I've been looking at some of the excellent samples from the Takumar series of lenses both here and elsewhere. It's got me wondering what would be a good lens to try one out? M42 mount, something relatively cheap and easy to find. Any suggestions?
SMC and Super-Multi-Coated will ensure "Zeiss-like" colour, but even more natural. Contrasty, but more blue kick than green kick. I like it better. YMMV.
The Auto-Taks and Super-Taks have a more classic, lower contrast feel to them. On the 50/1.4 this works perfectly with it's fickle bokeh, but on the 200/4 and 135/3.5, I highly recommend sticking to either of the multi-coated versions.
It is sort of a "choose-your-focal-length-and-lens-signature-and-go-with-it" deal. They're all great, but some are greater.
BTW, I hope you have some Zeiss around to compare focusing rings directly. I've had my hands on a lot of Zeiss, but nothing comes close to my well loved Super-Tak 50/1.4.
Oh, and the 50/1.4 *does* have mirror issues on the 5D, so for Tariq and the gang, I'll say try the 55/1.8 (preferably multi-coated).
Any info on the 150 f4? I saw a used one locally. Is the 50 f1.4 superior to the 55mm variants featured in the other thread?
The 150/4 is kind of an odd ball...it's one of the less popular Taks, but it's just as good as any of the others. I have one, used mostly for macro work with a diopter stuck on the end of it. It's slower than the 135, but not as long as the 200...maybe that's why it doesn't get that much attention. If you can get a deal on one, go for it.
I don't think there's any IQ difference between the 50 and 55...the 50 can just be had in a faster version, and is more popular. I have the 55/2 and I love it. I think the best bargains (bang for buck) are the 135/3.5 and 55/1.8 or 55/2. I've seen the 135 sell for as little as ten bucks...amazing for the performance it delivers. But, honestly any of the Super Taks/Super Multi Taks are a bargain, and are really excellent lenses.
Doug, i got a Super-Multi-Coated 200/4 from keh.com in "BGN" condition, it looks nice and is taking great shots, $41 (no idea why it was BGN, it has perfect glass and outside is clean, no scuff marks, just as clean as my EX lens)
My 135/3.5 is also a S-M-C for $59 from keh.com in "EX" rating.
Too bad their 35/2 is listed as LN- and priced accordingly, i will keep checking their BGN listings as i got lucky with both BGN lenses (other is a Zuiko 28/3.5, a little used looking but clean glass)
Or if you got the patience get the lower dollars deals off ebay.
I saw some shots ISO1600 posted on another thread, looks like a nice lens his nikon.
Your list of the transition of Pentax lens names from Takumar to Pentax is correct, but it gets more complicated when you get to the K-mounts, as the name Takumar was used for some non-SMC K-mount lenses. This is especially important to know if you're after a 135/2.5, as the SMC Pentax 135/2.5 and its earlier SMC Tak version are excellent lenses, but the Takumar (Bayonet) 135/2.5 which looks very similar to the SMC Pentax, is not nearly as good.
The SMC Macro-Takumar 50/4 is a peach! The SMC Takumar 85/1.8 is probably the best in this series, and the SMC Takumar 135/2.5 is not far behind.
nothing zeiss-like here- these lenses were calculated for sheer optical performance, no secret formula or anything about them. also, the 35/2 hits the mirror all the time
the 85/1,8 I bought in an A+ condition cost less than 100 eur- wasted money- nothing beautiful about it. the 135's are equally crappy- the 2.5 is pretty bad at long distances.
I could only recommend the 50/1,4, which hits the mirror- so I don't recommend it
Airborne_ wrote:
nothing zeiss-like here- these lenses were calculated for sheer optical performance, no secret formula or anything about them. also, the 35/2 hits the mirror all the time
the 85/1,8 I bought in an A+ condition cost less than 100 eur- wasted money- nothing beautiful about it. the 135's are equally crappy- the 2.5 is pretty bad at long distances.
