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 135mm Field Test
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well my super 135mm f3.5 is a lens that looks sharp on the surface until you do a crop and it's not so sharp. I've notice a few other lenses do not look so sharp at first but in doing a crop the image doesn't break down easily.

Super tak 135mm f3.5
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/pentax135mmf3-5.jpg

viv 70-150mm zoom @ appx 135mm
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/chris710.jpg

And in MY tests with MY lenses......the winner for enlarging is the vivitar.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Excalibur: I understand what you mean. IMO, it could be my fault that my photos at 100% crop aren't sharp but here's a 100% crop (no PP) of #8 above and while I may no longer have 20-20 vision, it looks sharp enough (though not clinically sharp as photos taken with macro lenses). I focused on the Chinese characters.



PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cmontoya wrote:
@Excalibur: I understand what you mean. IMO, it could be my fault that my photos at 100% crop aren't sharp but here's a 100% crop (no PP) of #8 above and while I may no longer have 20-20 vision, it looks sharp enough (though not clinically sharp as photos taken with macro lenses). I focused on the Chinese characters.


Well that crop looks ok, it's probably all sour grapes from me, and moaning about my 135mm tak after owning it for 30 years, as it would seem I have a bad copy.
But I enlarge hundred of shots with many lenses, not because I'm always testing them, but to get rid of the dust spots in Photoshop....so you get to know what lenses stand out from the rest.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cmontoya wrote:
... @TBaker: Thank you. I read that the SuperTaks indeed overexpose so I was experimenting by compensating by -1 and -2 stops. I couldn't sleep until I found out for sure so I researched and found that SuperTaks indeed have this problem. The explanation and solution can be found here
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/34265-takumar-50mm-f1-4-low-contrast-narrow-f-stops.html. ...


This was heatedly discussed in a Russian forum; eventually the explanation was discovered and a solution. (still looking for the link...)

The explanation is a full-frame film lens projects a full frame image circle into a mirror box designed to meter lenses with much smaller aps-c size image circle; depending very much on the scene, with a ff lens on aps-c camera, the meter reads too low, leading to overexposure.

The effect of the larger image circle on smaller aps-c sensor/metering is further confirmed because on full frame camera, metering is accurate, typically needs constant about +1 stop compensation over the entire aperture range.

A solution is to mask the image circle by installing a mask over the camera end of the lens to reduce the image circle size to just cover aps-c sensor without vignetting. The modified lens meters properly, same as on ff, needing typically +1 ec over aperture range.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Excalibur: I was still 10 years old when you first owned a SuperTak Smile Let me take this opportunity ask what lenses you recommend personally in the following focal ranges: 35mm, 100-105mm, and 135mm? Thank you.

@siriusdogstar: Thanks for the explanation.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cmontoya wrote:
Let me take this opportunity ask what lenses you recommend personally in the following focal ranges: 35mm, 100-105mm, and 135mm? Thank you.


Well that's a question for the forum, and you'll get umpteen different answers from the cheapest to most expensive lens, and arguments about 3d, bokeh and sharpness, with the choices posted.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smile I know. It's like the never ending "What is better - Canon or Nikon?" question in the forums I'm a member of.

It's good to hear opinions and facts from other photographers. Although I hope not to the point there would be a heated discussion because I always believe that it's the photographer more than the gear. My motto, "75% photographer, 25%" gear Smile


PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cmontoya I like the atmosphere of your shots. I wonder if there is any PP on these images, for example no5 from last series... (Besides cropping)


PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cmontoya wrote:
Smile I know. It's like the never ending "What is better - Canon or Nikon?" question in the forums I'm a member of.

It's good to hear opinions and facts from other photographers. Although I hope not to the point there would be a heated discussion because I always believe that it's the photographer more than the gear. My motto, "75% photographer, 25%" gear Smile


Well the forum would be boring if we all agreed, and every shot posted everyone said "how great it was, when the shot wasn't very good".

For a lens:- If you mention what you are willing to pay, mention your camera is a 450D, mention the qualities you want in the lens plus range 35mm etc It would narrow down the answers.
And as you have realised "throwing money at photography gear doesn't guarantee to make you a better photographer".

Well would you like at least one opinion from me? Well one of the best bang for buck lenses (if you can use it and don't mind the bokeh) is the Hexanon 40mm f1.8 (I have two) and were going for less than £10 not so long ago.
http://www.northcoastphotos.com/Lympa_2007_09_29.htm you can get thru to this link as it will re-direct you.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Tharos: Nowadays, I post-process my photos using a 2-step process. (1) NoiseNinja using the right ISO profile of my Canon 450D, e.g., if I use ISO 1600, then I use ISO 1600 profile, and (2) Unsharp Mask: Amount 10%, Radius: 20 pixels. That's it. I no longer play around with Photoshop too much as I'm trying to be a better photographer. Not a purist but I'm trying to capture the scene as it really is. I'll remove somebody's pimples when that somebody pays me to do it. He he he.

@Excalibur: I totally agree with your first statement. Thank you for the Hexanon tip.

As for my MF lens hunt, my budget is only up to around $150 (including S&H). I'm looking for a good 35mm f/2 lens. I regret not buying one from the seller of the SuperTak 135mm f/3.5 when he offered it to me. The total was only around $200. I could have forgiven myself for paying $50 more for an excellent lens. Anyway, I'm regularly keeping an eye for a mint-looking copy all the time in ebay.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2