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

Super-Takumar 1:4.5/20mm Asahi Opt. Co. (M42)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 11:54 am    Post subject: Super-Takumar 1:4.5/20mm Asahi Opt. Co. (M42) Reply with quote
Just because of the recent discussion about 20mm lenses I was interested to see the different performance of my 20mm lenses on FF camera. I compared the Takumar with my Minolta AF 20mm/F2.8 lens on my Sony A850 FF body. The Minolta lens is definitely not the best Minolta lens, however it's optically identical to the MF version in MD mount.
Samples RAW, no manipulation.

Interesting to note the difference in color although there are only seconds between the captures. Maybe the different coating of the lenses caused this effect. But that can be changed anyhow, therefore no criteria to judge on lens quality.
Both pictures at F=8.

The Minolta lens seems to be sharper. But only visible in pixel peeping size. I doub't that on the final picture (print out) any differences would be really visible, especially when the color is corrected during PP.

So my final judgement is that both of them are more than just usable on FF cameras.

Super-Takumar:



Crop:



Minolta:



Crop:



PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Was the camera set to AWB or custom WB? There's obviously different colour temp in the samples. Also minolta seems quite a bit sharper to me.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RTI wrote:
Was the camera set to AWB or custom WB? There's obviously different colour temp in the samples. Also minolta seems quite a bit sharper to me.


Just checked again to be sure: AWB was the setting of the camera for both pictures. However, as I said already. This doesn't matter anyway.
But the cause of the different reaction of the WB automatic must be the lens. There is no other explanation for that. Everything else was the same.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
RTI wrote:
Was the camera set to AWB or custom WB? There's obviously different colour temp in the samples. Also minolta seems quite a bit sharper to me.


Just checked again to be sure: AWB was the setting of the camera for both pictures. However, as I said already. This doesn't matter anyway.
But the cause of the different reaction of the WB automatic must be the lens. There is no other explanation for that. Everything else was the same.



Well, that actually would matter, at least for me. Having two lenses with equal focal distance but different colour reproduction can introduce some headache in certain situations. Ofc you can correct in raw, but still DSLR lenses today are used a lot for video too...


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Picture of the lenses:



PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Picture of the lenses:


Wow, that Takumar is pristine Exclamation


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RTI wrote:

Well, that actually would matter, at least for me. Having two lenses with equal focal distance but different colour reproduction can introduce some headache in certain situations. Ofc you can correct in raw, but still DSLR lenses today are used a lot for video too...


Maybe it's also anything within LR6? I just exported the RAW files from Lightroom into Irfan for re-sizing. However, even LR6 shows the RAW pictures already in other colors. Maybe LR uses some other algorithms for different lenses? I don't know, however will watch this behavior further. Maybe I'll check with an other camera later. This two lenses could be used on almost every camera I have. Only the Minolta lens is not possible on the Pentax SLR, but on the 3 different mirrorless cameras I have....
Anyway, Video is nothing I would need.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Minolta is a much later lens.
I think that Minolta is from 10-15 years after the Takumar was replaced by the Pentax K mount versions.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
The Minolta is a much later lens.
I think that Minolta is from 10-15 years after the Takumar was replaced by the Pentax K mount versions.


The Takumar (11 elements, 10 groups) was introduced 1968 and the Minolta (10 elements, 9 groups) 1986; however, the Minolta is based on the MC version introduced 1975.
In terms of development only 7 years difference....
But that is not the point. I just wanted to compare the Takumar with ANY other lens. Technically I had no other choice to use any other 20mm on my A850 for comparison on FF body. Especially for wide angles the more critical test on FF is the preferred method; at least in my opinion. On smaller sensor sizes they are better anyway.
Although the Minolta lens performs slightly better, the Takumar is still a great lens. On the final picture there is barely any difference visible. The crop view doesn't say anything about the final picture if not above 60x40cms in print.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thorium yellowing on the Takumar?
Would love that lens btw... I looooove my Taks!


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AWB can react differently depending the lens . On my A7 is not consistent if I use non native lenses.


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rudolfkremers wrote:
Thorium yellowing on the Takumar?
Would love that lens btw... I looooove my Taks!


Although there is an evidence that Asahi used thorium oxide for their lenses (55mm) I didn't find any evidence for the 20mm lens.
So it's rather unlikely. However, maybe I'll recheck with fixed WB setting to see if it's really the lens or rather the camera or the software.

Takumars are not bad at all. Wink


PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
AWB can react differently depending the lens . On my A7 is not consistent if I use non native lenses.


Most probably that is the reason for different looking colors. Will watch this behavior further.


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 5:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That ST would fit nicely in my Tak collection... Must resist temptation to search the net.... Cool


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lightshow wrote:
That ST would fit nicely in my Tak collection... Must resist temptation to search the net.... Cool

The Super Takumar 20/4.5 is a great lens, eventhough it cannot compete with modern superwides in terms of resolution. If you want to buy one, try to find a copy with the original lens shade, as it also serves as an adapter for 77mm filters --a 58mm filter mounted directly on the lens thread will vignette on a full frame camera. The lens shade is quite rare and fetches high prices when sold separately.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for all the info here.
I really appreciate it.


PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2015 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
pinholecam wrote:
Thanks for all the info here.
I really appreciate it.


My pleasure! Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just scored one as part of a package with the original hood and a original Asahi polarizer

Good lens so far, in APS-C is brilliant.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 3:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
titrisol70 wrote:
I just scored one as part of a package with the original hood and a original Asahi polarizer

Good lens so far, in APS-C is brilliant.
Like 1 Like 1 Congrats


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Super-Takumar 1:4.5/20mm Asahi Opt. Co. (M42) Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Just because of the recent discussion about 20mm lenses I was interested to see the different performance of my 20mm lenses on FF camera. I compared the Takumar with my Minolta AF 20mm/F2.8 lens on my Sony A850 FF body. The Minolta lens is definitely not the best Minolta lens, however it's optically identical to the MF version in MD mount.


That's wrong of course, as one can easily see when looking at the two lenses side-by-side. Not only is the AF much large than the MD, it also has a much larger front element, and its focusing is internal (unlike the MD). The lens section is different as well, of course:
http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/139-minolta-20mm-f28
http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sony-af/objektive/239-minolta-sony-af-20mm-f28
The AF is a completely new calculation, and as such it was patented by Minolta.

tb_a wrote:
The Minolta lens seems to be sharper. But only visible in pixel peeping size. I doub't that on the final picture (print out) any differences would be really visible, especially when the color is corrected during PP.

So my final judgement is that both of them are more than just usable on FF cameras.


Going from f4.5 to f2.8 in a FF superwide - while keeping its performance - is a challenge of its own. Go and ask Zeiss Oberkochen why they never released their Distagon 2.8/18mm prototype, but kept upgrading their Distagon 4/18mm instead (with floating focusing) ...!!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1