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 3.5/135 vs. MC Jupiter-37AM
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:07 pm    Post subject: SMC Takumar 3.5/135 vs. MC Jupiter-37AM Reply with quote
This morning I received a SMC Takumar 3.5/135 which I won for 17 GBP.
Very mint condition with original bag and both original caps (a rarity).

I put it to comparison with my favourite lens of the same speed -the MC Jupiter-37AM- and I have to say that, apart from a tad warmer tone and a tad more contrast in the Jupiter, the two pictures look identical for the quality of detail and the edge performance. I have not tested the CA but I expect similar values.

In conclusion I say that I think the SMC Takumar 3.5/135 is an excellent lens.

-


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats very nice price
This lens surprised me also.
Small nice, solid, no CA, nice colors, sharp and very good for macro.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congratulations, Orio!

The "formula 3.5/135" seems to be a very reliable one. I have several lenses with these parameters (and different lens design) and each of those is at least good, if not very good or even excellent.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats! I vote for Jupiter against SMC Takumar even if Tak is a fine lens.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks - one to look out for.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I made a little torture test for bokeh earlier.
(just test shots nothing fancy)
The lens came out of it brilliantly, even from the most difficult situations.
Take a look:









PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now that is great value.

patrickh


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Definitely worth hunting for!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The smc Takumar 135 / 3.5 could be the same as the smc Pentax 135 / 3.5 (the first one with the K bayonet http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/K135f3.5.html ) mafe for the K series Pentax cameras (K bayonet Spotmatics) ? It seems that the more encountered smc Pentax-M 135 / 3.5 http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/M135f3.5.html has a different optical formula and is more compact (less than 2 cm in lenght) that the first one (the K version).


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Recently I had picked up a near mint copy as well and had fallen in love with the smooth mechanics of it.
I guess this result won't do away with your general bias against japanese lenses you had mentioned at the other thread. I very much believe in your expertise and you founded your bias very well. But before your elaboration I must admit that from what I have been reading here and there I had started wondering if that bias which is shared by some at least in some cases could be a prejudice..Wink ??
anyway, I am happy to know that you like your new lens, and thank you for sharing


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kuuan wrote:
Recently I had picked up a near mint copy as well and had fallen in love with the smooth mechanics of it.
I guess this result won't do away with your general bias against japanese lenses you had mentioned at the other thread. I very much believe in your expertise and you founded your bias very well. But before your elaboration I must admit that from what I have been reading here and there I had started wondering if that bias which is shared by some at least in some cases could be a prejudice..Wink ??
anyway, I am happy to know that you like your new lens, and thank you for sharing


There is no objective truth in comparing lenses, not even MTF tests, because to be really such, they should be made under the same conditions. Let alone subjective impressions.
So it's hard to talk about prejudice when everything is clearly in the realm of the subjective.
A real prejudice would have not let me go for and buy this lens, don't you think?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
montecarlo wrote:
The smc Takumar 135 / 3.5 could be the same as the smc Pentax 135 / 3.5 (the first one with the K bayonet http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/K135f3.5.html ) mafe for the K series Pentax cameras (K bayonet Spotmatics) ? It seems that the more encountered smc Pentax-M 135 / 3.5 http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/M135f3.5.html has a different optical formula and is more compact (less than 2 cm in lenght) that the first one (the K version).


I don't know, I know too little about Pentax lenses to be able to reply.
In some cases, transition from older to newer lens is a matter of optimization/modernization (example is Contax Sonnar 2.8/135), in other cases (I think for instance of Nikkor 2.5/105 pre-AI and AI, or of Elmarit-R 90 first and second version), the optical scheme is completely new.
-


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
is it right, the SMC Tak you got is the one shown here:
http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html?Pentax_SMC_Takumar_135mm_3.5.html
and here:
http://angeliou.blogspot.com/2007/08/takumar.html
not the one shown at the montecarlo's links to bdimitrov' site?

there is some onfo on stans' site about the different Pentax 135mm, quote:

I have no experience with the other lenses, but according to Boz's site, the various optical formulas for the 135 lens are:

SMCP 135/2.5: 6 groups, 6 elements (also SMC Takumar 135/2.5, but not Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5)
SMCP A 135/2.8: 4 groups, 4 elements
SMCP A* 135/1.8: 6 groups, 7 elements
SMCP F and FA 135/2.8: 7 groups, 8 elements
SMCP 135/3.5: 4 groups, 4 elements (also SMCT 135/3.5)
SMCP 135/3.5: 5 groups, 5 elements
TAKUMAR (BAYONET) 135/2.5: ? groups, ? elements

and, quote:

'I've used the Takumar (BAYONET) 135/2.5 lens and find that while it is quite sharp, the color and contrast are not up to par with even my older M42 mount Super-Multi-Coated Takumar lenses'

quotes taken from: http://stans-photography.info/LongComments.html#135%20mm%20General%20Discussion


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

A real prejudice would have not let me go for and buy this lens, don't you think?


Orio I never thought that you personally were prejudiced,
and you just may successfully scattered my suspicion that others are, you are not even german..Wink

but I should be more careful with my words, this forum is full of the most kind and friendly people, please everybody be assured that my remarks are meant jokingly, maybe mockingly, but certainly friendly with a big smile.

Seriously I had thought that early Takumars were considered the best together with Leica optically and their build quality seems better than that of other german and russian lenses.

Last edited by kuuan on Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:03 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pentax made several versions of this lens over the years, and apart from changes to the coating I don't believe that they made major (if any) changes to the optical design. I have several versions.

The earliest is a preset version with a 46mm filter ring and some chrome parts on the barrel , which was followed by a preset version with a 49mm filter ring and a full black barrel which it kept through the life of the screw mount M42 lenses.

