View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DAVEG
Joined: 08 Sep 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:41 pm Post subject: Takumar smc pentax 55mm f/2 test shots |
|
|
DAVEG wrote:
Due to heavy work load its late when I finally get a couple of shots off with the new lens just taken in my lounge under normal light conditons post more when time allows .
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10528 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
The lens is f/2, not f/1.2, right? (Please correct the subject line!) _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DAVEG
Joined: 08 Sep 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
DAVEG wrote:
Has f1.2 on the lens if I put f/2 that is complained at you cant win . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2201 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
The lens is f/2, not f/1.2, right? (Please correct the subject line!) |
+1:
Better not creating confusion in users that may have not seen the other thread with the pics of the lens.
This is an smc pentax m 1:2 (which menas f2) 50mm
Strangely enough, I don't remember having seen much images taken with this lens. I suspect it to be pretty good, so I'm looking forward for some samples. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6008 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
DAVEG wrote: |
Has f1.2 on the lens if I put f/2 that is complained at you cant win . |
Just to help clarify.
A lens with f 1:2 is an f2 lens.
A lens with f 1:1.2 is an f1.2 lens.
Now if yours has had a stop instead of a colon it might look like f1.2 when it should read f1:2
Hope this clears up any confusion.
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 Posts: 1364 Location: Slovenia
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
I'm sorry if I create more confusion but I'm confused too. I always thought "standard" notation was either 1:2 or f/2 or F2. That is small f if you use the division sign and capital F if you don't. And when you use the colon, that signifies the ratio between aperture diameter and focal length of the lens. As in 1:2 would mean aperture diameter is half the focal length. The same way "f/2" is supposed to mean the diameter of the aperture is "f/2" where small f stands for focal length. Which can also be written with the f substituted with the actual focal length as in "50mm/2". And "F2" would be shorthand for "f/2". Is my logic wrong? I actually writing "f2" and "f1.2" more correct? _________________ my flickr stream |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DAVEG
Joined: 08 Sep 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
DAVEG wrote:
When I first said it was a f2 I was corrected to put it was a f 1.2 OR 1:2 To be corrected but this causes confusion to those who like myself are new to manaul lenses and there focal lentgh denominations and correct meaning , but when advertised for sale the vendor put F/2 when its a 1:2 then there is 1:2,2 which I think is the f/2 my apologies for the confusion but what is correct. :?so its f/2 then. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6008 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Perhaps this will help.
Here is a picture of an f1.2 lens - notice on the lens 1:1.2
Here is a picture of an f2 lens - notice on the lens 1:2
A picture of an f2.2 lens would have on the lens 1:2.2
Like this one:
Cheers
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6624 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Title edited to avoid confusion. Glad you're enjoying the Takumar, it's a cracker...superb value. _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DAVEG
Joined: 08 Sep 2013 Posts: 110
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DAVEG wrote:
yeah the contrast is pretty good need more practice with it I feel . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16541 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
Guess there is ONLY one Takumar f2 lens in this world, hence the title?
Oh, now we have two threads about that very same lens, how clever is that...? _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
It's three now and there was another last week.
All these 'standard' speed 50s from the major makers are very similar, they are all more than good enough, so just pick one you like and stick with it, you'll save a lot of time and money that way. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|