :)
Hi Alan, I’m afraid I have never had access to a Geiger counter but I’ve seen several videos on here showing the kind of readings that optics of this era can have, so I do take on board peoples concerns. I’ve still got and very occasionally use a couple of these Konica lenses, their 57mm f1.4 and the 28mm I mentioned above, and they they’re lovely lenses. But I’m less likely to reach for them than others not because of their radioactive properties, but more because of the aperture ring design which is a bit ‘fiddly’ and not néarly so satisfying as similar era Minoltas, Nikons and the like. But to each their own eh? 👍🙌📷
Thanks Radu, very enjoyable video and your commentary great in depth review of this lens. If someone doesn’t find it to their taste they should just not watch an Not post such stupid remarks. Your images at the end very beautiful and well composed. At 83 I am not worried about the radiation ( I have several radioactive lenses).
Hey Radu nice review, I have the radioactive FL 58/1.2 from canon on my m4/3 Olympus em1 and after two weeks mounted in the camera the sensor starts to show hot pixels, took it apart from the camera and after one week they start to vanish so my advice is not leave it on the camera for long periods of time
Yeah, that is known to happen sometimes. AFAIC, I started by selling all my radioactive lenses and eventually sold off all my vintage lenses altogether. My wife still have a few, but those are not hot. Myself, I shoot Fuji and modern AF lenses now.
I have the Hexanon 50 at f1.7 ( in fact I own 4 ) the first one variant , the next and the last ( f22 ). I had read a lot about the sharpness and quality of the Hexanors and although I can't consider them as soft, compared to some Minoltas, Canon FD and Olympus they don't seem so sharp to me, yes. the colors are more natural and "correct" than the other brands.
I have a beautiful copy of this lens and tested it on a Geiger counter and it is not radioactive. My takumar and Fujinon 50 1.4 are both radioactive as was expected. you should test your copy to see if it is radioactive. Geiger counters are only ~$50 on eBay. I was able test all of my suspect lenses
Hi Radu! Very nice video. I just found a Konica Acom 1 with the beautiful Hexanon 50 mm AR 1.7. So curious about that. By the way I found out this on the internet: " Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.7 AR is not radioactive. I routinely test lenses for radioactivity as part of my testing. Documenting lens radioactivity has become my hobby. Konica used thoriated glass in the top of the line Hexanon 57mm f1.2, which is slightly radioactive but omitted it from f1.4 or the f1.7 versions." At first I was a little scared too then reading this I rolled around. I hope this is useful and makes you sleep peacefully❤
There are numerous reports of radioactive 1.4s. There are videos of people measuring the radioactivity of their lenses on UA-cam. I have become accustomed to it.
That's a nice love letter to the old Konicas ! I've got some of them, and the 57mm f1,4 is easily my favorite vintage lens, and it's supposedly not radioactive. (I think only 50mm 1,4 and 57mm 1,2?) The only Konica I've got that's not great is the 80-200 f3,5 my Canon FD 70-210 f4 is optically better. But the Canon lens feels like a toy, when the Konica weighs in at 1200g. Maybe tanks are made like Konica zooms, and not the other way around. :) I commend you on the good English, cheers from Sweden.
Hi Radu and thank you for this technically excellent and articulate disposition on the optical characteristics and attributes and detriments of this lens. Bravo. Of course you describe very well the 'glow' and I thought of the adjective 'radiant' - which of course is how you go onto describe its physical properties! Great, and thank you for your great effort putting together this video.
@@1kwords and a technical question please- what are your settings for the monochrome videos - the way the vegetation - well, all of it - is captured is fantastic. Ansell Adams in motion ha!
That is quite the compliment, but I assure you am I doing nothing special. Some videos, like this one, are shot on my phone. It was then edited in DaVinci Resolve with the slightest bit of corrections I can get away with. There is really no magice formula, nor do I have any recipe. I just fiddle around until I like how it looks.
I recently bought this lens, and the radiation behind the lens is 10usv/h. There is nothing wrong with other parts, but it is still an unfriendly number (this radiation amount is equivalent to the radiation amount of a person in a year).
