View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:41 am Post subject: Smc M 50 1.4 vs Takumar |
|
|
memetph wrote:
What is your feedback about the SMC Pentax M 50/1.4 .
How does it compare to other 50/55 1.4 lenses ?
Is there a difference with its older brother the SMC Takumar 50/1.4 ?
Thanks for you infos. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
My two favourite Pentax 50's are the S-M-C 50/1.4 for the metal focus grip and Multi-coating, and the SMC K 50/1.4 which(IMO) is better built than the M & A versions and sharper.
I do like the S-M-C 55/1.8, I think it has a nice transition to out of focus and smooth bokeh. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4569 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:13 am Post subject: Re: Smc M 50 1.4 vs Takumar |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
memetph wrote: |
What is your feedback about the SMC Pentax M 50/1.4 .
How does it compare to other 50/55 1.4 lenses ?
Is there a difference with its older brother the SMC Takumar 50/1.4 ?
Thanks for you infos. |
I have come to the understanding that people who have done a purely technical comparison between the M 1.4/50 and the S-M-C 1.4/50 found the M lens to be the somewhat superior lens. Personally I agree that it is a faultless lens, but the I prefer the S-M-C for more character, the M lens imo looks a bit boring in comparison.
The 55mm Takumar / Pentax lenses don't come in f1.4 but are f1.8 and f2 lenses and quite different. Great lenses, imo they give very good 3 dimensional feel.
Possibly the 55mm are better for far away objects, the 1.4 lenses optimized for closer focusing. ( love both my S-M-C Takumar f1.4/50 and Auto Takumar f2/55 ) _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Thank you both.
I have the 55mm STak and SMC. I like the rendition of this lens very much. It is sharp and nuanced at the same time.
I was thinking about the 50/1.4 because it is sharper at f2 and I prefer 45/50mm to 55/58mm as standard focal distance.
There is a lot about the STak 50 1.4 on the net and less about the M . I am thinking of the M as I was surprised by the quality of a M 35 2.8 that I recently bought and because I prefer , of course, a lens in good condition. The M are usually 10 years younger and seem not to be affected by the yellowish coulouring of the lenses.
So I am hesitating . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4569 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
note that there are quite a few versions:
first two versions of the Super Takumar, the earliest, the socalled '8 element', then the 'regular' Super Takumar, next the S-M-C Takumar, the first to have multi coating ( though latest series of the earlier Super Takumars may have it too ), next comes the SMC which has the rubberized focus ring, then come the first in K mount, first the Pentax SMC or Pentax K, and finally the M ( and later the A and FA )
The 8 element Super Takumar is said to be the sharpest of all, some also say it has the best bokeh. The S-M-C and later versions do have better coating though which make them the more reliable and universal useable lenses. Therefore, if not specially hunting for the somewhat rare 8 element I'd advice against the Super Takumar and choose any of the later, would either take the S-M-C for all metal build, feel and character, or the M for being the most 'modern, smallest and lightest. _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
kuuan wrote: |
note that there are quite a few versions:
first two versions of the Super Takumar, the earliest, the socalled '8 element', then the 'regular' Super Takumar, next the S-M-C Takumar, the first to have multi coating ( though latest series of the earlier Super Takumars may have it too ), next comes the SMC which has the rubberized focus ring, then come the first in K mount, first the Pentax SMC or Pentax K, and finally the M ( and later the A and FA )
The 8 element Super Takumar is said to be the sharpest of all, some also say it has the best bokeh. The S-M-C and later versions do have better coating though which make them the more reliable and universal useable lenses. Therefore, if not specially hunting for the somewhat rare 8 element I'd advice against the Super Takumar and choose any of the later, would either take the S-M-C for all metal build, feel and character, or the M for being the most 'modern, smallest and lightest. |
The early 8 element ST has some nasty flare that is relatively easy to bring up, it is sharp.
The following 7 element ST has much nicer flare, is almost as sharp.
