Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Takumar Collection
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
lucius wrote:
Thanks memetph,
Yes I do, but I wish I could have the time to use them more often.
Here is a link with some images [url] https://flic.kr/ps/2d85zw[/url]


Link does not work.


I fixed the link now and also posted here a few images
https://www.flickr.com/photos/79353590@N04/


PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
Very, very nice collection. Oddly, I do not have a single Tak. Early on, I bought a 3.5/28 and didn't like it. I'm thinking that experience tainted me for future purchases. I believe in any line of lenses, some stand out as special. Besides the 1.8/85, what would you consider to be those special ones?

Yes, some of them are excellent, some just ok. I think the early Taks have something unique. The best of them is for sure the 58mm f2, Sonnar type, rare and expensive. Also I like S-M-C 135mm 2.5 V2


PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
Very, very nice collection. Oddly, I do not have a single Tak. Early on, I bought a 3.5/28 and didn't like it. I'm thinking that experience tainted me for future purchases. I believe in any line of lenses, some stand out as special. Besides the 1.8/85, what would you consider to be those special ones?


I have had a small collection of takumars for a while - nothing comparable to the one shown here - but among the ones I had I think the 2.3/35 needs a special mention.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The most beautiful camera+lens, IMHO :

Asahi Pentax K with Auto-Takumar 55mm 1.8 zebra



PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Shocked wow
such a great Takumar selection!
I "only" have 2 boxes full of M42 Takumar lenses and another one with 6X7 Takumar.
My first manual lens was a Super Takumar 55 f2, it was a good beggining for a collection/LBA.

My 5 favourites M42 Takumar are:
Super Takumar 55 f2
Super Multi Coated /SMC 50 f1,4 7 element
Super Multi Coated 85 f1,9
Super Takumar 105 f2,8
Super Multi Coated 135 f2,5 2nd version

Wich are your favourite ones?

Last edited by eliasloarre on Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:03 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hey, you are not doing too bad with 'only' 2 boxes hahahah. I think I can fit everything in one box Smile
Is not easy to find favourites but I can tell for sure I love S-M-C Tak 85 1.8 ! This is my first lens, first love ! It was just the beginning of my LBA Smile
I love also S-M-C Tak 135 2.5 and all the older Takumars even the autos.
Of course Super Takumar 50 1.4 8 element is maybe the queen :







eliasloarre wrote:
Shocked wow
such a great Takumar selection!
I "only" have 2 boxes full of M42 Takumar lenses and another one with 6X7 Takumar.
My first manual lens was a Super Takumar 55 f2, it was a good beggining for a collection/LBA.

My 5 favourites M42 Takumar are:
Super Takumar 55 f2
Super Multi Coated /SMC 50 1,4 7 element
Super Multi Coated 85 f1,9
Super Takumar 105 f2,8
Super Multi Coated 135 f2,8 2nd version

Wich are your favourite ones?


PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That is such a neat collection.
I own just one takumar. A simple smc 55mm f1,8.
They are pretty exotic lenses in belgium. You don't come across them very often. Confused

Beautiful images!


PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Karen
You got so many good lenses ! WOW I wish I could try a few. But...I said I have to stay focused on Takumars ( budget constraint...)
I love your work, you got amazing mushroom images using that Canon FD, didn't know is that good.

!Karen wrote:
That is such a neat collection.
I own just one takumar. A simple smc 55mm f1,8.
They are pretty exotic lenses in belgium. You don't come across them very often. Confused

Beautiful images!


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Beautiful collection.

Are you still looking out for others like the Takumar 15/3.5; 83/1.9?

I am also curious about the 20mm and 24mm.
Are they worth it wrt more modern lenses (eg. Pentax M or Canon FD20; perhaps lenses of the 80's) ?

I ask this as I try to buy lenses as a usable set.
In other words, for any brand, I tend to get a UWA; Wide; Normal; short tele.
I have somewhat the same for my M42 lenses though they are not coherent in branding.
Right now, I lack something between my Soligor 17/4 and Takumar 35/3.5.
The Takumar 20 or 24 might be it, but I'm not sure if I should spend more money on them or just stick with my other mounts 20,24,28 mm lenses.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 7:08 am    Post subject: the most compact std. Takumar Reply with quote
The 50mm f3,5 (from before Asahi started to use the M42 mouunt) must be the most compact of all the standard lenses.

p.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Beautiful pictures and nice collection, Luc.

My favorite Takumar lens:
58/2.4 Preset (Heliar formula; initially designed for the Asahiflex, it was one of the first Pentax lenses to be made in M42 mount)

A few other that I use regularly:
S-M-C 35/3.5 (tiny jewel, excellent on the Sony A7)
S-M-C 85/1.8 (better than the Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited IMHO)
105/2.8 Preset (so incredibly small)

paulhofseth wrote:
The 50mm f3,5 (from before Asahi started to use the M42 mount) must be the most compact of all the standard lenses.

