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

Best 2.5/135mm for NEX: CANON S.C. or SMC ASAHI Takumar
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which 2.5/135mm do you prefer:
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar
38%
 38%  [ 7 ]
CANON S.C.
27%
 27%  [ 5 ]
Other
33%
 33%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 18



PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:32 am    Post subject: Best 2.5/135mm for NEX: CANON S.C. or SMC ASAHI Takumar Reply with quote

6 element 135mm f/2.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar, that is. Takumar is perhaps a bit sharper. I slightly prefer CANON for the colors and a little less annoying chroma. Here my last wide-open CANON attempts at street portraits. Ljubljana 2 days walk:

















PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2013 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Both of these lenses are surely very good. But when it comes to a 2.5/135 I would always recommend a Tamron 2.5/135. I just LOVE that glas!


PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2013 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That Canon certainly does a great job of separating the subject from the background. I don't think you can go wrong using it. If the Pentax is sharper, I'd ask if the additional sharpness is necessary. If it were me, I'd be checking the difference in out-of-focus highlights between the two lenses and go with the one that had the more appealing bokeh.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2013 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If someone can share Takumar's wide-open samples on NEX it would be great. I sold my sample sadly.
Poll situation is complete draw at the moment Smile.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Member Spotmatic posted some wide open photos using Takumar: http://forum.mflenses.com/super-multi-coated-takumar-12-5-135mm-m42-t47140.html


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SMC Takumar 2.5/135 i don't think v2 and Sony A7. Besides the house all F2.5:













PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
SMC Takumar 2.5/135 i don't think v2 ...


Model number on camera side of Auto/Man switch...43812 is model II. I've had both models. I is slightly above average compared to many 135/2.8 while II is first class...


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had the versión II of the takumar and used it with film, in the old days

Very strong CA. The spherochromatic afectted the quality of the pics.

The canon seems to be better in this question. Isn't it?


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:
Both of these lenses are surely very good. But when it comes to a 2.5/135 I would always recommend a Tamron 2.5/135. I just LOVE that glas!


Thanks.

Are there only one versión of the lens?

If there are more than one, which is the one you are talking about?

Thanks again.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:
Both of these lenses are surely very good. But when it comes to a 2.5/135 I would always recommend a Tamron 2.5/135. I just LOVE that glas!


I can confirm that the Tamron AD2 is a very good one.
Best is f4-f5.6, but f2.5 is not bad either.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no experiences with the lenses included in the poll,
and although i haven't used it much, i quite like this one :

http://forum.mflenses.com/fujinon-ebc-135-2-5-t71932,highlight,%2Bfujinon.html


PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2018 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for this post!! I'm going to snag a Canon 135 2.5 SC for $30 or $40... will be interesting to see how it compares to my MC Minolta 135 2.8. (Probably better for me to play with these and stick to my professional lens that range from 16mm to 100mm than plunge and get the new Sigma 135 1.8 at $1300, which I really want but continue to wonder if I actually NEED IT for my portrait work given that the 85mm range is more practical and often darn magical.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2018 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott Edwards wrote:
Thanks for this post!! I'm going to snag a Canon 135 2.5 SC for $30 or $40... will be interesting to see how it compares to my MC Minolta 135 2.8. (Probably better for me to play with these and stick to my professional lens that range from 16mm to 100mm than plunge and get the new Sigma 135 1.8 at $1300, which I really want but continue to wonder if I actually NEED IT for my portrait work given that the 85mm range is more practical and often darn magical.


Be aware that it is heavy, really at the heavy side of the vintage SLR 135mm list. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51865628 I have one converted to EF mount but use it seldom. Should however given the images in this thread. The Ernostar/Sonnar optical design character shows favorably. In the bag I usually have the Minolta MD III 135mm 3.5 which is almost the lightest SLR 135mm and very sharp over the field. Added a Mamiya Sekor CS 135mm 2.8 for its low weight too, sharp but with more CA than the other two. All have EF mounts now. The M-S weighs 325 grams after the mount conversion. For portraits I prefer a 100mm lens but the thread shows a 135mm works well on the street.