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

Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm better than I expected
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:42 pm    Post subject: Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm better than I expected Reply with quote
This lens tends not to be so appreciated but when the price was only 5 euro
and it was in great condition curiosity took over and luckily it did.it is a fun lens to use and not so long after its SMC siblings in performance.
What are your experiences with this lens?
My first test pictures with the lens,wide open.....This is a Made in Taiwan should I add,the Made in Japan apparently should be better.





PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If those are straight out of the camera, that's a good lens. The first picture is excellent, plenty sharp enough and lovely bokeh. The bokeh on the other shots is OK as well. Yes....a nice lens. Like 1 small


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They are resized and sharpen.It's a tricky lens to fokus the pictures gets hazy if
they are just a little back focused.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There are two Takumars bayonet 135mm, f2.5 and f2.8 .


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
There are two Takumars bayonet 135mm, f2.5 and f2.8 .

My is the f2.5 one


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zeeke wrote:

memetph wrote:
There are two Takumars bayonet 135mm, f2.5 and f2.8 .

My is the f2.5 one


They might be optically the same (4 elements in 4 groups), and both are likely really 135/2.8 lenses, too.

The 135/"2.5", just like the 135/2.8, has 52mm filter threads (so that it likely has a clear front aperture of less than 50mm). At 135mm, an f/2.5 lens should have a front aperture of 135/2.5 or 54mm.

[Compare that with the SMC Pentax "K" 135/2.5, which has 58mm filter threads, for example.]


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zeeke wrote:
My is the f2.5 one


This one, right?

It might get an unduly bad reputation because it's directly compared to the brilliant K135/2.5 (the last version of the M42 Takumar 135/2.5 has the same optical design).

Anyone who thinks they bought a K135 or a M42 Takumar 135/2.5 and gets this one instead will develop an irrational hatred for this lens...

Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 9:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm better than I expected Reply with quote
Zeeke wrote:
This lens tends not to be so appreciated but when the price was only 5 euro
and it was in great condition curiosity took over and luckily it did.it is a fun lens to use and not so long after its SMC siblings in performance.
What are your experiences with this lens?

At 5 euro, how could you go wrong? Smile

I used to have one of these, many moons ago, and was surprised at how good it was (pretty sharp and with good colors), as long as the lens is shielded from bright light. Without SMC, it flares pretty easily, but, if it is kept away from a backlit bright sky or some other backlit light source, it works pretty well.

EDIT: Here was my arsenal of Pentax 135's at one time (way back in Ye Olde Film Days of Yore) -

[A* 135/1.8, VS1 135/2.3, K 135/2.5, Takumar [Bayonet] 135/2.5, K 135/3.5 -- I still have only the VS1 135/2.3 and the K 135/2.5.]

And, Zeeke, I like your third shot the best. Smile


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fwcetus wrote:
Zeeke wrote:

memetph wrote:
There are two Takumars bayonet 135mm, f2.5 and f2.8 .

My is the f2.5 one


They might be optically the same (4 elements in 4 groups), and both are likely really 135/2.8 lenses, too.

The 135/"2.5", just like the 135/2.8, has 52mm filter threads (so that it likely has a clear front aperture of less than 50mm). At 135mm, an f/2.5 lens should have a front aperture of 135/2.5 or 54mm.

[Compare that with the SMC Pentax "K" 135/2.5, which has 58mm filter threads, for example.]


Yes I think you are right,when I stoped it dow to f4 I'm getting exactly half the shutter speed from wide open.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:21 pm    Post subject: Re: Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm better than I expected Reply with quote
fwcetus wrote:
Zeeke wrote:
This lens tends not to be so appreciated but when the price was only 5 euro
and it was in great condition curiosity took over and luckily it did.it is a fun lens to use and not so long after its SMC siblings in performance.
What are your experiences with this lens?

At 5 euro, how could you go wrong? Smile

I used to have one of these, many moons ago, and was surprised at how good it was (pretty sharp and with good colors), as long as the lens is shielded from bright light. Without SMC, it flares pretty easily, but, if it is kept away from a backlit bright sky or some other backlit light source, it works pretty well.

EDIT: Here was my arsenal of Pentax 135's at one time (way back in Ye Olde Film Days of Yore) -

[A* 135/1.8, VS1 135/2.3, K 135/2.5, Takumar [Bayonet] 135/2.5, K 135/3.5 -- I still have only the VS1 135/2.3 and the K 135/2.5.]

And, Zeeke, I like your third shot the best. Smile

WOW that Pentax a f1.8 looks delicious.. Wink Wink The new K1 with that one should been lots of fun...


PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Some more with the lens.Att f4 I think this is as sharp as Sonnar or Hexanone 3,2 but I have to check that at some point

F2.5



F4



F4



PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
~Very~ nice portraits, Zeeke. Like 1 small


PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fwcetus wrote:
~Very~ nice portraits, Zeeke. Like 1 small


Thank you!


PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Where a budget lens is capable of. Very nice portraits. Like 1


PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
+1!!
Like 1


PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent Zeeke.
OH


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Also would like to say, those are excellent portraits and good examples of the lens' sharpness.
It's indeed sharp. I also stayed away from this model due the all the bad reviews online, how it didn't have the SMC and was inferior to the K135 f/2.5. I wasn't impressed with my copies of the S-M-C Takumar f/2.5 v.1. So, who wants more disappointment!

Your gamble paid off, and the performance in those portraits had me go dig up my Ricoh XR Rikenon 135 f/2.8. This was Pentax-made (in Japan) lens, single-coated. I found it to be quite sharp. Looking it over, I believe it's probably siblings with the Takumar Bayonet.

Sometimes, reviews are just off. Another maligned 135mm is their SMC Pentax-M f/3.5. How the new 5 in 5 design was poor. They go unloved. I also took a chance on one for under $10.
It turned out to be excellent. Quite frankly, much better than all my other f/3.5, including Pentax's Super and S-M-C Takumars, Canon FD S.C., Olympus OM, Minolta MD's (4 in 4 and 5 in 5), and two Hexanon ARs (older and newer versions).
So, you never know until you put it on your camera.

Like 1
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1