Not from my own experiences - I only have the Konica III with the Hexanon 48mm f/2. In my eyes it's very sharp in the range of up to 3-4 meters.
Like any other lens the Hexanon likes to be stopped down one ore two apertures.
I have the IIIa with 50mm f/1.8, but as I don't have the 48mm f/2 it's hard for me to make any definitive statement as to comparative sharpness. I will say that my IIIa has a wonderful viewfinder, and when I had it CLA'd I had the interlink between f/stop and shutter speed disabled, so that each could be set independently of the other -- the EV system interlock really slowed down adjustments. My IIIa is perhaps the quietest camera I own; it's leaf shutter has a very soft sound when released.
Thanks. I once had a 48mm f2 on an SII which produced wonderful images, but wondering whether i should get the 50mm f1.8 version or not. One thing I did not like was the pentagonal aperture blades.
I hope you report back with your findings. I'm curious as to which is the better lens. I had the III with 48mm f2 and loved that lens for the way it rendered a scene. Sharp, but not to sharp so to speak.
I will be so happy when this "wide open" fascination has run it's course. Just my personal rant. But if you must, I have found the Helios-44-2 to be exquisite. If you can find a way to mount it to your Konica it would be worth the effort. The lens is super cheap and is quite sharp when stopped down.
Eric, unfortunately wide open is the only way of getting perfect highlight circles in the bokeh. And, yes, I've had people tell me not to worry about the highlight shapes, but I've used the 48mm f2 lens and I find the pentagons very distracting.