[ChristianRock]

Thanks, ChristianRock. I like the Ricoh lenses. Besides the 50mm 1.4, I also owned 28-100mm F4, 70-150 F 3.5 and the 70-210 F4. They are called the "Rikenons big three" by the photographers at my country. I am selling the 50mm 1.7 now, since I think the 1.4 version is better built.

The 1.4 is better built, but it's at least twice as heavy. And the 1.7 is sharper wide open and has better colors - at least my Sears branded Rikenon does. It's so nice and light and small, I end up keeping all 3 (I have the f2 as well since I paid 10 dollars for it...)

On my trip to Portugal last year, the 50 1.7 made a really nice combo with the Pentax 35 2.4 for a nice light street photography setup. This year I'll buy a Sigma 24 2.8 Superwide II to add to that setup - or a Rikenon 24 2.8 if I can ever find one!

[ivanvernon]

I played around with my new Rikenon lens today, another addition to my growing 50 mm collection. I removed the back fastening plate by taking out the 4 small Phillips screws, and was then able to remove the great dreaded Ricoh pin. With the pin out, I felt safe in mounting it to the K-3. It is evening, so my test shots were inside with flash, but the results look quite sharp.

This lens has the P setting, which is in somewhat the same position where you would look for an A setting on Pentax-A lenses. The P setting apparently has no function on Pentax cameras, and most likely served on the Ricoh native cameras as an A setting does on Pentax cameras,. Setting the lens on the P setting produces a tiny aperture, smaller than the f 16 of the lens, and the P setting may be f 22. I found that you can get a decent image using the P setting by jacking up the ISO setting to around ISO 800 on the K-3, but I suppose there must be some falloff in IQ at such a small aperture.

With this lens, it appears that you can manually set your own desired aperture and shutter speed without using the green button, when using manual mode, so I thought, Oh boy, this thing is working like an old preset lens so I don't have to worry about the green button. Then I tried it on Av mode, and find that when you manually set the aperture, the K-3 will set the appropriate shutter speed for correct exposure. Nice! I have to try the Av mode tomorrow in daylight, but the lens is definitely looking good to me. It is a little heavy at 8.9 oz, but nothing like my converted Canon FD 50 mm f 1:1.2 at a hair over 16 oz.!

I will appreciate comments from anyone who is using this lens to correct my impressions or offer new information that may be useful in using it.

ADDED NOTE: I dug out my Sears 50 mm f 1.4, and it appears quite similar to the Rikenon 1.4--52 mm filter, same colors, similar lettering, same aperture settings, similar grip surfaces on focussing and aperture setting rings.

[Dewman]

I played around with my new Rikenon lens today, another addition to my growing 50 mm collection. I removed the back fastening plate by taking out the 4 small Phillips screws, and was then able to remove the great dreaded Ricoh pin. With the pin out, I felt safe in mounting it to the K-3. It is evening, so my test shots were inside with flash, but the results look quite sharp.

This lens has the P setting, which is in somewhat the same position where you would look for an A setting on Pentax-A lenses. The P setting apparently has no function on Pentax cameras, and most likely served on the Ricoh native cameras as an A setting does on Pentax cameras,. Setting the lens on the P setting produces a tiny aperture, smaller than the f 16 of the lens, and the P setting may be f 22. I found that you can get a decent image using the P setting by jacking up the ISO setting to around ISO 800 on the K-3, but I suppose there must be some falloff in IQ at such a small aperture.

With this lens, it appears that you can manually set your own desired aperture and shutter speed without using the green button, when using manual mode, so I thought, Oh boy, this thing is working like an old preset lens so I don't have to worry about the green button. Then I tried it on Av mode, and find that when you manually set the aperture, the K-3 will set the appropriate shutter speed for correct exposure. Nice! I have to try the Av mode tomorrow in daylight, but the lens is definitely looking good to me. It is a little heavy at 8.9 oz, but nothing like my converted Canon FD 50 mm f 1:1.2 at a hair over 16 oz.!