S-M-C has way better flare resistance, is about as sharp as the 8.
I don't have the SMC Tak, as far as I know only the focus ring was changed.
The K 50/1.4 is sharper wide open than the 8.
Still looking for an M 50/1.4, but I do have the 50/1.7 which is fairly good, close to my S-M-C, but the K has better bokeh.
The A isn't as sharp as my S-M-C. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tromboads
Joined: 29 May 2012 Posts: 1655 Location: Melbourne AU
Expire: 2015-10-01
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
tromboads wrote:
don't bother with the M 50 f1.4
Honestly I couldn't justify a difference to the SMC 50mm f1.4 tak I had. and I sold the M in order to keep the Tak.
+1 for the M 50mm f1.7 tho. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gardener
Joined: 22 Sep 2013 Posts: 950 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gardener wrote:
I own or owned all of them except for K-version (which, I understand is exactly the same as SMC Tak). Of the M42's SMC is hands down my favorite. In K-mount I prefer M version for it's superior build quality, and don't see a reason to get an A unless you use later Pentax body. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tromboads
Joined: 29 May 2012 Posts: 1655 Location: Melbourne AU
Expire: 2015-10-01
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tromboads wrote:
What he said
But hey. don't let us get in the way of your LBA. I had to touch it for myself before I believed anyone too |
|
Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Thanks .
It is to use with a Sony A7. I decided to buy a M. i understand that there is not that much difference. The M has no trace of yellowish tint and is in extremely good condition. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11028 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
memetph wrote: |
... I was thinking about the 50/1.4 because it is sharper at f2 ... |
I think the 1:1.4/50 and 1:1.8/55 are really close in sharpness; too close to see:
http://forum.mflenses.com/starfield-compare-m42-asahi-smc-takumar-1-4-50-and-1-8-55-t41437.html _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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-A 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 |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Thanks.
This test does not speak much to me . I don't understand it.
Anyway both lenses are tested wide open. It is not what I say. I expect the 1.4/50 to be better when stopped down at 2 than the 55 at 2. So it is: 1 stop down vs w.o.
Now I have both lenses . I shall see. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11028 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
memetph wrote: |
Thanks.
This test does not speak much to me . I don't understand it.
Anyway both lenses are tested wide open. It is not what I say. I expect the 1.4/50 to be better when stopped down at 2 than the 55 at 2. So it is: 1 stop down vs w.o.
Now I have both lenses . I shall see. |
I can't see any differences wide open; you think there will be difference at f/2?
May I suggest starfield test photos to compare sharpness of lenses at f/2? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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-A 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 |
|
|
cloapex
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
cloapex wrote:
I owned and do own many of the lenses mentioned here.
The SMC Tak and the Pentax "K" is the same lens optical but with different mounts. (The only difference would be in the coating, but not optical or individual ex of the lens) I tested all versions, and for me the SMC is the best version of them all. Having the best coating of the Takumar era and eight aperture blades in comparison to six in the "Super versions"
Buttersmooth bokeh and sharp wide open.
The K/55 or Takumar 55 is very cheap and not as heavy as the Tak 50. It has a longer focus throw and more painterly bokeh. Also i find it more cold in the colors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Yes the K and the M42 are the same lens.
That is why I was asking about the difference between the M and the M42.
I was expecting a better performance from the 1.4 at 2 than from the 1.8 or 2 wide open.
A quick first test this morning showed that it is the case with more shapness and contrast.
Your remark about the colder colours of the 55mm is probably due to the stronger yellowish coloration taken by the the M42 or K versions of the 50 1.4 (Thorium).
The same test this morning showed that the M 50 1.4 is colder than the 55. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
I bought the Pentax SMC M 50 1.4 .
This shot at f2.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4569 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
very good portrait!
congrats for the M lens, it's a faultless lens and has the smaller body, is very cmpact for a 1.4/50 _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 940 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Thank you Kuuan.
You are right . It is compact and light. Focusing is also easy and smooth. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|