Then came a model with a semi auto aperture (which had to be cocked to open the aperture to full for viewing these were called auto takumars but did not live up to their name obviously) and then a model with fully auto aperture and single coating (marketed as Super Takumars.)

Finally they marketed the famed multi coated SMC Takumars which was the last model before they moved to bayonet mount.


As far as I know all of these models are highly regarded. I have them all, having slowly accumulated a collection over the years. One day I must post some comparative tests to see if there is any difference in the results produced. I expect the only differences would br through the changes to coatings but it would be interesting never the less.

Their 105mm f2.8 went thru a similar range of designs which paralleled the 135mm changes. I also have each of these apart from the semi auto version which is a bit hard to find although it comes up on eBay from time to time. They are equally nice lenses and well worth collecting and using.

I have found Pentaxes M42 lenses to be of universally high quality. They have a reputation for superb build (and that reputation is well deserved in my view) and the the have high optical quality although like many lenses of the era their corner performance suffers a bit and they benefits from stopping down a couple of stops.

The only problem they seem to suffer from is that their aperture design can lead sometimes to them getting a little sluggish over time and they may need a service to clean the aperture mechanism and get it working properly. This is not that common however and if it does occur the service is relatively simple and not too expensive. I should add in fairness that I have found that Canon FL lenses also have this problem from time to time.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kuuan wrote:
...and you just may successfully scattered my suspicion that others are, you are not even german..Wink


Watch it, neighbour! Wink


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The early models of the Super-Takumar 135/3.5 lens were 5 element/4 group lenses, while the subsequent models (including K-mount SMC-Pentax lenses) were simplified 4 element/4 group lenses. The 5/4 version is reportedly better.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have what I think is the earliest model, Takumar 135/3.5 pre-set. I've only taken a few images with it, but the bokeh was very nice. I still need to get it into something to show sharpness.

Cosmetically a beautiful lens (I love the chrome and black parts), and mechanically as smooth as it gets, comparable in smooth action to my old Summicron 50/2.



PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurence

You take the sexiest pictures!


patrickh


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
patrickh wrote:
Laurence
You take the sexiest pictures!
patrickh


Haha! Almost, but not quite as sexy as young, toned female? Wink

Laurence (Larry)


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The early models of the Super-Takumar 135/3.5 lens were 5 element/4 group lenses, while the subsequent models (including K-mount SMC-Pentax lenses) were simplified 4 element/4 group lenses. The 5/4 version is reportedly better.


Abazz Do you have a link for this, I am interested to read about it. But I do not know much about K mount only the M42 mount which I regard as superb lenses in general. Were the SMC M42 mount lenses also 5/4 design?


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:18 am    Post subject: Asahi Pentax lenses Reply with quote
Asahi Pentax lenses:

Takumar lenses (Pentax M42 mount)
http://forum.mflenses.com/pentax-lenses-and-cameras-t2798.html#42014

Pentax lenses (Pentax K mount)
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/index.html


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterm1 wrote:
Abazz Do you have a link for this, I am interested to read about it. But I do not know much about K mount only the M42 mount which I regard as superb lenses in general. Were the SMC M42 mount lenses also 5/4 design?


Peter, I got this from some old Pentax lens catalogs. It is also mentioned in Gerjan van Oosten's The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Screwmount Guide, Uitgeverij Jansk, Zeist, 1999.

The first Tele-Takumar 135/3.5 was designed in 1953 as a chrome finish lens in M37 mount for the Asahiflex cameras; it was a 5 element/4 group formula.

In 1957, the lens was released in M42 mount for the new Asahi Pentax camera as the Takumar 135/3.5. It was the preset version in black barrel with chrome rings; product number was 324/43240. The optical formula was unchanged. This is Laurence's lens pictured above.

In 1959, the lens was released in all black finish with semi-automatic aperture preselection (the mechanism has to be manually cocked with a small lever on the lens after each exposure) as the Auto-Takumar 135/3.5. Product number was 343.

In 1961, the Takumar preset lens underwent some cosmetic changes (all black finish, lighter weight). Product number was 353/43530.

In 1963, the Auto-Takumar was replaced by the Super-Takumar 135/3.5 model I with all black finish and full automatic aperture preselection. Product number was 354/43540.

In 1965, the rear group doublet of the Super-Takumar was replaced with a single meniscus, thus giving birth to the new Model II lens with 4 elements in 4 groups. Product number was 43541.

All subsequent versions (S-M-C-Takumar and K-mount) shared the same optical formula as the Super-Takumar model II.

Many Pentax lenses (like the 35/2, 135/2.5, 300/4, ...) had their optical formula changed at some point in the production of the lens, sometimes significantly, so it is always better to specify the product number when referring to these lenses. On Super-Takumar and S-M-C-Takumar lenses, the product number is engraved beneath the Auto/Manual lever.

It is always funny to read those threads about the S-M-C-Takumar 135/2.5, a popular lens which seems quite controversial. Some users find it quite mediocre, while the others consider it a great lens. Could it be an issue with quality control at the Pentax factory? In fact, the explanation is quite simple: there are two different lenses named S-M-C-Takumar 135/2.5. The first model (product 43802) with a 5 element/4 group formula exhibited a lot of residual aberrations at wide apertures, while the second model (product 43812) had a much better corrected 6 element/6 groups construction.

Cheers!

Abbazz

Last edited by Abbazz on Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:16 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had this lens for a little while, in my opinion all later version Takumars are lot better. This is nice looking lens, but not a good one.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz, I am not sure to understand if you are talking of the 3.5/135 or the 2.5/135, in any case my 3.5/135 has serial number 43542.
-
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2