Love your work. Very poetic stream of pictures in the image section (29:27). Just today I acquired this lens (new version F22) at the flee market. Will try it out (again) within the next week. As far as i remember, some years ago, I was more thrilled by my Hexanon 50mm F1.7. Thank you for this review! P.S. your beer into .... (cheap beer will do it) ..... this endorses: any 50mm lens will do as well? Did you intend that?
I did not mean to make a connection between cheap beer and cheap lenses, but I am of the opinion that tools (and beer) don't necessarily need to be expensive to be good.
Is it now? I just bought one a couple of days ago and I'm eagerly expecting it to arrive. However, everything I could find online said these two variants have identical optics. Why do you say they are different?
Loved the review! I've just bought this and will use it on my fujifilm xt1. You had me laughing out loud when you got to the radioactive part! Great photos, I can't wait to use the lens
Congratulations again Radu on another enjoyable video in your own entertaining and individual style :-) I really love your images, for the art and for the insights into life in Roumania. I have two copies of the 50 1.7, later smaller versions, both from Konica TC cameras, the first camera has faults, I couldn't resist when someone in my city sold an immaculate working TC. The first 1.7 lens has disappointed me, I haven't yet tried the second copy. The reputation of being the sharpest ever lens came I believe from a 1970s magazine review, maybe perspectives have changed :-)
Great video. Just accidentally came across your videos and quite like the mood. Never knew about the Konica lenses and actually found one cheap in my city here - Sofia, but it turns out there are no adapters from Konica AR for my camera ( a rare sigma SA mount), neither are found AR to M42, as I have such an adaptor... I so much would have liked to have a dangerous lens :) There is an adaptor for Sony, which I guess you have used. Greetings from Bulgaria and keep up the mood.
Haha, it's not that dangerous after all, I am slightly overstating the facts making it all sound more dangerous than it really is. I'm glad you're enjoying my content.
Thank you for this video. As a lover of Minolta lenses, I was also interested in learning about this lens. And you presented the material well. (excellent English, by the way). But as for the "flaw" of this lens - this is really unnecessary precaution. I mean, are you serious? :D Who really cares about this radioactivity? It's there in such meager amounts. Besides - you yourself mentioned exceptional cases. All in all, it never stopped people. It was also interesting to learn about this encyclopedia that you mentioned. Now curious - where can I read it. But the biggest question I have is about wider angle lenses. The thing is... 50 mm for me is perhaps one of the most inconvenient focal lengths. It does not allow you to capture more general shots and at the same time does not allow you to capture an enlarged isolated scene or portrait. And all my life I am perplexed by the fact that for some reason it is considered standard and close to the human angle of view. And this question haunts me all the time. Why the hell is 50 mm considered the most versatile? In fact, the human eye sees much wider - even wider than 35 mm. Of course, we see the periphery out of focus, but we still register it. I would say that 35 mm is closer to being called really approximately equivalent to the human angle of view. So, Radu - is there the same high-quality sharp lens but 35 ? In the same line, perhaps? I mean lenses that you personally like with this range. (Sony a7 III + a few adapters).
There is radioactivity all around - just from the cosmic background radiation and such. Sick patients who receive radioactive implants are safe to walk around and socialize, touch other people
I've done my research and had you watched the video you probably would have not made this comment, because my conclusion was that the lens is generally safe.
This was one of the most fun reviews I've ever watched. I commend you on your articulate, humorous and intelligent English. :)
Thank you so much. I'm thrilled to hear, well rather read this. God bless you.
You are absolutely spot on. I am 65 years old and got my first SLR, Konica Autoreflex T w/ 57mm f1.4 Hexanon lens, from a friend in 1972 who brought it back from overseas duty in the Pacific then sold it to me cheap. I was fifteen at the time and being on the Yearbook staff I used it daily throughout High School. I have over the years added to my Konica cache and although I have other brand cameras and glass, most of the time I will give priority to use either my Konica cameras or Konica glass. My 50mm f1.4 is currently on my Sony NEX 7 and is very suitable. By the way, I've owned my (2x) 50mm f1.4 Hexanon for many decades now and I am in good health, all my four children, adults now, are in good health. I have not realized any compromise to myself or any of my family members caused by any radiation emitting from this lens. Please be comforted by this testimony.
