| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:04 am Post subject: Crappy Tele-Takumar 300/6.3 |
 |
|
Laurence wrote:
At least that is what two fellow photographers have called this lens. Of course, neither has actually USED the lens. 
One of the guys said "it probably isn't much good, it's so slow"...
So when does a lens become crappy from "slowness"? 
Anyway, here is a quick shot of the old "standby" group of Daffodils.
Looks to me like it isn't crap after all!
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 6627
Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
The Takumar 300/6.3 is a bit of an odd lens. It does have a good reputation for performance though. I have been looking for a cheap one for quite some time.
_________________
I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
| luisalegria wrote: |
| The Takumar 300/6.3 is a bit of an odd lens. It does have a good reputation for performance though. I have been looking for a cheap one for quite some time. |
Yeah, I have been watching for a cheaper 300mm lens for a while too. I will eventually obtain the Sonnar 300/4, but wanted something that would at least be good enough for now.
I got this one for about $30, so I figured it was worth a try. I don't really care about speed, as most of my stuff is landscape anyway.
Yes, I thought it was rather an oddity too. I really didn't even know a Tele-Tak 300/6.3 existed until I saw it for sale.
It actually has a rather nice collapsible lens hood, not the usual "too short" lens hoods that sometimes are pinned onto tele lenses.
Here's a couple more - not processed, cropped.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rawhead
Joined: 09 Feb 2009
Posts: 1525
Location: Boston, MA
Expire: 2014-04-29
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
rawhead wrote:
Ah, I was going to come in and say "Hey, I'll be glad to take your crappy lens, if only you'd pay for shipping" but I guess that was not the point of the thread 
I like the mountain range shot quite a bit.
_________________
Sony α7R, Pentax 67II, Kiev-60, Hasselblad 203FE, 903SWC, Graflex Norita 66, Mamiya M645 1000s, Burke & James 8x10, Graflex Pacemaker Speed Graphic (4x5 and 3x4), Century Graphic (2x3), R.B. Graflex Seried D, Rolleiflex SL66E, Rolleiflex 2.8C Xenotar, Mamiya C330f, a few M42, six P6, three OM, four Hasselblad, two Pentax 67, two Mamiya 645, one Noritar, and a sprinkle of EF. Oh, and an Aero Ektar and Leica Noctilux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
| rawhead wrote: |
Ah, I was going to come in and say "Hey, I'll be glad to take your crappy lens, if only you'd pay for shipping" but I guess that was not the point of the thread
I like the mountain range shot quite a bit. |
Thanks Raw: Yes, it seems to be just fine, and will eventually be a very nice backup to the Sonnar 300. Thanks for the comment on the mountain shot. The Tele-Tak 6.3 seems to be fairly sharp overall, and has an acceptable amount of fringing...a little bit there, but not very much at all.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sven
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Posts: 818
Location: Linköping Sweden
Expire: 2011-12-29
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sven wrote:
The mountain range is really an excellent landscape shot.
Seems to be a nice enough lens.
I'm searching for at reasonably priced 300mm myself, mostly for wildlife photo I think. In that case I guess speed can be a bit more important.
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D200, Pentax *istDL, Nikon D100 IR converted
SLR: Pentax Spotmatic, Pentax ME,
Nikkor:N 2.8/24 H 3.5/28, 2/35, 2/50, 1.4/50 1.8/85, 3.5/50-135, E 2.8/100, P C 2.5/105, 2.8/135, 2.8/180 ED, 4/200,
M42: Pentacon 4/200, S Takumar 1.8/55, Meyer Orestor 2.8/135, CZJ Flektogon 2.4/35, CZJ Pancolar 1.8/50, CZJ Sonnar 3.5/135
AF Lenses: Nikkor 1.8/50, Pentax 18-55
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/29261959@N08/
Website http://www.hundbilder.nu/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
I saw lot of your nature work. I like it very much and here it is not the exception.
I like your contaflex 126 job too.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE
Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 5486
Location: Left Coast
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
Nice Larry
For $30 who can complain.
Curious about the build quality.
Does it fall in line with the rest of the Takumar family?
_________________
Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
Great shots Laurence!! 
The only time you will get a crappy Takumar is when it's broken 
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Dawg
Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 2530
Location: Thach Alabama
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Big Dawg wrote:
How dare youi get one before I do!!! LOL You know I've been wanting one of these Laurence! Crappy is as Crappy uses it in my book. I don't know what some people expect from a lens many years older than they are. In my experience and use the tele takumars are very good.
_________________
Big Dawg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Farside
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 6549
Location: Ireland
Expire: 2013-12-27
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Farside wrote:
That mountain shot is incredible, Larry.
_________________
Dave - Moderator
Camera Fiend and Biograph Operator
If I wanted soot and whitewash I'd be a chimney sweep and house painter.
