Pentax Super Takumar 105/2.8

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

Hello all! I couldn't resist picking up a Super Tak 105/2.8. It looks clean and clear with good looking glass.

I had heard it was an extremely nice performer from word of mouth, so I thought I'd take a chance... Cool

I was gratified to see a review of the lens here on MFLenses...was this a review by Atilla?

http://www.mflenses.com/super-takumar-105mm-f2.8-lens-review-4.html

If anyone has additional experience with the lens I would love to hear about it, positive or negative.

Cheers! Laurence

peterm1 · Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224

I would be very surprised if you are disappointed by this lens. It is sharp, contrasty and like all Tak lenses of the screwmount era built exceedingly well. I have several versions (Super takumar, SMC, early preset in 36mm filter mount and in 39mm filter mount) and all are good. (The only version I am missing is the auto takumar one which requires you to cock the diaphragm.) This lens is about as good, I would suggest, as the legendary Nikkor 105 f2.5.

peterm1 · Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224

I have just posted some lens tests from the 1970s. Included in it is one a test of the Takumar 105. I have also included a test of the Nikkor 105 and I have to take back my comment about the Pentax being as good - at least wide open. The Takumar has to be stopped down a bit before it competes. But still I can still assure you that subjectively it produces nice looking images.

Cheers.

http://forum.mflenses.com/some-lens-tests-for-you-t4468.html

peterm1 · Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224

Shot today with my SMC Takumar 105 f2.8 at around f5.6. (A candid shot from about 7 meters / 25 feet distance of a stranger with an interesting face.)

With this kind of result being typical of what it is capable of, I don't think you will have anything to complain about with this lens.

iha · Joined: 03 Apr 2007 Posts: 284

I have some 100-105mm lens, Takumar 105/2.8 I think it has more value to collect than using, because the pictures are normal. Do not see its shots sharpier than 50mm lens or 105mm Nikkor, and has no personality, no "soft effect".
.

peterm1 · Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224

I do not really agree, but as they say - to each his own!

iha · Joined: 03 Apr 2007 Posts: 284

Yeap, my opinion is subjective. I have not got a favourite from the 100-105mm lenses.
.

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

Peterand iha:

THANK YOU for the great information! I am looking forward to testing out my Super-Tak 105!

I have a feeling I'll at LEAST like the focal length. My Jupiter9 85/2 is a wonderful focal length for portraiture, but sometimes I like to get even a bit closer in to the "face" shots and I hope the added length will give me a handy focal length for those types of shots. And, of course, the 105 length is naturally going to be good for other uses as well.

If it doesn't work out, I see they are a popular item on eBay, so I guess I can always get some money back.

titrisol70 · Joined: 14 Dec 2021 Posts: 152 Location: State of Denial

Wonderful lens, 105 works great in APS cameras as a medium tele (~150 equivalent)
The Takumar (I have an S-M-C) has amazing color rendering and a very nice image quality

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

I have this lens. I believe it a super tak version. I recall liking it a lot. It doesn't compete with my olympus 90 f2 macro or contax zeiss 100 f2 though. But the prices on those 2 are substantially more.

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

I agree with iha. Imho the original 4-elemnts model I and Auto-Tak versions are better than the 5/4 elements Super- and Super-Multi-Coated versions, while all are somewhat soft, never really getting sharp. I like the chrome-nose Sonnar Nikkor-P Auto 1:2.8 f=105mm https://www.destoutz.ch/lens_105mm_f2.5_215011.html

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658

I like the nikon 105, but the takumar has something special in the IQ for me.

Said that, the 85 and the 135 are the prefer focals for portrait to my taste

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

KEO · Joined: 27 Sep 2018 Posts: 761 Location: USA

I have a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 105 2.8. It's a good lens - solid all around. There's nothing about it that wows me though. It doesn't disappoint, but it doesn't excite. If I had to choose I also would pick the Nikkor 105 2.5s over it.

The old black and silver Takumar 105 2.8 with the preset aperture is way more interesting. It's not quite as sharp wide open (although it's perfectly fine). but it has a lot more character and more pleasing, vintage bokeh - including nice soap bubble highlights wide open.

D1N0 · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2495

Preset black and silver Takumar:

Bubbles by The lens profile, on Flickr

Super-Takumar (late version)

Bokeh sample Super-Takumar 105mm F2.8 by The lens profile, on Flickr

eggplant · Joined: 27 May 2020 Posts: 516

Interesting, I think one of those versions seems to struggle towards the edges https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/1156-takumar105f28

I wonder how new before the bokeh at this focal length in the Pentax lineup changes.

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

D1N0 · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2495

Yeah it is not a lens for people who struggle to frame their image with subjects always ending up in some corner.

pabeu · Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 55

Owning the Super Tak version, I find that it's strongest asset is in it's size. It's really small ( compared to a Nikkor) and light. If you add to the mix a very nice contruction and handling plus a very pleasent rendering (not extraordinary) it makes it a very interesting combo, specially on APC-C for travelling.

Ultrapix · Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 551 Location: Italy

Just today I tested some lenses between 90 and 135 mm, to find the best ones for those occasions (also professional) when I go manual; among those tested was the Super Takumar 105 2.8 (not SMC), and it did not come out very well. The other contenders were the Petri 135/2.8 (so-so), the Yashica 135 2.8 preset (very good), Jupiter 37A (so-so), the Zeiss Sonnar 135 3.5 zebra (good), Minolta MD 135 3.5 (excellent apart from some CA), Elmar 135 4 (outstanding but less bright), Elmar 90 4 (ditto), Tamron 90 2.5 second type (outstanding), and Leica Elmarit M 90 2.8 first type (good but poor contrast due maybe to glass problems). I agree with those who said that the best part of the Pentax is in the size and mechanics. I do not publish the results of my hasty test because although it was sufficient for my purposes (I was looking for the lens with the best uniformity and brilliance), it was not conducted with the necessary rigour to disclose it. As a side note, I do not hide my surprise at the result of the old Yashica, of which I will show some shots shortly.

pabeu · Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 55

Is the old yashica a yaninon-r or a super yashinon DX?

Ultrapix · Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 551 Location: Italy

KEO · Joined: 27 Sep 2018 Posts: 761 Location: USA

kymarto · Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2023 8:09 pm Post subject: Re: Pentax Super Takumar 105/2.8