Thanks.
Your wonderful gallery of images demonstrate the 3D qualities of this lens. Thanks for sharing!
Back in these days, there were quite some obvious differences between identical lenses. I seem to have grabbed one of the sharpest Konica 50mm f1. 4 on planet earth! It has become my gold standard. Not wide open, where an Olympus 50mm f1. 8 is way sharper, but stopped down to f4, it becomes unbeatable. I even compared it to the Sony fe24-70 f2. 8 GM at 50mm, both at f11 and to my utmost amazement, the 60 years younger professional Sony masterpiece was in no way sharper! Even zoomed in 500%, the endresult was at least on par! I have some 80 to 100 lenses to choose from at home, from vintage to modern, and nothing ever came close to better the sharpness of this vintage old beauty!
I don't find that surprising at all. This lens is on of the better vintage-era fast fifties in the world.
Wouldn’t ya know it; the day after I get this lens I find this video! Like you had I known that this lens was radioactive before I bought it probably wouldn’t have. But after shooting it for the day, I’m so glad I got it. Make room for me
In the Badass mobile and let’s check our Badass selves!
Indeed it is, but there is a latter version of this lens, optically identical, yet slightly smaller and lighter, loosing the half stop clicks and closing all the way down to f22, which is not radioactive.
@@1kwords Thanks for that clarification. I’ll have to check, but I’m pretty sure I have the f/22 version. Since I was ready to keep and shoot with the radioactive version I’m still going to claim Badass status!
I just got a Konica Hexanon 57mm 1.2. The radioactive tint is very alluring. It's built like a tank. The focus ring is smooth and the aperture ring is precise. Looking forward to testing it out.
I'm a bit jealous. I do have the 1.4/50 and is indeed amazing, but the 1.2 is very alluring.
Even the Hexanons that are considered "stinkers" are better than the budget and mid-tier offerings from most other lens makers of the time.
The AR 50/1.4 is lovely. The older 57/1.4 is sublime. The 55/1.2 is pure magic. (And those are just a few 50s).
My best advice to anyone is buy one of these attached to an Autoreflex camera and spend some time with those bodies; they don't get the amazing due that they should receive. Konica made exceptional photographic equipment and the world deserves to be reminded.
Please.... don't worry yourself over the rare-earth. There lens models with far more (the older Takumar 67 105/2.4) and are still entirely safe. Just don't sleep with it underneath your pillow every night for years. The level of radiation is *completely* negligible. Don't be anxious.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment.
@@1kwords In all my yammering comment I never said thanks for a great video. Thanks for a great and thoughtful video! :D
Hello , yes me , a one of the people .
I love your female portraits very much .
And B.G.M. Is also very dreamingly .
Thank you very much .
Feb. 18th 2024 Sun. 12:33
from Yokohama City Japan
Thanks for your comment.
This is a beautiful lens and you described it's character well. The F16 version is indeed radioactive. The F22 version is not.
I measured my Hexanon 50 f1.4 .Dosimeter was put on the back of the lens. It measured 5.22 uSv/h. It is 17 times more than normal. Just note that average radiation in my apartment is 0,04 uSv/h
I agree that you can get a film look/feel in digital photography. I shoot with vintage lenses on my Fuji X-E3 & the "imperfections" in the vintage glass tend to give a filmic/vintage feel to the images. I also apply film simulations, in camera, to add to this filmic look.
I also agree that you should not grind up the glass & eat it. 😆 I suppose I should stop taping my radioactive lenses to my forehead! 🤔😆
I should also mention that I enjoy seeing your photography as well. Absolutely fantastic!
I very much enjoy your videos. Your English is excellent and I wonder where you have learned some of your expressions. Wonderful images, especially the b&w. Wow! Peace & be well.
Thanks so much for your kind words. Regarding where I learned the expressions, while I can't say because I don't know which expressions you mean, I can tell you that I watch and read a lot of English language content, and always have since I was basically 12.
