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

Just Bought Super Takumar 28mm 3.5 Prime. Any good?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:03 pm    Post subject: Just Bought Super Takumar 28mm 3.5 Prime. Any good? Reply with quote

To compliment my 55 f1.8 i bought a Super Takumar 28mm 3.5 Prime for £35 UK pounds. I have seen a couple pics using this lens but wondered what you think generally. Did i do good? Very Happy

Here it iz:


PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Superb lens and a very decent price for it.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my copy of the Super is actually a teeny bit better than my S-M-C, these are excellent lenses. congratulations


PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woo Hoo!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My review of the S-M-C variant:
http://forum.mflenses.com/s-m-c-takumar-28-3-5-on-a-full-frame-body-t17304.html


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:30 am    Post subject: Re: Just Bought Super Takumar 28mm 3.5 Prime. Any good? Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
Did i do good? Very Happy


Yes Andy - you did good, I'll be posting the lens to you today Wink


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks aoleg

Lovely pics there. Does indeed look like a top lens and a bargain too!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have owned almost every Takumar variant made between 24mm and 300mm (Takumar, auto Takumar, Super Takumar, SMC Takumar) and I would say that this lens is one of the best image makers I have found in that group- although I have only owned one version of this lens, the Super Takumar with 49mm diameter barrel. (There was an earlier 58mm version as well. ) It is sharp and has excellent contrast. I do not recall it having much distortion either but do not quote me on that as distortion is something that I tend not to regard as being a big issue for most of my work with wides.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterm1 wrote:
I have owned almost every Takumar variant made between 24mm and 300mm (Takumar, auto Takumar, Super Takumar, SMC Takumar) and I would say that this lens is one of the best image makers I have found in that group- although I have only owned one version of this lens, the Super Takumar with 49mm diameter barrel. (There was an earlier 58mm version as well. ) It is sharp and has excellent contrast. I do not recall it having much distortion either but do not quote me on that as distortion is something that I tend not to regard as being a big issue for most of my work with wides.


Thats good news! Thank you Smile


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mal1905: I have just realised it's you who i have bought it from. Hopefully i'll get it before i go on me hols on Monday! Can't wait to try it out.

Cheers


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
Mal1905: I have just realised it's you who i have bought it from. Hopefully i'll get it before i go on me hols on Monday! Can't wait to try it out.

Cheers


I hoped that the hint wouldn't go unnoticed Wink

Have mailed you through the tracking details via the 'Bay, shouldn't take too long to get to you from here.

You'll love it - it was a duplicate and I've held on to the beaten-up copy - but it should prove to be a keeper for you.

Thanks again for your purchase Andy!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

congrats for a great lens for a very good price indeed!
Takumars 55/1.8 and 28/3.5 is great choice for starters

( The S-M-C variant was one of the lenses I had used most during the last few months while Nepal and Vietnam, 140 photos in this set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157605173945492/ )


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mal1905 wrote:
andyw wrote:
Mal1905: I have just realised it's you who i have bought it from. Hopefully i'll get it before i go on me hols on Monday! Can't wait to try it out.

Cheers


I hoped that the hint wouldn't go unnoticed Wink

Have mailed you through the tracking details via the 'Bay, shouldn't take too long to get to you from here.

You'll love it - it was a duplicate and I've held on to the beaten-up copy - but it should prove to be a keeper for you.

Thanks again for your purchase Andy!

No worries, looking forward to it!!!!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kuuan wrote:
congrats for a great lens for a very good price indeed!
Takumars 55/1.8 and 28/3.5 is great choice for starters

( The S-M-C variant was one of the lenses I had used most during the last few months while Nepal and Vietnam, 140 photos in this set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157605173945492/ )

Just been looking at your pics. Very nice!!!!! These lenses really are superb. They have a 'feel' of there own don't you think? Smooth with good sharpness/contrast but not over saturated with colour. I'm not saying they lack colour but they are more natural. I'll hopefully be posting up some shots of my own when i get mine.

Gotta get me a Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 What a stunner!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

your avatar cracks me up.

be careful with these Takumars. LBA can be a killer. Wink

oh and good choice on the 55 as well. it is without a doubt my favourite lens. it has a unique quality all its own. I know the 50 1.4 gets all the attention but the 55 is just special in my opinion. it has something extra... much like our SMC-FA 77mm 1.8 Limited. it's got some 'mojo'.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Erm...you like your Takumar's don't you Shocked

Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
Erm...you like your Takumar's don't you Shocked

Very Happy


It's a well know fact that Takumars are the work of Satan - once they hook you, there's no going back Twisted Evil


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyw wrote:

Just been looking at your pics. Very nice!!!!! These lenses really are superb. They have a 'feel' of there own don't you think? Smooth with good sharpness/contrast but not over saturated with colour. I'm not saying they lack colour but they are more natural. I'll hopefully be posting up some shots of my own when i get mine.