I will appreciate comments from anyone who is using this lens to correct my impressions or offer new information that may be useful in using it.

ADDED NOTE: I dug out my Sears 50 mm f 1.4, and it appears quite similar to the Rikenon 1.4--52 mm filter, same colors, similar lettering, same aperture settings, similar grip surfaces on focussing and aperture setting rings.

Ivanvernon, I had all my 50mm lenses out last night and like you, I noticed a remarkable similarity between the Sears f:2 & the Ricoh f:1.7. They are almost identical in physical configuration.... lettering, colors, grip surface & aperture rings. The only real difference is the size of the maximum aperture opening and the "P" marking on the aperture ring. So.... I think it's safe to say that the Sears lens was made by Ricoh.... or at least THIS one. I haven't had time to do any real practical optical comparison yet, but I'm looking forward to it.

[Pixel-8]

I think I have all the versions of versions of the Rikenon 50/2. The all metal XR, the more plastic "L" and "S" and the tiny plastic 50/2 "P" All really good.

Have never owned a copy of any of the Rikenon 50/1.7s. I skipped over those and went for the 50/1.4s (Rikenon "P" 50/1.4 and MC Sears 50/1.4 which I am pretty sure is the same as the Rikenon XR 50/14)

Has anyone here done a full comparison of all the Rikenon 50-55 lenses??

[Pixel-8]

Here (top) is a shot with the XR Rikenon 50/2 "L" lens (don't think it means "limited"). For comparison a shot with Pentax smc-m 50/1.7 (bottom)

[ChristianRock]

Rikenon XR 28 2.8

[Pixel-8]

The 1.4 is better built, but it's at least twice as heavy. And the 1.7 is sharper wide open and has better colors - at least my Sears branded Rikenon does. It's so nice and light and small, I end up keeping all 3 (I have the f2 as well since I paid 10 dollars for it...)

On my trip to Portugal last year, the 50 1.7 made a really nice combo with the Pentax 35 2.4 for a nice light street photography setup. This year I'll buy a Sigma 24 2.8 Superwide II to add to that setup - or a Rikenon 24 2.8 if I can ever find one!

Christian, I'm pretty sure that the Rikenon 24/2.8 was built by Sigma.

I had a perfectly new Sigma 24/2.8 Superwide II here for sale for awhile, but I took it down, no interest. -Pixel

[ChristianRock]

Christian, I'm pretty sure that the Rikenon 24/2.8 was built by Sigma.

I had a perfectly new Sigma 24/2.8 Superwide II here for sale for awhile, but I took it down, no interest. -Pixel

From the pictures I've seen of it and from it (the Rikenon 24 2.8, at least the XR version) doesn't look like the Sigma at all. I think it was a Rikenon own design, as the pictures look a lot like the 28mm (which I like a lot but it's also very different from other brands color rendering).

Was your Sigma the AF version or the MF version? I had almost saved up the money to buy one recently (MF version) by selling some other things... then my wife found a use for the money... again...

[Pixel-8]

Christian: It is the MF version, with the "A" setting. PM me separately, if you are interested.

---------- Post added 02-04-15 at 09:03 AM ----------

Yes you are right the earlier XR version looks like it may have been Ricoh's own build. Or a Pentax clone. Not many of those around. Maybe it was the Rikenon 16/2.8 I was thinking of.