I'm brand new to owning a manual camera but snacked up a Hexanon 40 1.8 which I'm going to match with a Canon EOS D10. I think that will give me the correct... uhmmm.. Attitude for learning and shooting. Your review is ...lovely, and sooo supportive of me .. already and I'm still waiting for the freaking camera to arrive. Please be safe and thank you soooo much, sir. I bow in your general direction. I'm an ole punk rocker on Soc Sec so... maybe I'll go for that beautiful lens you're talking about in a month or two. Peace.
Hey Radu and thanks again for another engaging and charming presentation, you’ve got such an open and honest approach your videos and opinions are very easy watching.
For what it’s worth, I hope that you’re able to face down your anxiety over the radioactive qualities of this lens, and if it helps to know that anecdotally I have also heard that such glass might be an issue only if the elements are smashed and you somehow manage to ingest the particles, but as long as you don’t sleep with it beneath your pillow you’ll likely be fine.
…that said, if you grow another head don’t come crying ha!
I ordered this and another Konica Hexanon earlier this week so I was very pleased to see you had covered it and it’s reassuring and making the anticipation of its’ arrival all the more exciting, although mine is the later f22 version without the radioactive angle, but also without the half stops so as ever, life gives and it takes away.
I have tried many, many similar lenses, but the search for the perfect optical sidekicks continues … it’s an ego thing I think, the ego is never satisfied with what it has always wanting more and new, but just occasionally it finds somewhere calm to rest a while and maybe the Konica may be such a refuge :)
Hi Henry,I just want ask did you check the radioactive by machine on that? Like Geiger counter?
Hi Alan, I’m afraid I have never had access to a Geiger counter but I’ve seen several videos on here showing the kind of readings that optics of this era can have, so I do take on board peoples concerns.
I’ve still got and very occasionally use a couple of these Konica lenses, their 57mm f1.4 and the 28mm I mentioned above, and they they’re lovely lenses.
But I’m less likely to reach for them than others not because of their radioactive properties, but more because of the aperture ring design which is a bit ‘fiddly’ and not néarly so satisfying as similar era Minoltas, Nikons and the like.
But to each their own eh? 👍🙌📷
Like you I have this lens, and like you we share the emotion it brings... just love it man, what more can one say.
Thanks for the content.
Thanks Radu, very enjoyable video and your commentary great in depth review of this lens. If someone doesn’t find it to their taste they should just not watch an Not post such stupid remarks. Your images at the end very beautiful and well composed. At 83 I am not worried about the radiation ( I have several radioactive lenses).
Thank you for your kind words.
Hey Radu nice review, I have the radioactive FL 58/1.2 from canon on my m4/3 Olympus em1 and after two weeks mounted in the camera the sensor starts to show hot pixels, took it apart from the camera and after one week they start to vanish so my advice is not leave it on the camera for long periods of time
Yeah, that is known to happen sometimes.
AFAIC, I started by selling all my radioactive lenses and eventually sold off all my vintage lenses altogether. My wife still have a few, but those are not hot.
Myself, I shoot Fuji and modern AF lenses now.
I have the Hexanon 50 at f1.7 ( in fact I own 4 ) the first one variant , the next and the last ( f22 ). I had read a lot about the sharpness and quality of the Hexanors and although I can't consider them as soft, compared to some Minoltas, Canon FD and Olympus they don't seem so sharp to me, yes. the colors are more natural and "correct" than the other brands.
I do agree. While I can't speak for the 50 1.7s, I can speak for the 1.4 and it's less sharp than the Canon FD 50 1.4, and the Olympus Zuiko 50 1.4.
I have a beautiful copy of this lens and tested it on a Geiger counter and it is not radioactive. My takumar and Fujinon 50 1.4 are both radioactive as was expected. you should test your copy to see if it is radioactive. Geiger counters are only ~$50 on eBay. I was able test all of my suspect lenses
I had it tested and it is radioactive.
I've got the Konica Hexanon Ar 50mm F/1.7 and love it!
I bet you do. It's a fantastic lens.
I have just come across your channel. I really liked your video. Very well done video. Enjoyed learning about this lens.
