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

Super-Takumar 50mm 1:1.4 Serial No. 3166621
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't think I was shouting, as peterqd himself used capital letters to emphasis certain words ("WANT" and "FORCED"), and so I used exactly the same form of emphasis.

What RAART said is exactly what I meant. All I am saying is that if people don't use F1.4 on principle, but stop down to say, F1.8 or F2.0, then they should just buy a an F1.8 lens. Nobody is forcing them to buy an F1.4 lens.

Personally, using a F1.4 lens at F1.4 is the reason you buy one: to be able to use it not only when you NEED to, but when you WANT to be creative with DOF, bokeh and in low light.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so really, like always, the problem exists in tight wads like ourselves expecting these 40, 50yr old lens to be sharper then a bees dick.

f1.4 is sharp, you just need to change what your idea of sharp is Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dnas wrote:
Personally, using a F1.4 lens at F1.4 is the reason you buy one: to be able to use it not only when you NEED to, but when you WANT to be creative with DOF, bokeh and in low light.


Personally, I buy a lens because I can afford it, it fits one of my systems and I haven't got something similar, and it is the right price. I can be creative in all different ways that please me. I very rarely, if ever use the lens wide open (but I don't dismiss the possibility that I may want to some day).

I have owned fast motorbikes capable of 160mph+, but I have never felt the need to go flat out on one, preferring to enjoy the acceleration and handling (and fuel economy).

Everyone here has their own way of enjoying photography; there is no right or wrong way to use a lens as long as the results please you. As an amateur, hobby photographer, I only have to please myself. Cool


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

skida wrote:
I have owned fast motorbikes capable of 160mph+, but I have never felt the need to go flat out on one, preferring to enjoy the acceleration and handling (and fuel economy).


Personally I have owned a car capable of 180mph+ and I drove it to full potential... Live your life to the fullest... Cool


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Need a Nocton f/1.0 or possibly a f/0.75 lens specially made for dim movie sets? Laughing

Does the Canon FD lens have the SSC coatings? Like was stated, the S-M-C and SMC versions of the Takumar exhibit more contrast & color saturation, which can appear as increased sharpness.

So the Tak is soft at f/1.4, so are other f/1.4 lenses -- to what lens is it being compared to say you expect it would be sharper?


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

the lens I have it does have SSC or SC. It is the latest FD without breech lock.

For movies I will still use Pentax while IMO it is enough light sensitive and if needed I will have that dreamy look of the Pentax lens also I love how it renders colors and sharpness is good enough. I want to have another SMC Takumar F1.4 to see if it is better then this one I have currently.

I do have an bid running on ebay for Minolta MD Rokkor-x F1.2 and lets see if I will get it.

Honestly I always loved Nikon and Olympus lenses and those ones are always my favorite followed by Pentax and then other ones incl. Canon but it looks like that Canon FD series have few surprises for me there... Confused

Zeiss and Leica I never purchased while I had always Nikon gear but I think that I had few Voigtlaender's too. (sold all my Nikon gear prior relocation to Canada and keept just one body and 3 lenses)

Anyway the Nokton looks nice but it looks like that is good only for movies. I almost pulled the trigger on that one but in the end decided not to do while I mostly take photos and in rare occasions movies...


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RAART wrote:
skida wrote:
I have owned fast motorbikes capable of 160mph+, but I have never felt the need to go flat out on one, preferring to enjoy the acceleration and handling (and fuel economy).


Personally I have owned a car capable of 180mph+ and I drove it to full potential... Live your life to the fullest... Cool


The analogy is a bit different. You cannot drive 180mph more then just for very limited period of time. While shooting wide-open, you can do that most of the time. I do. Even closed down one stop doesn't interest me Smile. I don't think i live my life more intense then those shooting F8.0 Wink.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
RAART wrote:
skida wrote:
I have owned fast motorbikes capable of 160mph+, but I have never felt the need to go flat out on one, preferring to enjoy the acceleration and handling (and fuel economy).


Personally I have owned a car capable of 180mph+ and I drove it to full potential... Live your life to the fullest... Cool


The analogy is a bit different. You cannot drive 180mph more then just for very limited period of time. While shooting wide-open, you can do that most of the time. I do. Even closed down one stop doesn't interest me Smile. I don't think i live my life more intense then those shooting F8.0 Wink.


I did when I was younger... Right now just sometimes and later "kar bo, pa bo..."


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How do I live my life and use a F/1,4 lens wide open. I can't find the relation, but each one........

Why the F/1,4 lenses were made in the old age? Well, For use them in low light. The professional of that time did it. Time after that lenses

objects of status. So they were used to other things for what they were made: low light.

So, into the compromise of a high resolution at medium apertures or at wide open, the first won.

Today, some lenses like the samsung 1,4/85 have a high resolujtion wide open and close the aperure ring don't give us a lot of better

resolution.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I used the bike analogy because I see similarities:

I haven't ridden flat out, but it is there if I ever need it. Maybe it is more important that other bikers look and say "Wow! He has a 160mph bike!" Wink


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RAART wrote:


IMO his logic is perfectly fine, otherwise why people should purchase fast lens or please explain why you purchased F1.4 lens if you don't use it? For shallow depth of field? Everyone knows that fast lenses are generally made for low-light condition/photography.

Do you agree with this? Cool

Some people buy fast lenses for brighter viewfinder and ease of focus and composition, not to actually shoot with them wide open.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes I agree that you can get those lenses to have brighter viewfinder but did manufacturer made them for brighter viewfinder or go back to 1994 and say for what did you use your fast lens at that time? Wink


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

also I did test another 50's I have and the best I like to use in low-light situation is SMC Pentax-A 1.7 as well as Canon FD 1.8

Super-Takumar 1.4 will be used for movies and whenever I need that takumar touch in terms of color rendering...

SMC Pentax-A has very neutral color rendering, Canon FD slightly warmer very similar to Nikon AF 1.8 (same optical as Ai and non-Ai).

Just to mention that Canon for some reason is best to get focus accurate and when is happen the liveview screen changes slightly with some color shifting. I never had experience this like with that lens... Confused


PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dnas wrote:
All I am saying is that if people don't use F1.4 on principle, but stop down to say, F1.8 or F2.0, then they should just buy a an F1.8 lens. Nobody is forcing them to buy an F1.4 lens.

You don't understand me. Any lens gives better results when it is stopped down - generally the optimum point is midway between wide open and fully stopped down, but even one stop makes a difference. A 1.4 lens stopped down to 1.8 is improved - a 1.8 lens wide open is not improved.

I try to take all my pictures at f5.6 or f8 unless I want a large or small depth of field. Only if the light is very challenging will I open or close the aperture setting, and only then after adjusting the ISO and the shutter speed. Using a 1.4 lens is still very useful for me, for two reasons: it gives me more latitude to open the aperture should I need to, and it gives a brighter image in the viewfinder.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Any lens gives better results when it is stopped down - generally the optimum point is midway between wide open and fully stopped down, but even one stop makes a difference. A 1.4 lens stopped down to 1.8 is improved - a 1.8 lens wide open is not improved.

I try to take all my pictures at f5.6 or f8 unless I want a large or small depth of field. Only if the light is very challenging will I open or close the aperture setting, and only then after adjusting the ISO and the shutter speed. Using a 1.4 lens is still very useful for me, for two reasons: it gives me more latitude to open the aperture should I need to, and it gives a brighter image in the viewfinder.


This is very true... Wink