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

Are these any good?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

luisalegria wrote:
I can't tell the difference in sharpness between the Vivitar/Tokina 135 and the Takumar 135/3.5 at f/4
The Vivitar is a bit soft at f/2.8, but so are most 135's.
Bokeh is better than the Takumar I think. But that Takumar is known for pretty hard-edged bokeh.
You may be able to find a difference if you run a real test, unlike my general impressions from use.
It also depends on what sort of sensor you have. I have a 12mp APS-C. Some of the newer 4/3 sensors for instance tend to show more differences between lenses.

the takumar 135/3.5 is a four element nothing special lens so I wouldnt be surprised at your findings. the takumar to get is the six element smc takumar 135/2.5 (type 2, not the 5 element type 1). It is superb.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That Takumar 135/3.5 is sharp to the limit of my sensor wide open, so in my case, and I suspect for most people with typical DSLR's, any advantage of a better lens would be academic.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hifisapi wrote:
luisalegria wrote:
I can't tell the difference in sharpness between the Vivitar/Tokina 135 and the Takumar 135/3.5 at f/4
The Vivitar is a bit soft at f/2.8, but so are most 135's.
Bokeh is better than the Takumar I think. But that Takumar is known for pretty hard-edged bokeh.
You may be able to find a difference if you run a real test, unlike my general impressions from use.
It also depends on what sort of sensor you have. I have a 12mp APS-C. Some of the newer 4/3 sensors for instance tend to show more differences between lenses.

the takumar 135/3.5 is a four element nothing special lens so I wouldnt be surprised at your findings. the takumar to get is the six element smc takumar 135/2.5 (type 2, not the 5 element type 1). It is superb.


Yes, Hifisapi. Go for it, without hesitate.

I tried, as almost anyone did here, a lot of 135 mm lenses. And the SMC 2,5 "2 v." is one of the best.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

luisalegria wrote:
That Takumar 135/3.5 is sharp to the limit of my sensor wide open, so in my case, and I suspect for most people with typical DSLR's, any advantage of a better lens would be academic.


Yes, agree. But you can have a better cam in the future. And the lenses are so nice. Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hifisapi wrote:
luisalegria wrote:
I can't tell the difference in sharpness between the Vivitar/Tokina 135 and the Takumar 135/3.5 at f/4
The Vivitar is a bit soft at f/2.8, but so are most 135's.
Bokeh is better than the Takumar I think. But that Takumar is known for pretty hard-edged bokeh.
You may be able to find a difference if you run a real test, unlike my general impressions from use.
It also depends on what sort of sensor you have. I have a 12mp APS-C. Some of the newer 4/3 sensors for instance tend to show more differences between lenses.

the takumar 135/3.5 is a four element nothing special lens so I wouldnt be surprised at your findings. the takumar to get is the six element smc takumar 135/2.5 (type 2, not the 5 element type 1). It is superb.


yes, that tak is 4 element, however it has excellent sharpness and color depth. so far it's the best 135 i got, and i am going to hang on to it until i will get something better, particularly i'm on the look out for tair 11a. but thanks for your input, if i come across 135/2.5 sms tak - i will buy it Wink

how can i differentiate between type 1 and type 2? Are there any visible differences?


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jvg wrote:


how can i differentiate between type 1 and type 2? Are there any visible differences?



The only difference I know is the little number engraved on the back of the a/m switch.
The earlier version (5-4) has a number ending with 02, while in the latter (6-6) it ends with 12.

The latter is also slightly heavier


PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aanything wrote:
Jvg wrote:


how can i differentiate between type 1 and type 2? Are there any visible differences?



The only difference I know is the little number engraved on the back of the a/m switch.
The earlier version (5-4) has a number ending with 02, while in the latter (6-6) it ends with 12.

The latter is also slightly heavier


thanks. Smile