Tele-Takumar 400mm/5.6f M42

zewrak · Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 1212

Got an offer to buy a Tele-Takumar 400mm/5.6f M42, anyone got any good examples of the quality? How much should I pay for one, roughly? There is no way I can go try it before I buy, because of huge distances.

Grateful for advice.

padiej · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 8:53 pm Post subject:

Hallo!
I hava a Pentax smc M 200/4. It is very good. The 400/5.6 is rare and expensive. A 300mm pentacon is cheaper (about 50-100�) and also very good. I don�t know the price (I find two offers about 150� and 450�).

If you wan�t this lense, 150� is a good price, I think.

regard�s Peter

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

I have good opinion only from SMC and Super Takumar lenses. I have Tele-Takumar 200mm lens so crap.

Himself · Expire: 2013-05-30

What's the condition of the lens?
See some prices here

http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx

zewrak · Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 1212

The condition is B classed which is "excellent". And the price is about 160�. Can't find any good examples on the web at all :/

This is the only pictures I've seen, but babelfish bails on me, so I have no clue what it says : Examples

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

no examples means rather crap than good one, in this price range I suggest to take a Sigma 400mm f5.6 APO instead.

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

There's a little bit of info here:
http://www.aohc.it/tak05e.htm
I thought from Attila's remarks this was one of those crappy non-SMC lenses, but in fact it's an early Takumar before SMC. An SMC version was released later, but it looks like the optical formula remained the same. I expect it will probably be very solid and well built and pretty good optically, although at f5.6 and non-coated it will be quite dim in the v/finder and difficult to avoid shake due to the slow shutter speed.

zewrak · Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 1212

zewrak · Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 1212

I bought it, I'll get back to you with pictures when it arrives Wink

. Also got a super-tak 135/3.5.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Good luck mate! I hope you will satisfied. My Tele-Takumar 200mm a really crap lens.

zewrak · Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 1212

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

My experience with 400mm f/6.3 or 300/5.5/5.6 and a Pentax K100D, which should be the same as K10D. I have two 500's, two 400's, and three 300's, all old and slow, with the same results for all of them.

Focus confirm seems to work well down to f/8, and sometimes to f/11

The viewfinder is quite bright even at f/8, because the viewfinder screens of this series are not really ground-glass. They pass a lot more light, at the cost of making them poor at judging focus, so you are really depending (too much) on the focus confirm. Focusing is a much bigger problem than shaking. I often focus at f/5.5/5.6/6.3 and stop down to shoot.

Long, slow lenses are very usable hand-held on the Pentax because of the IS, down to maybe 1/200 with 400mm. Maybe less if you brace your body and time your breath (like shooting a rifle). I have done 1/90 or so with a 300mm hand-held. This means you can easily go down to f/16 or even less handheld in sunlight. At 1/500 or better you have no worries at all. You can snap-shoot.