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

SMC Takumar 1.4/50 on 5DMarkII
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:01 pm    Post subject: SMC Takumar 1.4/50 on 5DMarkII Reply with quote

Just a small late afternoon tour nothing special:







three 100% crops from pic 1,2 3 respectively:







Nice, I guess... but I don't know if this is the lens for me. I find it lacking something compared to the Icarex Tessar just to name one - or maybe it was just the dull daylight? Or maybe me being spoiled...?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really like the 2nd shot - the panoramic crop works very well.

Do you not get mirror-slap when infinity-focusing on the 5D MkII? I'm currently saving for one, and if this is the case, that's great news indeed. I haven't shaved the mirror on the MkI and there are a number of lenses I haven't been able to use because of this.

Like you, I'm never certain about this lens - I've had a few of them but none that I'd call a 'wow' lens. There are others in the mix that I use more often with great results - but rarely feel compelled anymore to take out the Tak.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mal1905 wrote:

Do you not get mirror-slap when infinity-focusing on the 5D MkII? I'm currently saving for one, and if this is the case, that's great news indeed. I haven't shaved the mirror on the MkI and there are a number of lenses I haven't been able to use because of this.


The trick is to set lens to close focus, then activate Liveview, refocus to long distance and compose and shoot, then before switching off Liveview setting the lens back to close focus.

Mal1905 wrote:
Like you, I'm never certain about this lens - I've had a few of them but none that I'd call a 'wow' lens. There are others in the mix that I use more often with great results - but rarely feel compelled anymore to take out the Tak.


Yes, same for me. I like the way it works wide open for close focus portrait shots. That is the reason why I have not sold it yet. But when I try it to shoot at long distance, it never fully convinces me.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio

You have made the Tak look as good as it can for landscapes - and that is pretty good.


patrickh


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Nice, I guess... but I don't know if this is the lens for me. I find it lacking something compared to the Icarex Tessar just to name one - or maybe it was just the dull daylight? Or maybe me being spoiled...?


I think maybe all in this sentence is true Wink

I prefer your Distagon 1.4/35 for this type of shoot.
The Taks are great for Portraits. They have that smooth tonal transition that I find so pleasing for skin.
The same quality that makes landscapes look flat as these shots show.
Although the light certainly had something to do with it also.
Lovely landscapes none the less. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

beautiful peaceful landscape, far from big city
I have seen many great samples from the tak, maybe the light was not the best


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AF chip not report aperture value I guess so no reason to confuse light metering.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe it's because of the daylight, maybe not completely.
Here's another photo taken in the same time, with a Sonnar 2.8/85:

whole:


100% crop:


The image is of similar quality, overall, but I prefer the way the greens are rendered in the Sonnar image. They have more variety.
See the olives for instance. Here they look like olives (gray-silver green), in the Tak picture, they could also be something else.
The WB is set to identical value for all images.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Something about the Sonnar image jumps out at me moreso than the Takumar ones did - really stunning location though, and they're all beautifully composed images.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Here's another photo taken in the same time, with a Sonnar 2.8/85

it is not fairplay to compare the tak with a zeiss Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mal1905 wrote:
Something about the Sonnar image jumps out at me moreso than the Takumar ones did


+1 for the Sonnar. Somehow it renders the scenery much more convincingly.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
Orio wrote:
Here's another photo taken in the same time, with a Sonnar 2.8/85

it is not fairplay to compare the tak with a zeiss Very Happy


I don't own enough Taks to speak (only two, this 50mm and the 135mm) to compare with the Contax, but for what I have, I think the overall quality is similar. My Tak has a coating that works very well, like the Contax coating. Sharpness is there in my Taks also.
It's the same situation as with the Nikkors, the image quality is similar, but the images that are output look different somehow. Not a lot different. Slightly different.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aoleg wrote:
Mal1905 wrote:
Something about the Sonnar image jumps out at me moreso than the Takumar ones did


+1 for the Sonnar. Somehow it renders the scenery much more convincingly.


I think that the whole image of the Tak is very pleasing in a different way. It's sweeter than the Sonnar's. Makes a whole impression that is probably better. Sonnar's image is harder. But it has more depth. It's a different taste. Different philosophies. I think only printing out the two images will make a real comparison possible.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who cares for the specific good and bad of the lens, in Orio's hands I think anything will produce a beautiful photo Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamNR17 wrote:
Who cares for the specific good and bad of the lens, in Orio's hands I think anything will produce a beautiful photo Very Happy


Well I reckon we can ALL agree with that comment Wink


PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamNR17 wrote:
Who cares for the specific good and bad of the lens, in Orio's hands I think anything will produce a beautiful photo Very Happy


Agree. It's the sharpest one of my nine 50mm lenses. As Patrick said, Orio makes this SMC Tak so great in landscape perfermance.
Smile