Super Takumar / Super Multi Coated Takumar

kuuan · Expire: 2014-12-26

The Super Multi Coated Takumar usually sell for quite a premium as compared to the Super Takumar.
For a reason, the S.M.C. was, I read, maybe the best coating in their time.

Here and there I have run across the opinion that the single coating of the Super Takumars could be of advantage on modern dSLRs.

What's your take?
Or does anybody have experience with both a Super Takumar and a Super Multi Coated Takumar of otherwise the same lens? If so, how did they compare?

And to which extent do this findings apply to other and which lenses?

thank you for any opinion,
Andreas

Attila · Expire: 2021-11-18

I had SMC and Super Takumar from 135mm f3.5 f2.5 , 200mm f4 I didn't see any difference beetwen them look with your eyes in Gallery.

padiej · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject:

Hallo!
In this german forum are the asahi-pentax-profis:
http://forum.digitalfotonetz.de/viewtopic.php?t=13063
It�s very interesting, what arnold know about pentax-lenses.

mfg Peter

kuuan · Expire: 2014-12-26

padiej · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:11 am Post subject:

Hallo!

Either he has a super good copy or the other lens do not harmonize with the sensor and the tunnel to the sensor ( can be different between the cams K10, K100, Ist DL) - little reflections are disturbing.

This is certain a little differnce, like my test between 50/1,4 and 50/2,0, and so I think - exeptions acknowledge the rule

Carsten said, the lightangle is not a source for troubles, the crop, the smaller sensor avert this.

I think, a little glass (beginn f2,8 or f3,5) makes sharper pics than a big eye-lens (f1,2-1,4) by using f5,6.

regards Peter

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

On the Takumars - one thing that complicates comparisons is that old lenses will have aged differently, tolerances etc - so one can't be reliably sure with one copy, to make generalizations.

Of my set of normal lenses, the Super Tak 50/1.4 is the most yellowed. This copy also has more CA on digital than the others (I'll re-run my CA torture test sometime soon). But it also has a bit of magic to it.

My SMC 50/1.4 is less yellow, but has some yellowing. I'll have to do some testing with it to draw any conclusions. Then there's an AUTO-Takumar 55/1.8 that hasn't yellowed at all (and based on the memory of what I think was a SMC 55/1. Cool

probably has less CA than the 1.4's.

Coatings reduce flare - not just the obvious kind, but there's a type that reduces contrast. There's a Luminous Landscape article on this...

I would expect a multi coated lens to be better than a single coated one, but a single (or even uncoated) can have a charm of its own. And I'd think the number of coatings would make less difference when flare in the environment is low.

--

I like my smc-a 28mm - it mates with digital pretty well. I have a feeling (not born out by direct comparison) that the A 28 works better on digital than on film. Conversely I find the 43 Ltd seems to like film better than digital.

There are articles I don't really care to delve into enough to understand, about the angle of incidence - film apparently accepts a wider angle than a digital chip - that for example the 4/3rds consortium trotted out as reasons for their sensor size.

padiej · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject:

Hallo!
Nester, you are right, the production in the past would not so homogen like jet, that�s true. Today, lasermeasuring with computer and automatic - robot - production brings more aquability.

This is the magic of old lenses, that they are so alive.

regards Peter

kuuan · Expire: 2014-12-26

Thanks a lot Neester and Peter for your input.