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 Multi Coated Takumar 135/2.5
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:57 pm    Post subject: Super Multi Coated Takumar 135/2.5 Reply with quote

I have a chance to buy this lens for $100....
Is this a decent lens?
He says it's M42 mount.

How is it's sharpness and bokeh.....compared to Canon 135L?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are two versions of this lens, one is extremely sharp even at f/2.5 (the second), the first is not so sharp at highest apertures Wink


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read somewhere (pentax forum? Laughing ) that the second version of the lens that is by which huhging is asking (6/6) is sharpest than the MC CJZ.

Is it true?

Rino


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This was my first 135mm lenses comparison :



PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I still don't get it.....which version is he selling?

On the front element it says " asahi super multi coated takumar"


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

huhging wrote:
I still don't get it.....which version is he selling?

On the front element it says " asahi super multi coated takumar"


To determine the right version the seller should look at the back of the Auto/Manual swtich. Ask him which number is engraved there. If it's 43812 then it's the right version (6 elements in 6 groups). And yes, it's a damn sharp lens! Smile


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He says the number is 43802.
Does this mean it's not a sharp one?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, it is also the first version, same optical formula as the Super Takumar 135/2.5 in my comparison Wink


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for the kind info.....


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not think it correct to say that the earlier version is not sharp. It is. But the later version is sharper - especially wide open. The early version is not a dog by any means. I have owned one for years and its turned in many excellent shots. I think that the earlier version seems more common that the later one - at least they turn up on auction sites more often.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll use this mainly for portraits, so super sharp may not be good.Smile
How is the bokeh from the lens?

Anyone have some pictures to share?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it so bad that $100 would be a waste or over-priced?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

huhging wrote:
Is it so bad that $100 would be a waste or over-priced?


I have one. It's not bad, but not stellar either. Quite an average 135mm with decent contract and so-so sharpness. It's only slightly faster than f/2.8. In this focal length, I would prefer a Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 or Nikkor 135/2.8, both great sharp lenses with excellent rendering.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IN M42 (like the TAk 2,5/135) you have a lot of good 135s too.

CZJ 3,5 or 4; steinheil; 37-A; tak 3,5 1st version; etc.

In others mount, you have the elmarit, canon L, rolleinar, etc.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or bokehmonster (pentacon/meyer 135/2.8 pre-set). The lens has nice bokeh and is quite sharp (at f/2.8-f/4 less than S-M-C 135/2.5 #2, but it has lower sagital CA).


PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Or bokehmonster (pentacon/meyer 135/2.8 pre-set). The lens has nice bokeh and is quite sharp (at f/2.8-f/4 less than S-M-C 135/2.5 #2, but it has lower sagital CA).


Yes, I forget it.

I had it for a week or so, and never try it by miself. My wife and my son used it but not me. It did not attract to me, but I ignored the fame of bokehmonster in this time.

If I find one in very good conditions and cheap, mine!!

Rino.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to update...
few test shots with Super Multi Coated Takumar 135/2.5...
I think it's a decent lens....






PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spotmatic wrote:
huhging wrote:
I still don't get it.....which version is he selling?

On the front element it says " asahi super multi coated takumar"


To determine the right version the seller should look at the back of the Auto/Manual swtich. Ask him which number is engraved there. If it's 43812 then it's the right version (6 elements in 6 groups). And yes, it's a damn sharp lens! Smile


Hello Peter,
What about 43801 engraved there ?
Thanks in advance. Smile


Last edited by Olivier on Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:37 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olivier wrote:
Spotmatic wrote:
huhging wrote:
I still don't get it.....which version is he selling?

On the front element it says " asahi super multi coated takumar"


To determine the right version the seller should look at the back of the Auto/Manual swtich. Ask him which number is engraved there. If it's 43812 then it's the right version (6 elements in 6 groups). And yes, it's a damn sharp lens! Smile


Hello Peter,
What about 43801 engraved there ?
Thanks in advance. Smile


43801 is the Super-Takumar with 5 elements in 4 groups, not S-M-C.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thank you sirius. Wink


PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the later K series version of the 6-6 lens. It is a lovely beast. I did a quick and dirty comparison to my DA* 50-135mm lens and it held it's own.

You can see the results here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31364196@N04/sets/72157622375653089/

The only odd thing is that if using "Auto white balance" on the K10D/K20D you get a very different value than more modern lenses. Either editing the white balance on the RAW images or setting the camera to a fixed WB gives better results. I don't know why the older lens confuses the Auto WB.

K


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

how to identify physically SMC Takumar 2nd version??

Thanks


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ferlie wrote:
how to identify physically SMC Takumar 2nd version??

Thanks


Hi ferlie, welcome to the forum!

On camera side of Auto-Manual switch is a number:

43802 -- first version
43812 -- second


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
ferlie wrote:
how to identify physically SMC Takumar 2nd version??

Thanks


Hi ferlie, welcome to the forum!

On camera side of Auto-Manual switch is a number:

43802 -- first version
43812 -- second


... glad to join this forum after have manual lens... Very Happy and thanks for information.