Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:36 pm    Post subject: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8? Reply with quote

As title: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8?

Ta


PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you speak about the Takumar (not Super or S-M6C), it is rather rare, but I can tell on its performances. I have the S-M-C 105/2.8 (second version of optical scheme), I dont often use it, but I never was disappointed Wink


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This lens optical construction is very similar to Contax Zeiss Sonnar 85/2.8, yet in my experience, my Super-Takumar never reaches the Zeiss in sharpness, contrast, and bokeh.

Super-Takumar 105/2.8 is single-coated (OK, there are in fact about 3 levels of coatings, but still it's not SMC and not T* in terms of contrast), and the S-M-C version is multi-coated. I paid about $100 for my Super-Tak, and about $200 for the Sonnar 85/2.8. I guess the S-M-C version would cost more. The Takumar is built better, but in my opinion the Zeiss is simply a better lens and well worth the premium price.

Having said that, Super and S-M-C Takumars are excellent lenses, and just about perfect for portraits where wide-open sharpness is not required.

If you are looking for a 105mm lens, Nikkor 105/2.5 is sharper still. There are many versions, but just two types of optical construction: Nikkor-P 105/2.5 (Sonnar design, single-coated, but excellent sharpness and contrast regardless!), and later Gauss-type 105/2.5 (about as sharp, later versions multi-coated, smoother rendering than the earlier Sonnar design). All of them are excellent lenses (I have both variants), and all of them I rate higher than the Takumar.


Super / S-M-C Takumar 105/2.8




Contax Zeiss Sonnar 85/2.8



PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This applies to Super Taks in general regarding to coating. Many of the Super Taks made in 1971 were actually smc coated. This is especially true for those the shared the optical formulae with those in S-M-C and SMC barrels.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Andy,

I have one of these lenses, if there's anything you'd like to know about it, or would like me to take some sample photos let me know. I've only had it a month or two, so I haven't used it a lot. My initial impression is the sharpness is fine (neither bad nor stunning), and the bokeh can be a bit busy for my tastes. It's a nicely built, very small lens.

--Geoff


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got one. so +1 on above. Preset and all black. Appearently there are two versions.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

it's an excellent lens, but I believe every word of aoleg' great post.

I got an overkill of 2.8/105 Taks, see my pics taken with the
Takumar 2.8/105, the preset which I have used more often than the others because of it's small size and being a preset which is very handy on a dSLR, though the S-M-C may well be the better lens: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157613165660802/
the Super Tak: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157605550800834/
the S-M-C: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157604973101206/


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

WOW! Thanks for the great responses, much appreciated.

I thought i would ask as there is one on ebay at 21 at the moment with 11 hrs to go which means it finishing at about 6.30 this evening, hmmmmmm


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

buy now prize for ST or S-M-C Taks usually is about 100 or a bit over ( the Nikkor around 130 )


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
I thought i would ask as there is one on ebay at 21 at the moment with 11 hrs to go which means it finishing at about 6.30 this evening, hmmmmmm


I would say, up to $100 for a Super-Takumar, and up to $130-150 for a good copy of an S-M-C version is a good price. I wouldn't pay more, as Nikkors and the Sonnar become available in that price range.

If you decide to go for a Sonnar 85/2.8, I would recommend the Japanese MM version (f/16 painted green on the aperture ring) as opposed to the German AE version (f/16 in white). Should be around $230 or so.

If going after a Nikkor 105/2.5, my favorite is Ai version for its rounded aperture and long focus throw. Ai-S has slightly higher contrast, but Ai has plenty already. The Ai version can be had for around $130.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hy Andy,

Judge by yourself:

At f/8:



At f/4:



Sorry, don't have the full res pics available here right now, must search in the storage DVDs ...

Hope this helps


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sample from my copy of smc-takumar 2,8/105 . Here f/4 , film Konica vx-400, Pentax Spotmatic-F Body .




This lens is a bit sharper than Meyer Orestor , and is very close to the Rokkor 2,5/100mm.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok, hard to choose, but one sample of various 2.8/105 Taks:

Takumar preset:

( bigger: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/3484954979/sizes/l/in/set-72157613165660802/ )

Super Takumar:

( bigger: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/2568902819/sizes/l/in/set-72157605550800834/ )

S-M-C:

( bigger: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/3855962497/sizes/l/in/set-72157604973101206/ )

Andreas


PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shot with the preset version. Nothing wrong with the image that I can see.



PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2019 9:52 am    Post subject: Re: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8? Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
As title: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8?

Ta


A quick comparison done this morning has shown, that the Asahi SMC Takumar 2.8/105mm is nowhere nearly as sharp as the Minolta MD 2.5/100mm. The Takumar at f11 has less detail than the Minolta at f2.5! For landscape, there are definitely better 100mm or 105mm vintage lenses out there. My Nikkor 2.5/105mm (Xenar type) is somewhere in between the Tak and the Minolta; the Canon nFD 2.8/100mm and the Topcor RE 2.8/100mm both also are better than the Takumar, but not as good as the Minolta MD 2.5/100mm which is a [5/5] design. Be aware that there is also a Minolta MC [6/5] design which has a slightly lower performance than the different MD variants. And there is a late MC-X [5/5] 2.5/100mm ...!

The Takumar, however has a distinctive "vintage" look at f2.8, and its bokeh seems to be quite nice. Probably it is well suitable for b/w portraits, especially on film. I will use the lens during the next days in parallel with my Minolta MD-III 2.5/100mm and the Auto Nikkor 2.5/105mm (an Xenar type, thus not the early Sonnar-Nikkor 2.5/105!), and share some images later.

Stephan


PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2019 11:00 am    Post subject: Re: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8? Reply with quote

andyw wrote:
As title: How rare/good is the Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8?

Ta



Not rare. And in terms of how good it is, it really depends on what you intend to use it for. Depending on your intention it could equally be the best lens or the worst lens.


I'd agree with stevemarks' approach in his second paragraph, where qualities are discussed, and a suggestion is made as to what those qualities would make the lens suitable for.


I've never tried mine for b&w. Thanks for the suggestion stevemark Like 1 .


PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2019 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Stephan for verifying my experiences with the 105mm S-M-C. I couldn't find what was the fuss about it being so great. It didn't quite fit with the exceptional quality of the other taks. It was designed as a portrait lens however, which use I didn't try. I never got any results indicating it was more than average performance. Cost lot comparatively; one of the first taks I sold. Now all that doesn't mean it isn't a great lens. Just that I didn't think k so.