I think the Industar 50/3.5 is even smaller (and I am not talking about collapsible lenses).

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:

I think the Industar 50/3.5 is even smaller (and I am not talking about collapsible lenses).


The Industar is a RF lens and these are generally smaller than comparable SLR lenses. However, the smallest SLR lens I have is an early Zeiss Tessar 50mm/3.5 in Exacta mount pruduced around 1949. It's even smaller than the Industar (only 2/3 in length, similar diameter).


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
No, the Industar 50/3.5 exists in m42 mount for slr too.
It is the smallest 50 for slr I have.

I use mostly smc 85/1.8 and smc 135/2.5.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
The Industar is a RF lens and these are generally smaller than comparable SLR lenses. However, the smallest SLR lens I have is an early Zeiss Tessar 50mm/3.5 in Exacta mount pruduced around 1949. It's even smaller than the Industar (only 2/3 in length, similar diameter).

I was refering to the Industar 50 (M39 mount) and Industar 50-2 (M42 mount) that were the standard lenses of the early Zenit DSLRs. Here's a picture of the tiny Industar (left) side-by-side with a diminutive Tessar 50/3.5 (which is about the same size as the Takumar 50/3.5):


Credit: Lens Bubbles

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:

I was refering to the Industar 50 (M39 mount) and Industar 50-2 (M42 mount) that were the standard lenses of the early Zenit


Sorry for confusion I was referring to the Industar 50 M39 for Zorki:



Also in comparison with the tessar.
Sorry for the bad pictures, just made them quick and dirty.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Sorry for confusion I was referring to the Industar 50 M39 for Zorki:



Also in comparison with the tessar.

In fact, the optical unit of the Industar is almost the same as the Tessar, as the former is a clone of the latter. The Tessar is longer than the SLR Industar because it has a more protruding barrel: in the Tessar, the front element is recessed inside the barrel, which functions as a build-in lens shade, while the Industar's barrel is almost flush with the front element. Of course, the RF version of the Industar has a longer barrel in order to accommodate for the shorter registration compared to the SLR lens.

When used on modern mirrorless cameras like the Sony A7 series, RF lenses do have the advantage of using a much smaller adapter than SLR lenses (due to the shorter registration). Therefore, an Industar 50/3.5 for Zorki + adapter will be shorter than a Tessar 50/3.5 for Exakta + adapter --anyway, a few millimeters hardly matter and the Tessar is the better lens!

I have a very small preset Takumar 135/3.5, which I considered as my shortest 135mm lens. I also have a Jupiter 11 (Sonnar clone) 135/4 RF lens which is a tiny bit longer but has a thinner barrel. When I decided to use both lenses on my sony A7, I realized that the Jupiter + adapter was in fact far more compact than the Takumar + adapter. As my Jupiter 11 is also very sharp, it has rapidly become my favorite 135mm (its major drawback, a 2.5m minimum focus, being easily overcome by using an adapter with built-in helicoid).

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:

When used on modern mirrorless cameras like the Sony A7 series, RF lenses do have the advantage of using a much smaller adapter than SLR lenses (due to the shorter registration). Therefore, an Industar 50/3.5 for Zorki + adapter will be shorter than a Tessar 50/3.5 for Exakta + adapter --anyway, a few millimeters hardly matter and the Tessar is the better lens!

I have a very small preset Takumar 135/3.5, which I considered as my shortest 135mm lens. I also have a Jupiter 11 (Sonnar clone) 135/4 RF lens which is a tiny bit longer but has a thinner barrel. When I decided to use both lenses on my sony A7, I realized that the Jupiter + adapter was in fact far more compact than the Takumar + adapter. As my Jupiter 11 is also very sharp, it has rapidly become my favorite 135mm (its major drawback, a 2.5m minimum focus, being easily overcome by using an adapter with built-in helicoid).