Hi Radu! Very nice video. I just found a Konica Acom 1 with the beautiful Hexanon 50 mm AR 1.7. So curious about that. By the way I found out this on the internet: " Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.7 AR is not radioactive. I routinely test lenses for radioactivity as part of my testing. Documenting lens radioactivity has become my hobby. Konica used thoriated glass in the top of the line Hexanon 57mm f1.2, which is slightly radioactive but omitted it from f1.4 or the f1.7 versions."
At first I was a little scared too then reading this I rolled around. I hope this is useful and makes you sleep peacefully❤
There are numerous reports of radioactive 1.4s. There are videos of people measuring the radioactivity of their lenses on UA-cam.
I have become accustomed to it.
@@1kwords i will check it Out! So also for 1.7s?
@@frankhitdrums no, to my knowledge, no 1.7 is radioactive, just the 1.4s
This video is a work of art, I love it!
You're too kind. Thank you.
That's a nice love letter to the old Konicas !
I've got some of them, and the 57mm f1,4 is easily my favorite vintage lens, and it's supposedly not radioactive. (I think only 50mm 1,4 and 57mm 1,2?)
The only Konica I've got that's not great is the 80-200 f3,5 my Canon FD 70-210 f4 is optically better.
But the Canon lens feels like a toy, when the Konica weighs in at 1200g. Maybe tanks are made like Konica zooms, and not the other way around. :)
I commend you on the good English, cheers from Sweden.
Thank you.
Hi Radu and thank you for this technically excellent and articulate disposition on the optical characteristics and attributes and detriments of this lens. Bravo. Of course you describe very well the 'glow' and I thought of the adjective 'radiant' - which of course is how you go onto describe its physical properties! Great, and thank you for your great effort putting together this video.
Thank you for your very kind words.
@@1kwords and a technical question please- what are your settings for the monochrome videos - the way the vegetation - well, all of it - is captured is fantastic. Ansell Adams in motion ha!
That is quite the compliment, but I assure you am I doing nothing special.
Some videos, like this one, are shot on my phone. It was then edited in DaVinci Resolve with the slightest bit of corrections I can get away with. There is really no magice formula, nor do I have any recipe. I just fiddle around until I like how it looks.
I recently bought this lens, and the radiation behind the lens is 10usv/h. There is nothing wrong with other parts, but it is still an unfriendly number (this radiation amount is equivalent to the radiation amount of a person in a year).
Careful not to drop it!
Love your work. Very poetic stream of pictures in the image section (29:27). Just today I acquired this lens (new version F22) at the flee market. Will try it out (again) within the next week. As far as i remember, some years ago, I was more thrilled by my Hexanon 50mm F1.7. Thank you for this review!
P.S. your beer into .... (cheap beer will do it) ..... this endorses: any 50mm lens will do as well? Did you intend that?
I did not mean to make a connection between cheap beer and cheap lenses, but I am of the opinion that tools (and beer) don't necessarily need to be expensive to be good.
Should you ever come back to this video, I want you to know that based on my experience, the f1. 4-16 is substantionally better than the f1. 4-22!
Is it now? I just bought one a couple of days ago and I'm eagerly expecting it to arrive.
However, everything I could find online said these two variants have identical optics.
Why do you say they are different?
Dude, does F22 radioactive?
@@alanyoung877 no, there is no indication whatsoever that the f22 is radioactive. I am quite confident it's not.
Loved the review! I've just bought this and will use it on my fujifilm xt1. You had me laughing out loud when you got to the radioactive part!
Great photos, I can't wait to use the lens
I'm happy I was useful to you and I'm even happier I was able to make you laugh.
The lens is indeed a fantastic one. It's my favourite lens by far!
@@1kwords ill do a UA-cam video once I've given it a try. Why not jump over to my channel and see id there's anything you like!
@@acecreates I have already subscribed. I'll have a look once work I'm done with work.
@@1kwords much obliged- I've subscribed to you too!
