View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Schnauzer
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 Posts: 2155 Location: Maine, USA
Expire: 2012-03-08
|
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: Super Takumar f 3.5 135mm |
|
|
Schnauzer wrote:
Is the Super Takumar f 3.5 135mm lense any good? I have a chance to get one for $40.00 with hard case. _________________ Ron |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/takumar/super_takumar_135mm_f3_5/
Yes, really nice one. Pretty common sometimes going even lower. I think this price is good. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Duckmancgy
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 Posts: 57 Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:10 pm Post subject: Tak 135/3.5 |
|
|
Duckmancgy wrote:
It's a great lens. I got mine here for 60 canadian with case and hood, so thats about 45 american right now. Great quality and wonderfully sharp even wide open
Jeremy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Nice to see you here Jeremy! _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Schnauzer
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 Posts: 2155 Location: Maine, USA
Expire: 2012-03-08
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Schnauzer wrote:
Thanks Attila and Jeremy.
A local guy has it. Its pentax M42. I haven't looked at it but he says its like new. _________________ Ron |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Prometheus
Joined: 27 Feb 2008 Posts: 878 Location: Garphyttan, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Prometheus wrote:
If you can, get the hood too. I discovered it worked much better with an Asahi, deep, Takumar hood then the rubber one I used at the beginning.
I like this lens I think, but will get more chance to use it when spring comes. I made some nice portraits and it feels very good buildquality. _________________ Retrocamera.net |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Schnauzer
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 Posts: 2155 Location: Maine, USA
Expire: 2012-03-08
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Schnauzer wrote:
I've noticed after looking a little that some of the lenses, like the 135/2.8 and 2.5. say SMC. I suppose that is a multi coating. I don't know if the pentax super takumar has this or not???? _________________ Ron |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterm1
Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterm1 wrote:
I would not by any means call myself a Takumar expert but I do own and have tried pretty well every M42 lens Pentax made in one variant or anther from 24mm up to 300mm. And in some cases (the 135mm being one of them I have owned several versions of the preset lens, the auto takumar version and a couple of versions of the later Suepr Takumar and SMC Takumar variants.
So against that background let me say that almost all of the Takumar lenses are excellent in both build and optical quality. Grab it and use it.
By the way it is seldom you find any 135mm f3.5 to be less than excellent. The Takumars especially so. The 135mm lenses were so commonly a part of the shooters kit back then, that manufacturers could not afford to have poor quality ones in thier line up....it would have done too much damage to their reputation. And f3.5 is such a moderate maximum aperture fortunately this seemed to be a relatively easy lens to design. Hence my comment that there are few bad ones that I have come across of any brand. The f2.5 faster version is also no slacker although the afficionados claim that the later redesigned version of that particular lens is better. I own the earlier one and if this is so, the later one must be special indeed. _________________ PeterM |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Schnauzer
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 Posts: 2155 Location: Maine, USA
Expire: 2012-03-08
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Schnauzer wrote:
Thank you Mattias and Peter. I think I will pick it up. _________________ Ron |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|