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

Comparing Super Takumar 55mm f/2 to f/1.8 and others - help
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:19 pm    Post subject: Comparing Super Takumar 55mm f/2 to f/1.8 and others - help Reply with quote

Hello,

I have two question to fellow MFLenses lovers:
1) How do you compare Super Takumar 55/2 to Super Takumar 55/1.8 - I would especially appreciate opinions of people who own/owned both of them and could compare side to side
2) How do you find Super Takumars flare/harsh sunlight resistance in comparison with SMC Takumars

Above questions poped into my mind, as I just recently bought (didn't arrive yet) Super Takumar 55mm/2, firstly because I wanted to try a big pie called 'Takumar' and secondly because it was a lot cheaper than the Super Takumar 55mm/1.8 and SMC versions. However just after I bought it I realized I don't know anything about this particular version. Here, on forum I found some photos and don't remember where, but I read statement that said f2 version is optically identical to the f1.8, just different aperture.

EV and DOF difference between f2 and f1.8 is negligible, so don't mind it's darker, I'm just interested in overall performance (sharpness, color rendition, flare resistance etc.)

Mateusz


PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the 55mm f1.8 and it is excellent. I haven't used the 55mm f2 but one would expect little difference.
Here is a useful link for you to explore if you are looking into Takumars - and anything else Pentax for that matter:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/category-Pentax-Takumar-M42-Screwmount-Normal-Primes.html
It rates the 1.8 ahead of the f2 based on user experience.
As to flare, I think as photographers, we should keep in mind that lenses usually perform better with a hood in spite of multi-coatings.
And yes, the SMC's are better if the lens is pointed sunwards
Cheers
OH


PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have the f2, but I have many super vs s-m-c takumars, and the difference in flare resistance is quite evident.
That doesn't mean s-m-c's are always better, though: in some focal lengths and for some uses the subtler tones of the super taks are better.
As a rule of thumb I like s-m-c wides (24, 28, 35 f3.5) more than the older versions.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got a Auto Takumar 55 1.8 on a 1960 Pentax K a few days ago, and the lens has hardly been off my NEX5 since. I have no experience with f2 version at all, but I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the f1.8, it's superb. ( I shall post a revue of mine in the next few days )


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

the super takumar 55mm f2 lens is the exact same lens as the super takumar 55mm f1.8 lens but with a small fixed stop installed to make it f2. this was done for marketing reasons. performance is identical at f2 or smaller fstops.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hifisapi wrote:
the super takumar 55mm f2 lens is the exact same lens as the super takumar 55mm f1.8 lens but with a small fixed stop installed to make it f2. this was done for marketing reasons. performance is identical at f2 or smaller fstops.

I believe that it was mass production cost savings that were the main incentive, with the glass being the most expensive part,
And your break even point for the f1.8 lens is 200,000 units, so you produce 300,000, then you produce another 500,000 units that are more or less the same but with different engraving on the aperture ring and name ring, and the top part of the aperture assembly has a smaller opening to limit it to f2. Quite smart if you ask me.
The f2 version has a slightly smoother bokeh @f2 due to the more round aperture, but that advantage goes away at other f values.
In some ways I prefer the 55/1.8 more then the 50/1.4, the rendering in particular.

RE: the Super-Tak vs the S-M-C, the S-M-C has more contrast and better flare resistance, but the Super-Tak's flare is not harsh, in fact I actually like it's flare more than just about any other lens out there that I've tried.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you all for reply.
Then it's just as I read - f2 is just like f1.8 in case of glass.
Well, maybe I was a little bit hasty while buying Super Takumar instead wait a little bit and end up on buying SMC in terms of better flare resistance.

Another quick question how do you compare SMC Takumar 55/1.8 to SMC-Pentax-M 50/1.7 as I bought the second one for friend and as I remember it was quite a lens, contrasty, sharp (don't know how much light resistant it was as I have it only in cloudy days). When it comes to think about it, I don't know why I bought Super Takumar instead of SMC-Pentax-M 50/1.7 Wink
Well, I could always sell it if it will not be as good as I thought and buy another one.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PhantomLord wrote:
Thank you all for reply.
Then it's just as I read - f2 is just like f1.8 in case of glass.
Well, maybe I was a little bit hasty while buying Super Takumar instead wait a little bit and end up on buying SMC in terms of better flare resistance.

Another quick question how do you compare SMC Takumar 55/1.8 to SMC-Pentax-M 50/1.7 as I bought the second one for friend and as I remember it was quite a lens, contrasty, sharp (don't know how much light resistant it was as I have it only in cloudy days). When it comes to think about it, I don't know why I bought Super Takumar instead of SMC-Pentax-M 50/1.7 Wink
Well, I could always sell it if it will not be as good as I thought and buy another one.


