| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 1:12 am Post subject: An evening walk with Asahi Takumar 2.4/58 |
 |
|
alex ph wrote:
Some city shots made with Asahi Takumar 2.4/58 (Heliar design, M37 thread mount). The last examples showing after crashes here in the forum go back to 2007-2010. The presented are not the most illustrative ones, as long as they are taken in the dim light. But I had a mood to try that.
The camera is NEX-5, ISO 400-800, aperture varies from f2.4 to f4. Contrast and colour tweaks are applied.
#1 Close up through an art shop window
#2 A larger distance, chrome surface and urban lights
#3 A difficult (artificial) light situation, coping with the contrast
#4 Portrait distance, pretty sharp when well focused
#5 A cityscape, visible (and interesting) low contrast without degraded sharpness and a rather low microcontrast
#6 A cityscape converted to BW, typical Heliar transitions
#7 A BW stylization (harder image tweaks)
When tweaking the shots, I recognize Heliar behaviour that lacks the plasticity of Planar having a much wider dynamic range. Heliar's one is narrower letting contrasts more difficult to polarize. The first instinctive move is to push them much further. But then you realize again that this is the lens' specialty. The shots just look more tempered and thus more "solid". |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Quite beautiful results.
The sharpness is evident and the rendering very pleasing
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Thank you, Tom!
In the recent months I play from time to time with the NIK processing set you once suggested and that you use for your BWs. It's a real joy of experiment with different options, giving quite plausible results for film imitation and attractively saturated BW.
Here I proceed with a Takumar 2.4/58 shot put through Analog and Silver apps of the NIK set:
For comparison, here is the original shot with simple tweaks of colours and contrast, more recognizable for its low contrast Heliar signature
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Adding now some more "traditional" shots, taken under day light, at f4.
The lens shows itself quite contrasty, and when auto-contrast is applied the colours are vivid and the Heliar "muted" rendition is less apparent. The sharpness is really good from f2.8, while at lower apertures (up to f5.6) the corners might be fuzzy even with an APS-C camera.
The lens' specialty clearly maintained in preserving highlights (the sky is never washed out) and in OOF objects keeping shapes, less dissolved than by many other (Planar) lenses.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sergtum
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 735
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
sergtum wrote:
nice shots!!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sergtum
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 735
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
sergtum wrote:
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
Does the M42 Preset variant have a similar optical formula?
|
i think that the M42 Preset variant have not a similar optical formula. may be i'm wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2020 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11026
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Gerjan van Oosten says in his "The Ultimate ASAHI Pentax Screw Mount Guide" says the preset P-mount retains the "Same optical design as the lens for the Asahiflex models. Lens barrel isxquite different though!". He list the older lens as 230g; newer at 150g.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sergtum
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 735
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
sergtum wrote:
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
| sergtum wrote: |
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
Does the M42 Preset variant have a similar optical formula?
|
i think that the M42 Preset variant have not a similar optical formula. may be i'm wrong. |
Is it possible to confirm or deny without taking the lens apart? 
|
I wrote that I could be wrong. I don’t quite understand the difference in Takumar lenses. There is a table by link
http://www.klassik-cameras.de/Pentax_Takumar_e.html
What lenses are under study? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11026
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
It's confusing. 
The lenses being discussed are shown in the first two tables 58/2.4 entries.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11026
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
Ironically, That link may have caused me to raise the question.
Curious there was a notation for the M42 version 4/6 ? 3/5.
I wonder if that means there was speculation of a change in the design during SLR production? |
Gerjan would've mentioned that IMHO. I'm not sure where AOHC got that 4/6? Pentaxforums doesn't https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Takumar-58mm-F2.4.html
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Thank you, sergtum!
Samples taken with both versions of the lens, the one with M37 and the one with M42 on pentaxforums, have the same recognizable low contrast / dense bokeh signature. I'd say the information about the same optic formula of both versions is correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2020 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2020 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
A very nice shot! And estonishingly good contrast for this lens in low light. Did you shoot wide open? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:59 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1674
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
A follow up of our exchange with BlazerOne about this M37 version of the lens (Heliar) and his M42 version (Planar):
The rendering of the M42 lens version is just fine. For me it stands very well in front of high end Planars and has its personal touch. OOF astigmatism that is noted by BlazerOne makes it event more interesting.
Compared to it, the m37 version and Heliars in general have a "heavier" background. I mean that in reality it is not at all always "smooth", as described when one speaks on the Heliar's mertis. To get "smooth" and "airy" transitions form OOF to in-focus, you need quite good or special light conditions. If you look at my examples taken in greysih light or just imperfect light conditions, with this Takumar, with Kodak enlarging Ektar or the clasic German Heliar, you'll easily notice a kind of grey cast which works well on BW but does not really makes a birthday present in colour. From this point of view, I assume that Planars giving much better contrast and brighter OOF are better all-round lenses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 2536
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Both m37 and m42 variant are Heliar 5/3. https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--24-f58.html Maybe people are getting confused with the 58/2 Sonnar Takumar that was also Launched with the Asahi Pentax system. That is is 6/4. This is by my m37 copy that arrived yesterday.
 Rock rider by The lens profile, on Flickr
_________________
pentaxian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11026
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
From https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--24-f58.html
https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--2-f58.html
https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--22-f55.html
https://takumarguide.weebly.com/takumarology.html
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
