| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bluedxca93
Joined: 19 May 2021
Posts: 67
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 6:07 am Post subject: Takumar wide angle lenses are they good? |
 |
|
bluedxca93 wrote:
Hi,
Are the takumar wide angles good?
They seem to have similar build quality to the yashinon dx line.
Especially the 35 mm 3.5 version seems to be normal priced and on the net i found great test shots.
Had a vivitar 35 mm tokina made wirh soft corners. Howbis the tak 35 mm?
Kind regards bluedxca93
_________________
Canon eos 2000d
Yashinon DX .135 f2.8
Yashica Yashinon DX 50 f1.7
Yashica Yashinon ML 28 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kypfer
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Posts: 520
Location: Jersey C.I.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
kypfer wrote:
My Super Takumar 35mm f/3.5 (circa 1964) has always given me perfectly satisfactory results, but I'm notorious for not bothering about the odd few pixels in the corner of the frame not being perfectly sharp, especially at full aperture, that's all part of the "character" of the lens … inevitably YMMV 
FWIW, I'm also perfectly happy with the results I get from my Vivitar TX 35mm f/2.5, my Tamron Adapt-a-Matic 35mm f/2.8, my Soligor 35mm f/2.8 in T2 mount and especially my Fujinon 35mm f/1.9 … make of that what you will |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10571
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
28mm has very low distortion.
35/2.3 is magical.
35/2 fat version is best of 35s but big.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 (151B), 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 |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 2502
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Compared to contemporary lenses they are among the best, also compared to third party stuff up into the eighties and nineties. I am sure someone will find fault with their corners and have some Minolta that does better though.
_________________
pentaxian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012
Posts: 552
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
I am quite happy with the Super Takumar 28 / 3.5, not the best with low light (weak in contrast wide open), but still much better than mostly competitors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 2937
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
I like the S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5. It's very tiny and beautifully built. It's by no means technically perfect, but the images are very pleasing and poppy, also pretty good when stopped down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
y
Joined: 11 Aug 2013
Posts: 304
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
y wrote:
The S-M-C 35/3.5 is rather good considering its age even on full-frame. On APS-C it surely works even better.
My copy of S-M-C 28/3.5 was rather poor on infinity even on APS-C. Maybe it was just a bad copy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
The 35/3,5 is a very good lens for walk around.
Very tiny, light and in the pic you will see all that you wanted to.
A long time ago I have used the big and oldest 28/3,5 and it seemed very sharp. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2935
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I doubt you could find a better value. Considering age, build quality, image IQ, price and potential resale value you are unlikelyto beat them. Newer wides will certainly beat it on image quality but price and resale value and build quality are nowhere near as good (damn few lenses ever built will compete on this front IMHO). How much were you thinking to spend? A hundred and a quarter should get a very nice example of the Asahi Pentax-M SMC 35mm 2.8 in PK mount.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
titrisol70
Joined: 14 Dec 2021
Posts: 156
Location: State of Denial
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2023 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
titrisol70 wrote:
Agreed, the 35/3.5 is excellent in APS-C and 35mm.
Depending on which camera system you will use the lens, and considering these are 50+yr old they can be excellent to good. Also some have not been cared properly or have misaligned over time.
Considering that I'm a pentaxian, I tend to rate them high
The 28/3.5 is a VG lens in APS, G in 35mm
and the 20mm is G in APS.
I've had a few 28s and recently got a 35 and a 20.
The Takumar 28 is better than most lenses of the time, but not as good as the NIkkor 28mm/2.8 or the 1980s SMC-A 28mm/2.8
 Pentax SV / H3v - SuperTakumar 28mm
| papasito wrote: |
The 35/3,5 is a very good lens for walk around.
Very tiny, light and in the pic you will see all that you wanted to.
A long time ago I have used the big and oldest 28/3,5 and it seemed very sharp. |
_________________
Pentaxian and proud
Cameras: Spotmatic, I and F, Pentax ME, MESuper, ME-F, P30t, K-x, MZ-5, Mz-7 // K100D, Kx, K5IIs, K3-iii
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Super Takumar 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/28, 1:1.8/55, 1:1.4/50 (7-element), 1:3.5/135
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/55, 1:1.4/50, 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135,, 1:4/200, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50
Lots of M, A, F, FA, DA series lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bluedxca93
Joined: 19 May 2021
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2023 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
bluedxca93 wrote:
I would use it on APSC on an eos 2000d.