Don't be too hasty in judging the Super Takumar 55mm f2 until you have tried it and put it through your normal shooting regimes.
I am willing to bet that you will not be disappointed.
As already mentioned - it has the same glass as the f1.8 which is a superb lens.
It has a persona that the SMC Pentax does not.
Even if I ever get an SMC Pentax, I won't be getting rid of my Super Takumar 55. My son has been using it and loves it as well, I'm thinking of buying another one for his use.
Cheers
OH


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Surely, I'm not judging book by the cover Wink
I'm just not entirely fond of my decision of buying as it was quick and without any background instead of knowing Takumars reputation.

Still I'm waiting impatiently for Super Takumar to arrive.

Mateusz


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm pretty sure you won't be disappointed. Both super and smc versions of the 55 are excellent lenses: funnily enough I think their reputation is somewhat kept back by their easily availability and consequent relatively low price - just like it happens with helios 44's, but with perfect build quality.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Concerning Helios 44 - I love this lens, one of my examples is razor sharp wide open, contrasty and bokeh is great. The only problem with Helioses 44 is quite poor behaviour in harsh sunlight, even with hood on. Therefore for me it's not the lens I reach for in bright, sunny days when I will be shooting in open terrain.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was wowed by my S-T 55/2 when I first used it, I paid $20 for it, and it came with a Spotmatic attached, I stopped using it when I got the 55/1.8(x3 early S-T with aperture ring that goes backwards, a later S-T, & an S-M-C) and found out they are optically the same.
I don't have any pics online right now as I'm using other lenses right now.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No idea with 55/2 but i have a 55/1.8 super tak here are a few photos

http://www.flickr.com/photos/abhishekray/sets/72157632880153326/

I would say its Superb Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you guys for such number of responses, now I really hope Post will deliver it quickly.
raay04 I already saw your photos. In fact those were one of the reason I decided to look for Super Tak Wink


PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really love takumar 55 1.8, I own both super and SMC version. There is something about its character and gradation of out of focus areas that few lenses can match, plus it is sharp even wide open. Besides, mechanically they are simply superior to any other mf lens. It is my number one lens from out of more than 30. Everyone should have one. I prefer it to other fifties with higher resolution, like pentax m 50/1.7 or 1.4 or p/k rikenons.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are some examples taken with Super-Takumar 55mm ƒ2
Hope this helps.







PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow, very beautiful images from that tak 55/2. It has lovely bokeh


PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

smc P55/2 compared to 44M-4:

smc pentax 55/2 at F2 (rear lens had a lot of mold/fungus , exactly at the point where the two rear lenses are glued together ( glue based on organic ? )


helios 44m-4 mc at F2


PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
In some ways I prefer the 55/1.8 more then the 50/1.4, the rendering in particular.

I have the K-mount SMC "K" versions of these two, and I quite agree -- the 55/1.8 is a gem.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:
I got a Auto Takumar 55 1.8 on a 1960 Pentax K a few days ago, and the lens has hardly been off my NEX5 since. I have no experience with f2 version at all, but I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the f1.8, it's superb.


A love that old little Auto Takumar 55 1.8 very much, but the Super Takumar 55 1.8, standard lens on my Spotmatic as well. They are both superb. Like 1 small


PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2016 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laugh 1

Zombie thread!


PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

WNG555 wrote:
Laugh 1

Zombie thread!
Laugh 1


PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zombie thread indeed.

But if it can be any use to new readers, I dismantled both to a degree, in order to investigate what made one an f2.0, and one an f1.8.

As you can see below, the f2.0 has deeper name and locking rings, and a fixed insert governing the maximum aperture. They were the only differences I could find myself. Hope it helps someone.






And just as some food for thought. It crossed my mind at the time that it may have cost slightly more to manufacture the f2.0 than it would the f1.8. Go figure.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 1.8/55 is a great lens, both optically and mechanically. It was the choice of pretty much every art college in Britain, mounted on a Spotmatic or later M42 Pentax body.

I spent 4 years of my photography degree using the 1.8/55 on a K1000 (with a M42-K adapter) and didn't use much else, the same could be said of all the other students.

The later 1.7/50 is probably sharper, it certainly has better coatings and it's overall a great lens, but it differs quite a lot in how it renders - it has a modern look, whereas the 1.8/55 has a more classical, characterful rendering, and for that reason I prefer the 1.8/55.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe the vast majority of the cost is the manufacturing of the optical elements, that they used the same optics in two different Kit lenses over such a long time period magnified the economies of scale.
That it was such a good lens is a nice bonus.