[ChristianRock]

28 2.8 again

[ivanvernon]

With the K-3 and Rikenon 50mm f 1.4, handheld, no post. I have just begun exploring this Rikenon lens. I have had it for a while, but only recently worked up the courage to take apart the mount to remove the deadly Ricoh pin. So far I find the lens quite good. Sharpness and rendering are good. Bokeh is very nice at f 1.4, and sharpness as in these portraits is excellent at f 8.0 when you do not need bokeh. This is a manual lens without an A setting, so I use it with the K-3 in manual mode and using the green button to set shutter speed. With the K-3, the lens "finds" focus easily, much better than most of my manual lenses. I use "catch in focus" and keep the beep sound on to tell when focus is achieved, so I don't have to fuss around too much. Shutter speeds, set by green button on the whole series of 8 portraits, were from 1/5 to 1/13 seconds, and these were handheld, so I maybe could have gotten more sharpness by using a tripod.

NOTE: Well EXIF is making a liar out of me. Shutter speeds from first to last of these four shots actually are 1/.50, 1/20, 1/13, and 1/10 seconds.

[Dewman]

With the K-3 and Rikenon 50mm f 1.4, handheld, no post. I have just begun exploring this Rikenon lens. I have had it for a while, but only recently worked up the courage to take apart the mount to remove the deadly Ricoh pin. So far I find the lens quite good. Sharpness and rendering are good. Bokeh is very nice at f 1.4, and sharpness as in these portraits is excellent at f 8.0 when you do not need bokeh. This is a manual lens without an A setting, so I use it with the K-3 in manual mode and using the green button to set shutter speed. With the K-3, the lens "finds" focus easily, much better than most of my manual lenses. I use "catch in focus" and keep the beep sound on to tell when focus is achieved, so I don't have to fuss around too much. Shutter speeds, set by green button on the whole series of 8 portraits, were from 1/5 to 1/13 seconds, and these were handheld, so I maybe could have gotten more sharpness by using a tripod.

NOTE: Well EXIF is making a liar out of me. Shutter speeds from first to last of these four shots actually are 1/.50, 1/20, 1/13, and 1/10 seconds.

Removing the Ricoh pin is a piece of cake after you've done it once, huh? I have a50mm f:1.7 Ricoh and a 28mm f:2.8 Ricoh, but have yet to do anything with them.

[ivanvernon]

Removing the Ricoh pin is a piece of cake after you've done it once, huh? I have a50mm f:1.7 Ricoh and a 28mm f:2.8 Ricoh, but have yet to do anything with them.

Yes, the main thing is to have a good screwdriver at hand to do the work. It is a matter of removing three tiny screws, removing the base plate, removing the exposed pin, and replacing the three screws. I "fixed" three lenses the day I undertook this task, and have one still to do because I can find no way to dismount the base plate.

[Dewman]

Yes, the main thing is to have a good screwdriver at hand to do the work. It is a matter of removing three tiny screws, removing the base plate, removing the exposed pin, and replacing the three screws. I "fixed" three lenses the day I undertook this task, and have one still to do because I can find no way to dismount the base plate.

I usually have no problem removing the base plate, but recently, I removed two of the three screws but the third would only spin and spin and NOT unscrew from it's hole! I finally gave up and used a Dremel Tool to grind down the pin so it wouldn't hang up. Only time I ever had THAT happen! Very frustrating.

[ivanvernon]

I usually have no problem removing the base plate, but recently, I removed two of the three screws but the third would only spin and spin and NOT unscrew from it's hole! I finally gave up and used a Dremel Tool to grind down the pin so it wouldn't hang up. Only time I ever had THAT happen! Very frustrating.

If there was a way to put a little gentle pressure from inside the base plate, pushing outward, the screw might have backed out. Then of course, you would probably never get it back in. Actually, a good quality glue is very capable of holding on the baseplate, although I really prefer screws since my Canon FL 55 mm f 1.2 fell off when the glue gave way. Right now I have a little problem with an Auto Yashica-DS 50 mm f 1.4 screw mount. It has no screws on the base plate, and there are only three tiny screws up on the barrel of the lens forward of the aperture ring. These appear to be standard slot screws, but about one-third the size of the regular baseplate screws on other lens I have worked on. Maybe the drimmel is the answer; as small as these screws are, it seems to me that there is a high probability of stripping the screws.