The Lenses of Farside (click)
BUY FRESH FOMAPAN TO HELP KEEP THE FACTORY ALIVE ---
Foma Campaign topic -
http://forum.mflenses.com/foma-campaign-t55443.html
FOMAPAN on forum -
http://www.mflenses.com/fs.php?sw=Fomapan
Webshop EU
http://www.fomafoto.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Séamuis
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 157
Location: here & now
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Séamuis wrote:
I have one of these myself, and although its not as contrasty being from the early super-takumar era as a later S-M-C or SMC lens it performs extremely well. being a 6.3 and a takumar makes it quite small and light given what it is, ands this generally makes it easily hand holdable. the preset aperture is of course excellent. im curious about your lens hood because I am not aware of pentax ever making a collapsable lens hood for this lens. is it an aftermarket piece? mine has a typical screw on takumar metal hood 58mm.
_________________
Fish-Eye -- Fish-Eye-Takumar 1:11/18
WideAngle -- Super-Takumar 1:3.5/28, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3/35, Auto-Takumar 1:3.5/35, Super-Takumar 1:3.5/35
Normal -- S-M-C Takumar 1:1.4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:1.8/55, Super-Takumar 1:1.8/55, S-M-C Takumar 1:1.8/55, SMC Takumar 1:1.8/55, Auto-Takumar 1:2/55
TeleType -- S-M-C Takumar 1:1.8/85, S-M-C Takumar 1:2.8/105, Super-Takumar 1:3.5/135, Tele-Takumar 1:6.3/300
Zoom -- Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150
Macro -- Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, S-M-C Macro-Takumar 1:4/100, Bellows-Takumar 1:4/100
Medium Format -- S-M-C Takumar 6X7 1:2.8/90 LS
----------------------------------------
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterm1
Joined: 06 Dec 2007
Posts: 224
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterm1 wrote:
It is difficult to find any early Takumar that does not perform respectably and in many cases beautifully. I do no own this 300mm but but do have the f4 300mm (I think its f4 - I have not used it for a while.) Its sharp and its only sin is not very nice bokeh. The bokeh on your lens looks pretty good though. The slow Takumars like this one are especially good. The f5.6 200mm is another of these great performing sharp lenses. I once picked up a mint one of those lenses a bargain bin for $15.
In total I have around 20 or so Takumars, auto Takumars, Tele Takumars SMC Takumars etc - often variants and variants of variants. They are all interesting and fun. I am not using them much and should really offer them for sale as without exception they are in great condition but I find it hard to part with them especially the more sought after ones like the various 85mms. I do use them a bit on a digital body - a Panasonic L1 but should really do so more often.
_________________
PeterM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
Thanks for ALL of your interesting replies!
I mistakenly said the hood is a retractable type hood. It is actually a screw-on hood. A very effective screw-on hood, I might add.
I am looking forward to using the Takumar 300/6.3 on my Sigma SD-14.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scottyea
Joined: 29 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Location: Near Mount Warning, Australia.
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 1:35 am Post subject: adaptor for SMC 55mm Taks |
|
|
scottyea wrote:
| peterm1 wrote: |
| In total I have around 20 or so Takumars, auto Takumars, Tele Takumars SMC Takumars etc - |
Hi Peter, I'm accumulating a collection of these too, and have a couple that are causing a little grief - the 55mm SMC 1.8 & 2 lenses - they dont just have a pin they have another chunk of metal that scrapes into the inner edge of the m42/EOS adaptor and then the auto/manual switch jams. Do you know what I mean?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1389
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| peterm1 wrote: |
| It is difficult to find any early Takumar that does not perform respectably and in many cases beautifully. |
Well, mostly. It's not that the Takumar is necessarily bad, it's just that the (newer) competition is much better. The 300mm is definitely aged, and surpassed by the competition. I tested my S-M-C Takumar 300/4 against two other 300mm lenses (Nikkor*ED 300/4.5 and CZJ Sonnar 300/4), and it certainly trails them quite noticeably in CA, less so in sharpness.
http://forum.mflenses.com/smc-takumar-300-4-nikkor-ed-if-300-4-5-sonnar-300-4-t18249.html
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 4045
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:00 am Post subject: Re: adaptor for SMC 55mm Taks |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
| scottyea wrote: |
| peterm1 wrote: |
| In total I have around 20 or so Takumars, auto Takumars, Tele Takumars SMC Takumars etc - |
Hi Peter, I'm accumulating a collection of these too, and have a couple that are causing a little grief - the 55mm SMC 1.8 & 2 lenses - they dont just have a pin they have another chunk of metal that scrapes into the inner edge of the m42/EOS adaptor and then the auto/manual switch jams. Do you know what I mean?? |
Yes, but that's perfectly normal. The little pin needs to be depressed before the A/M switch can be set. Anyway, on a DSLR you wouldn't want to have the switch on "Auto".
_________________
Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