Gotta get me a Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 What a stunner!


thank's for looking
more saturated that the 50/1.4, more similar to the 55/1.8 in that respect?

Mal1905 wrote:

It's a well know fact that Takumars are the work of Satan - once they hook you, there's no going back Twisted Evil


and if 55/1.8 or 50/1.4, you got to love both, and different they are!


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
Erm...you like your Takumar's don't you Shocked

Very Happy


I do. not as much as some people that's for sure... or rather I cant afford to love as many of them as some people. Wink wonderful lenses though, I have some real gems in my humble collection. I imagine you will as well, soon enough.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

***It's a well know fact that Takumars are the work of Satan - once they hook you, there's no going back***

erm I've had my three Taks since the 60's.....and do the digital guys praise them more than film guys, because of limited choice.
Film guys can choose any MF lenses they want and I find the common consumer taks inferior to common consumer Canon, Hexanon, Nikon and so on.

The best of the Pentax 35mm, 55mm and 135mm is the 35mm in my tests...... it's just under a 28mm canon fd for sharpness.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
erm I've had my three Taks since the 60's.....and do the digital guys praise them more than film guys, because of limited choice.


Limited choice? Aside from Taks, my camera takes other M42 mount lenses, Pentax K mount lenses, Contax / Yashica mount lenses, Rollei QB mount lenses, Pentacon 6 mount lenses, Hasselblad lenses, and others. That's hardly limited, is it? Plus, many of these lenses go on film cameras too.

Excalibur wrote:
Film guys can choose any MF lenses they want and I find the common consumer taks inferior to common consumer Canon, Hexanon, Nikon and so on.


Since my relatively recent discovery of manual lenses, I've sold all but two of my AF ones. None of the newer Canon lenses came even close to delivering the 'character' I get from the oldies.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Manual lenses just seem to have better image quality to me or at least give 'L' series lenses for example a run for there money. The major thing for me is the bang per buck you get from old manual lenses. The sharpest lens in my collection is the one i paid just £8 for and i can get close image quality from a 50mm f1.4 Tak for £50ish as a £250 canon 50mm f1.4 !!

Trouble is it's addictive and i have a long list of lenses that i want.......and no money!! Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
erm I've had my three Taks since the 60's.....and do the digital guys praise them more than film guys, because of limited choice.
Film guys can choose any MF lenses they want and I find the common consumer taks inferior to common consumer Canon, Hexanon, Nikon and so on.

The best of the Pentax 35mm, 55mm and 135mm is the 35mm in my tests...... it's just under a 28mm canon fd for sharpness.


True, the best of the others can beat the best Takumars in certain circumstances.

We're talking about the original screw mount Super/SMC Takumars, not the later Pentax lenses... though some family traits have been retained.

The best same-era Canons, Nikkors, Zeisses and Leicas for example may have a more even wide-open resolution characteristic, and may have a smidge more resolution at f/5.6 or 8... but not always. Pentax tended to favor the center vs the edges wide open. However, often Pentax glass was a class leader in a given category when it came to performance at various apertures... in other words, it's difficult to make generalizations.

What Pentax had earlier than most: the multi coating. That plus the build quality and small size are what appeals to many. Also, Pentax had the habit of making smaller and slower lenses, very useful and lower priced, for the amateur, while some of the other makes concentrated their 'best', with faster apertures, larger size and cost, for the professional.

They all seem to have something of a house rendition too, it all depends on what you're after and like. We're fortunate at this date to have available relatively cheap such a smorgasboard.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

***Since my relatively recent discovery of manual lenses, I've sold all but two of my AF ones. None of the newer Canon lenses came even close to delivering the 'character' I get from the oldies.***

Well all my lenses are old MFs (except for a few AF P&S), so I'm comparing like for like, and if anyone accumulates lenses over the years they should test and sort out the ones that go in the camera bag....and for me as a film user, the Tak 55mm f1.8 and 135mm f3.5 stay in the cupboard.

The Tak 35mm f3.5 is a very contrasty and sharp lens, I had to enlarge quite a bit to see the difference between the canon fd 28mm f2.8 of the same shot

tak 35mm
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/Pentax35mmf3-5M42.jpg


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting point on sharpness.

It looks like as far as digital goes there is a limit beyond which lenses seem to be indistinguishable.

I can't tell one lens from another in terms of sharpness once the lenses get down to identical results at 1:1 pixel-peeping. And quite a lot of lenses manage that at 6 megapixels. When I get a higher-res camera maybe I will notice more distinctions in the pixel-peeping game.

Good film, well processed, seems to get beyond the limits of digital resolution, but there are so many other things likely to go wrong with film quality, picture quality, focus accuracy, processing/scanning and printing, that its not easy to take advantage of the absolute best lenses even on film.