I was wondering if any experience or a page using a Takumar 300mm f4 on 5D.
Specifically an mirror problems?
The best I could tell from Google in that it is usually the shot lens that hit but I could not find any direct experiences.
Feel free to discuss any other 300mm f4/2.8 or 400mm/ 500mm lens as well
I have a 100-400 L but would like to look at some other options.
Have you tried the 400 F5.6? IMHO it is one of Canon's best lenses. Though I enjoyed my 100-400 immensely I found that once I bought the 400 there was just no going back. If I had to dump all but two Canon lenses I would keep the 400 f5.6 and the 135 F2. You can get a 3rd party lens cover from Art Morris to disguise the canon-isness.
SJMD wrote:
I was wondering if any experience or a page using a Takumar 300mm f4 on 5D.
Specifically an mirror problems?
The best I could tell from Google in that it is usually the shot lens that hit but I could not find any direct experiences.
Feel free to discuss any other 300mm f4/2.8 or 500mm lens as well
I have a 100-400 L but would like to look at some other options.
Thanks in advance.
steve
I used to have the 300/5.6 Tak, and if I remember correctly the back of the lens was pretty flush with the adapter. Most (all?) telephoto lenses don't poke into the box at all. I would think it would work fine, but maybe someone else here knows for sure.
This is what I have:
Takumar SMC 300mm F4 M42 mount
Zeiss Jena 300mm F4 P6/M42 mount
Nikon AIS 300mm 2.8 LD
Tamron 300mm 2.8 LD adaptall mount version 2.
Tamron 200-500mm LD Xr Di Canon mount
The Takumar is nice but CA seems to be a big issue when shooting against contrast light. Very compact and nice color. works great with Vivitar 2X TC.
Zeiss Jena is great for portrait type of work. Not as sharp but nice bokeh and color.
The Nikon 300mm 2.8 AIS LD is a great lens to own. The build quality is not as nice as the Tamron. Not many choices for filter slots.
Lower CA than the Tarmon 300mm 2.8 LD version 2. Visible vignette at wide open. works great with 2X TC as well.
The Tamron 300mm 2.8 LD is slightly sharper than Nikon. However, CA is more visible when shooting against contrast light. No Vignette issue. better focus mechanism than Nikon. works great with 2X TC as well.
The Tamron 200-500mm 5.6~6.3 LD Xr Di is an excellent lens. Light weight and easy to travel with. AF is slower than the Canon USM but that's my least worry. Tack sharp and works great with 1.4X Tamron/Kenko and Canon 2X tele-converters.
(yellow green) CA present some issues with the Takumar 300/4 on a 5D. If you want a super 300mm manual focus lens, look for a 300mm f4.5 ED. Especially the non IF ED version.
I can recommend the non-IF, non-ED, AIS version Nikon 300/4.5. I tried one at a local shop and it was so good I had to buy it. I know there is one other user on this forum that's also very happy with this lens. While I was at the shop I had my 1.4x Canon TC with me and put it on for a couple test shots. I was really surprised by the result:
. Tommy Lee wrote:
(yellow green) CA present some issues with the Takumar 300/4 on a 5D. If you want a super 300mm manual focus lens, look for a 300mm f4.5 ED. Especially the non IF ED version.
It does look like there are alot of Nikkor 300 around and the Takumar is in good supply. I really like the look of the takumar in the 50 mm - but is sounds it must be a different look at 300? both are much less that the canon L.
With the price of the Pentax SMC 300/4 being roughly the same as the Nikon 300/4.5 AIS non-ED, non-IF, which would be the better buy? How well would either one work with Canon's 1.4x EFII?
I'm just beginning to experiment with the 300+ focal length range, so I don't yet how much shooting I'll be doing at this FL. The Nikon 300/4.5 EDIF is ~$400, and I'm not sure yet if its performance can justify the added costs, especially since I have heard its performance with teleconverters is lacking.
s23chang wrote:
This is what I have:
Takumar SMC 300mm F4 M42 mount
Zeiss Jena 300mm F4 P6/M42 mount
Nikon AIS 300mm 2.8 LD
Tamron 300mm 2.8 LD adaptall mount version 2.
Tamron 200-500mm LD Xr Di Canon mount
The Takumar is nice but CA seems to be a big issue when shooting against contrast light. Very compact and nice color. works great with Vivitar 2X TC.
Zeiss Jena is great for portrait type of work. Not as sharp but nice bokeh and color.
I would have to agree. The Carl Zeiss Jena 300 f4 MC Sonnar has very nice bokeh and color. I have one in the P6 mount. It's not going to be a sharp as a modern 300mm lens (like Canon's, for example). It is, after all, designed with a much bigger image circle for medium format. But a late, "MC" could be sharp enough for a lot of things (certainly for portraits, and it will be sharp into the corners on a FF sensor), and it can be a low cost alternative for a 300mm lens, especially if you don't really find you use or need a 300mm lens all that often.