Congratulations again Radu on another enjoyable video in your own entertaining and individual style :-) I really love your images, for the art and for the insights into life in Roumania. I have two copies of the 50 1.7, later smaller versions, both from Konica TC cameras, the first camera has faults, I couldn't resist when someone in my city sold an immaculate working TC. The first 1.7 lens has disappointed me, I haven't yet tried the second copy. The reputation of being the sharpest ever lens came I believe from a 1970s magazine review, maybe perspectives have changed :-)
Great video.
Just accidentally came across your videos and quite like the mood.
Never knew about the Konica lenses and actually found one cheap in my city here - Sofia, but it turns out there are no adapters from Konica AR for my camera ( a rare sigma SA mount), neither are found AR to M42, as I have such an adaptor...
I so much would have liked to have a dangerous lens :)
There is an adaptor for Sony, which I guess you have used.
Greetings from Bulgaria and keep up the mood.
Haha, it's not that dangerous after all, I am slightly overstating the facts making it all sound more dangerous than it really is.
I'm glad you're enjoying my content.
omg i started watching in 2021 and finished in 2022 its over. but man the ending was nice
UA-cam algorithm probably combined my interest in Romanian music and photography and gave me this video on my timeline😂
Hope you enjoyed it.
@@1kwords Yes, found it very interesting.
Konica 28mm f/ 3.5. it is radiactive ?
Not that I know of.
OMG such beautiful photos!!
Thank you so much.
"Don't tape it to your head and sleep with it for a few years..." LOL
got the lens. looks great :) thanks!
These ones are going up, I love this little lens, really like it… well as far as radioactive the Takumar is well..will the sun remove it..
Tha sun will only remove the yellow tint, not the radioactivity itself.
Oh no….. but I do like this lens lovely little thing….
Seriously good portraits!
Thank you.
By the way great images, reminds to me the Leica look
Thanks, glad you like.
Thank you for this video. As a lover of Minolta lenses, I was also interested in learning about this lens. And you presented the material well. (excellent English, by the way). But as for the "flaw" of this lens - this is really unnecessary precaution. I mean, are you serious? :D Who really cares about this radioactivity? It's there in such meager amounts. Besides - you yourself mentioned exceptional cases. All in all, it never stopped people. It was also interesting to learn about this encyclopedia that you mentioned. Now curious - where can I read it. But the biggest question I have is about wider angle lenses. The thing is... 50 mm for me is perhaps one of the most inconvenient focal lengths. It does not allow you to capture more general shots and at the same time does not allow you to capture an enlarged isolated scene or portrait. And all my life I am perplexed by the fact that for some reason it is considered standard and close to the human angle of view. And this question haunts me all the time. Why the hell is 50 mm considered the most versatile? In fact, the human eye sees much wider - even wider than 35 mm. Of course, we see the periphery out of focus, but we still register it. I would say that 35 mm is closer to being called really approximately equivalent to the human angle of view. So, Radu - is there the same high-quality sharp lens but 35 ? In the same line, perhaps? I mean lenses that you personally like with this range. (Sony a7 III + a few adapters).
There is radioactivity all around - just from the cosmic background radiation and such. Sick patients who receive radioactive implants are safe to walk around and socialize, touch other people
I love this video, I don't know why...
I'm very happy you enjoyed it. Thanks for dropping by.
I go here for sample photos to make sure that this lens has soap bubble bokeh balls, but you are saying in sad like my father.
50 f1.7 is good enough, not heavy, less soft
Yeah, it's even suppoesd to be a little sharper than the 1.4.
what about the 57mm 1.2, thats the one i really want lol
I don't have that one so I can't say, but I hear it's really good.
O arzi pe bere ieftinake :)))
După posibilități...
Haha radioactive. Well, so are Takumars.
Yes they are.
Bere de la Ciucas si muzica de la Vanghelis
Muzica e Chad Crouch, nu Vanghelis.
Too late
Haha!
Do your research!! The amount of radioactivity is minimal.
I've done my research and had you watched the video you probably would have not made this comment, because my conclusion was that the lens is generally safe.
35 minutes of nonsense... Sorry but THUMBS DOWN.
Thank you.
Bla bla bla bla all video! Where test and photo? Not good bloger
Images start at the end. Min 29. Learn to internet.