I could only recommend the 50/1,4, which hits the mirror- so I don't recommend it
I take it you're using a 5D? I haven't had any interference issues with my 1Ds, and I've had everything from a 28 to a 200 on it... The 5D seems to be the only camera in the Canon lineup that seems to have that problem. I'll agree that these lenses aren't magic...but then I don't find anything mystical in any of my L glass or Zeiss lenses either. Are there better lenses out there? Sure. For the money though, I'd like to see someone show me a lens that will outperform a Super Tak...
i used a 50/1.4 supertak on a 1Dmk1 and had mirror issues all day long at infinity focus... same w/ some film EOS, can't remember for sure which ones.
I personally think the M42 Pentax lenses are a nostalgic trend that really holds no water or value. The cameras that shoot those lenses natively are more boring than the Nikon or Olympus equivalents, and i just hate screwing lenses on. They go for 2 or 3 times as much on the used market than they did in 2004, and there's no reason other than rabid fanfare.
Nikon and Olympus made millions, maybe billions of great cheap lenses.
Unfortunately, the Zuikos are really starting to catch on also!
ISO1600 wrote:
i used a 50/1.4 supertak on a 1Dmk1 and had mirror issues all day long at infinity focus... same w/ some film EOS, can't remember for sure which ones.
That's interesting...I think that's the first time I've heard of a 1 series with a mirror problem on that lens. I don't have a 50/1.4...maybe it pokes into the box farther than the other lenses. I've got a 55/2 and it works great...
ISO1600 wrote:
I personally think the M42 Pentax lenses are a nostalgic trend that really holds no water or value. The cameras that shoot those lenses natively are more boring than the Nikon or Olympus equivalents, and i just hate screwing lenses on. They go for 2 or 3 times as much on the used market than they did in 2004, and there's no reason other than rabid fanfare.
I respectfully disagree. Although, I don't use them on the "boring" cameras and have no need to screw anything once the M42-EOS adapter is on there. The adapters are cheap and good enough to just buy one for each lens. They go for 2 or 3 times what they used to because people are trying them and loving them. Despite their price increase, they are still a bargain compared to other brands and they do perform very well, in my experience. Sample variation may have lead some to conclude that they suck, but that is ultimately meaningless. I had a Distagon 28/2.8 that sucked, but I didn't conclude that Zeiss is over-rated.
Scott Clark wrote:
I take it you're using a 5D? I haven't had any interference issues with my 1Ds, and I've had everything from a 28 to a 200 on it... The 5D seems to be the only camera in the Canon lineup that seems to have that problem.
Have you tried any other canon camera? they won't work either on my eos 300 or 33v
Airborne_ wrote:
Have you tried any other canon camera? they won't work either on my eos 300 or 33v
Never used them on a film body, but I used a pile of them on my 10D with no problems... I'm pretty sure none of the crop sensor cameras have an issue, but I've heard of the 5D hitting a lot of different wide lenses at infinity focus.
I don't know, i am quite happy with that shot if we just talk sharpeness test shot at f/3.5.
I'm with cogitech, i ordered some generic EF rear lens caps that stay on my M42, OM and C/Y adapters, only one i would consider changing lenses on adapter, is OM, nice lens release on the lenses.
Adapters for M42 are $10 shipped if you don't need a collar to depress the auto aperture pin, the Takumars have a auto/manual switch, so no need.
I got all my adapters from kawamall on ebay, work great.
I guess I should have been more specific in that I'm looking at the m42 mount and have a 1ds2 -- no issues so far with the mirror on any lens. I'm mostly using these lens for landscape and panorama type of photographs so wide open performance is really unimportant. In addition I find it enjoyable to research, locate, and experiment with some of these old lenses. While most of the bargain lenses I'm sure are either not up to modern standards or are just too beat up and neglected, I think I've found a few that work very well.
The Takumars are widely available and cheap so if there are a few gems I'd really like to give them a spin.
