racoll wrote:
Wow! This thread is getting me pretty excited about using an SMC Takumar 50/1.4 that I just got with a Pentax ES. I've used the Super Tak 50/1.4 on a Pentax Spotmatic, but would like to try using the SMC Tak 50/1.4 on my 7D. What adapter would any of you recommend?
Andy
I have the non chipped fotodiox pro m42 to EOS adapter, and it works perfectly. It pays to get brass, they don't get stuck and they last. It was less than $20.
ShaneEngelking wrote:
I have the non chipped fotodiox pro m42 to EOS adapter, and it works perfectly. It pays to get brass, they don't get stuck and they last. It was less than $20.
There were many minor design changes among the Takumar to Super-Takumar to SMC Takumar versions. Some involved more (or less) elements. Lens coatings were also a major feature. The SMC coating was and still is considered among the best. Super-Takumars has a single coating, while SMC Taks had multiple layers. The K-mount versions had essentially the same coatings with a "modern" bayonet mount.
M
pmcmanis wrote:
I hope this isn't off topic but would someone detail the differences between the takumars and their equivalent K mount lenses? Esp. the 50mm f1.4.
Last week I borrowed a friend's 5DMKII to test out how well it worked with my sweet and ancient SMC Takumar M42 f4 macro lens at our tiny "airport." I thought I'd push the ISO up to 6400 for the fun of it too.
racoll wrote:
Any issues with focusing at infinity?
With no modification except the adapter on a 5D2, it gets to about 15 meters before it touches (didn't notice this until you asked). I never really focused it that far in real world use, and if I ever needed to focus to infinity, i would use live view. I prefer to use hyperfocal distance rather than infinity, so not really an issue for me at all.
Yep, winter is on the way... So it's a flash of yellows, oranges, and reds as the winter freezes prepare to roll over the lands. (well unless you're in Australia )
Kewl Wagon! Seeing shots like these always set me to thinking about restoring them. A wire wheel, some woodworking tools, and a make-shift forge could really bring this baby into the 21st century! Of course I'd wanna put a rubber friction drive electric motor on it when done though.
Super-Tak 50/1.4 @ f/1.4, 1/250s, ISO320, On the GH1
Super-Takumars in fact have primitive multi-coating with 3-4 layers (typical for most mid-late 60's lenses that are referred to as single-coated), SMC is 7+ layers, a far more advanced coating. Auto-Takumars are single-coated.
As to differences, some lenses changed little (there's few differences from the second Super-Takumar 50/1.4 version through the modern SMC Pentax-FA 50/1.4) but other lenses changed dramatically, the 28/3.5 for example, which comes in 4 completely different versions and only two are at all related (the second Super version, which is optically the same as the SMC version and the SMC Pentax version is a more complex variation, the SMC Pentax-M and first Super-Takumar versions are quite different).
There were many minor design changes among the Takumar to Super-Takumar to SMC Takumar versions. Some involved more (or less) elements. Lens coatings were also a major feature. The SMC coating was and still is considered among the best. Super-Takumars has a single coating, while SMC Taks had multiple layers. The K-mount versions had essentially the same coatings with a "modern" bayonet mount.
Please share your "factual" data that contradicts my statement that Super-Taks have a single coating. I'm willing to concede that a few models may have multi-coated components, as Asahi was experimenting significantly.
Here's my source based on the Asahi Optical Historical Club data.
M
mawz wrote:
Super-Takumars in fact have primitive multi-coating with 3-4 layers (typical for most mid-late 60's lenses that are referred to as single-coated), SMC is 7+ layers, a far more advanced coating. Auto-Takumars are single-coated.
[deleted]
It's easily visible in the lenses, look at the coatings compared to earlier Auto-Takumars. The visible difference in the coatings indicates the more complex coatings of the early 3-4 layer coatings.
What most people refer to as Single Coating is in fact primitive multi-coating by the mid-1960's, usually 3-4 layer. The reason why these are usually referred to as single-coated lenses is because the fairly significant difference in performance between the primitive 3-4 layer coatings and the modern coatings with 7 or more layers which would show up in the early 70's (and that's also why Pentax calls its coatings Super Multi Coating).
A truly single-coated lens will have only one coating colour in the reflections (I've got one in front of me now, a circa-1955 Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4 in LTM mount).
MDelinquento wrote:
Please share your "factual" data that contradicts my statement that Super-Taks have a single coating. I'm willing to concede that a few models may have multi-coated components, as Asahi was experimenting significantly.
Here's my source based on the Asahi Optical Historical Club data.
)