Well, I am aware of all this as I have a decent collection of RF lenses (also from Russia) for my Ricoh GXR-M where I can use them almost without adapter (only M39 to Leica-M). However, for tele lenses I still prefer the "old fashioned" SLR camera, but that's more or less a matter of used habit after 4 decades of SLR photography. I have both versions of the Jupiter 11 (M39/LTM and M39/Zenit) besides some different Takumars. The Takumar 105mm/2.8 (M42) is by the way a very nice and tiny tele and the 150/4 isn't bad either. I don't know by heart which version I have in 135mm, but I think both 2.5 and 3.5 versions.
I have also a rather huge Takumar collection from 17mm upwards. Not to sure yet if it ends with 300 or 400mm. It's time for an inventory check. Wink


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 1:16 pm    Post subject: smallest Takumar Reply with quote
I was not precise enough; smallest standard Takumar lens. A bit less than 30mm high
p.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
First I'll tell you about the lenses I have : 20mm and 24mm. Both very good, not easy to find and kind of expensive. I wanted them in S-M-C and I paid premium...I don't know how they compare to modern wide or UWA, but you won't be disappointed.
If I'm still looking for white elephants? Yes ! I do, but....I simply can't afford to pay $2500 for Takumar 15/3.5 no matter how much I want it. At least not now. Btw, right now is one on eBay...Smile Same thing for 83/1.9. A few years ago you could find them for a few dollars now thousands.


pinholecam wrote:
Beautiful collection.

Are you still looking out for others like the Takumar 15/3.5; 83/1.9?

I am also curious about the 20mm and 24mm.
Are they worth it wrt more modern lenses (eg. Pentax M or Canon FD20; perhaps lenses of the 80's) ?

I ask this as I try to buy lenses as a usable set.
In other words, for any brand, I tend to get a UWA; Wide; Normal; short tele.
I have somewhat the same for my M42 lenses though they are not coherent in branding.
Right now, I lack something between my Soligor 17/4 and Takumar 35/3.5.
The Takumar 20 or 24 might be it, but I'm not sure if I should spend more money on them or just stick with my other mounts 20,24,28 mm lenses.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, that Heliar is a beautiful lens. Together with Sonnar - Takumar 58mm f2. They both have something special.


Abbazz wrote:
Beautiful pictures and nice collection, Luc.

My favorite Takumar lens:
58/2.4 Preset (Heliar formula; initially designed for the Asahiflex, it was one of the first Pentax lenses to be made in M42 mount)

A few other that I use regularly:
S-M-C 35/3.5 (tiny jewel, excellent on the Sony A7)
S-M-C 85/1.8 (better than the Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited IMHO)
105/2.8 Preset (so incredibly small)

paulhofseth wrote:
The 50mm f3,5 (from before Asahi started to use the M42 mount) must be the most compact of all the standard lenses.

I think the Industar 50/3.5 is even smaller (and I am not talking about collapsible lenses).

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wanted to buy a heliar type, Takumar 58/2.4 (M37) lens a few months ago. After I told the seller that I want to use it with a Pentax DSLR, he did not want to sell me. He said that this lens is for collectors and I will not be satisfied with this lens and a digital camera.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't have the m37 version, I have the M42 and I love it ! I use it with an adapter to Canon without problems. Yes, they are for collectors but you can get amazing images.
See here http://forum.mflenses.com/asahi-58mm-f-2-4-takumar-heliar-type-t14817.html

edri wrote:
I wanted to buy a heliar type, Takumar 58/2.4 (M37) lens a few months ago. After I told the seller that I want to use it with a Pentax DSLR, he did not want to sell me. He said that this lens is for collectors and I will not be satisfied with this lens and a digital camera.


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lucius wrote:
First I'll tell you about the lenses I have : 20mm and 24mm. Both very good, not easy to find and kind of expensive. I wanted them in S-M-C and I paid premium...I don't know how they compare to modern wide or UWA, but you won't be disappointed.
If I'm still looking for white elephants? Yes ! I do, but....I simply can't afford to pay $2500 for Takumar 15/3.5 no matter how much I want it. At least not now. Btw, right now is one on eBay...Smile Same thing for 83/1.9. A few years ago you could find them for a few dollars now thousands.



Thank you for your inputs on the wide lenses.

I left one K15/3.5 pass (asph version) just before the Pentax FF was announced.
Seems like I won't ever find it at that price anymore. Very Happy

That Takumar 83/1.9, I really doubt I will find one at a reasonable price nowadays too.
My friend got lucky and found it in a shop here.


PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2015 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
!Karen wrote:
That is such a neat collection.
I own just one takumar. A simple smc 55mm f1,8.
They are pretty exotic lenses in belgium. You don't come across them very often. Confused

Beautiful images!


I've got a fair few as well, they are pretty common in the UK.
I may have some duplicates. Definitely have a duplicate 135mm. Maybe a swap or a MFLenses special cheap price sale would suit you? If so lets take it to PM. Smile


PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2015 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
edri wrote:
I wanted to buy a heliar type, Takumar 58/2.4 (M37) lens a few months ago. After I told the seller that I want to use it with a Pentax DSLR, he did not want to sell me. He said that this lens is for collectors and I will not be satisfied with this lens and a digital camera.


LOL
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3