While not beeing the best camera it produces sharp enough photos for din A4/a3 pronts which is enough for my purposes.
Thanks A lot for the answers.
The reason i would like to buy the 35 takumar is that i suppose it has a good built quality while examples looking sharp and price is reasonable.
Have an 28 mm ml on which i have infinity problems either buy a second 28 ml or a new adapter...The 28 mm takumar seems to cost much more than the 35mm.
_________________
Canon eos 2000d
Yashinon DX .135 f2.8
Yashica Yashinon DX 50 f1.7
Yashica Yashinon ML 28 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 2937
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2023 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| titrisol70 wrote: |
I've had a few 28s and recently got a 35 and a 20.
The Takumar 28 is better than most lenses of the time, but not as good as the NIkkor 28mm/2.8 or the 1980s SMC-A 28mm/2.8
|
It's successor however, the SMC Pentax (non M) 28mm f/3.5, is one of the best vintage 28's around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
y
Joined: 11 Aug 2013
Posts: 304
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2023 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
y wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
| titrisol70 wrote: |
I've had a few 28s and recently got a 35 and a 20.
The Takumar 28 is better than most lenses of the time, but not as good as the NIkkor 28mm/2.8 or the 1980s SMC-A 28mm/2.8
|
It's successor however, the SMC Pentax (non M) 28mm f/3.5, is one of the best vintage 28's around. |
Yea, the K 28/3.5 is astonishing for landscapes. However, it is not a common lens and the price is kinda high nowadays. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alsatian2017
Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2023 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alsatian2017 wrote:
| titrisol70 wrote: |
I've had a few 28s and recently got a 35 and a 20.
The Takumar 28 is better than most lenses of the time, but not as good as the NIkkor 28mm/2.8 or the 1980s SMC-A 28mm/2.8
|
Which is quite logical since the SMC Takumar is the oldest of the three lenses. Nethertheless, it is very good and perfectly useable as a landscape lens (very good behaviour against the light and uniform sharpness stopped down). While it might be not as good as the later SMC Pentax 28 mm f/3.5, it's close enough to replace it.
_________________
Personal website : https://volkergilbertphoto.com
Classic lenses : https://volkergilbertphoto.com/objektive/
Instagram : https://www.instagram.com/volker.gilbert/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 2502
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2023 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
The SMC Pentax-M 28/3.5 is not so far behind the SMC K version and much cheaper. On APS-C extreme corner performance (Which is not bad, just not as good as the K) won't matter. The Pentax-m 28/2.8 is no slouch either. I prefer them over the A version because of build quality. The A series was a bit lacking in that especially the more common 50 an 28mm lenses.
_________________
pentaxian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
titrisol70
Joined: 14 Dec 2021
Posts: 156
Location: State of Denial
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2023 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
titrisol70 wrote:
The M series 28mm was my go for years, until I got a A-28mm, which communicates with the Pentax DSLRs and allows me to control the aperture
Optically they are not disimilar
I know of the K-28/3.5 but it is a bit pricey
| D1N0 wrote: |
| The SMC Pentax-M 28/3.5 is not so far behind the SMC K version and much cheaper. On APS-C extreme corner performance (Which is not bad, just not as good as the K) won't matter. The Pentax-m 28/2.8 is no slouch either. I prefer them over the A version because of build quality. The A series was a bit lacking in that especially the more common 50 an 28mm lenses. |
_________________
Pentaxian and proud
Cameras: Spotmatic, I and F, Pentax ME, MESuper, ME-F, P30t, K-x, MZ-5, Mz-7 // K100D, Kx, K5IIs, K3-iii
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Super Takumar 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/28, 1:1.8/55, 1:1.4/50 (7-element), 1:3.5/135
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/55, 1:1.4/50, 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135,, 1:4/200, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50
Lots of M, A, F, FA, DA series lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kymarto
Joined: 30 Nov 2016
Posts: 406
Location: Portland, OR and Milan, Italy
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2023 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kymarto wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
28mm has very low distortion.
35/2.3 is magical.
35/2 fat version is best of 35s but big. |
I second the f2.3! Incredible bokeh, at least
_________________
Vintage lens aficionado |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
