Lens Turbo II problem with Super-Takumar 1:3.5/28 (SOLVED!)

[Toecutt3r]

Giddy with excitement, I received my Lens Turbo II today from Hong Kong. I purchased the MD mount as that is the mount of most of my MF lenses. I also have three Super-Takumars, the 1:3.5/28, 1:1.8/55, and 1:3.5/135. All of my MD lenses work, and two of the three Super-Takumars work with an M42 to MD adapter. However, the rear element of the 1:3.5/28 comes in contact with the lens of the Turbo II near infinity focus. Luckily no damage was done to either the lens or the adapter, but I am so bummed right now because this is the one lens in my stable that I was most excited about using the Lens Turbo II with, to finally have a true wide-angle.

I am sure that I will still enjoy the Lens Turbo II with all of my other lenses. This is my first post on this forum, but I wanted to get this out there right away so that others may avoid possibly damaging their adapter, or worse, their beautiful lens.

Update: My serial number for this lens is 2000933. I have seen earlier serial numbers on the Web that begin with "1" that appear to have a different rear element configuration (much larger diameter lens). I have no idea if this earlier configuration will work with the Lens Turbo II.

[Lightshow]

Too bad, but why don't you get the Rokkor MC 24/2.8 or MD 24/2.8?
I like my Rokkor MC 28/2.5 more than my Super-Tak 28/3.5.

[memetph]

The MD 28 3.5 (5 elements, 49mm filter ) works quiet well stopped down it is sharp in the corners. It is better than my Smc Tak 28 3.5.
Corner performance seems to be a weakness of those boosters. You should look for a WA which performs in this aera as the center will be always sharp enough thanks to this device.

[LucisPictor]

I think anyway that the longer the FL the better a lens works with a LensTurbo.
Wide angle lenses need to be stopped down several stops in order to provide a good corner-to-corner performance on an FLR.
The wider the more.

[quidam]

[quote=Update: My serial number for this lens is 2000933. I have seen earlier serial numbers on the Web that begin with "1" that appear to have a different rear element configuration (much larger diameter lens). I have no idea if this earlier configuration will work with the Lens Turbo II.[/quote]

The Super Takumar which begins with serial number 1 is the same as yours, namely version 1. There is a second version of that lens where the serial number starts with 2.266.364 and further.
More here:
http://kajiwara.weebly.com/index-et-prix-des-takumar.html

[simbon4o]

First of all are you sure there is no infinity focus because with all these adapters the focus scale on the lens will not work correct for sure... just try to focus to infinity it can even pass it... My Pentax M 28 2.8 is passing infinity with my LTII...

[doomed-forever]

Where have you bought your Lens Turbo Mk. II for Minolta MD? I'm looking for that one....thanks!

[iangreenhalgh1]

Buy a decent 24mm lens, all these speed booster turbo thingies degrade quality.

[Toecutt3r]

Wow, what a lively forum! Thanks for your replies... this place is going to be fun.

doomed: I got the Lens Turbo II in MD for Sony NEX from Big-IS on eBay. Here is a link: Click here to see on Ebay

simbon4o: You are absolutely correct! Infinity focus on my Lens Turbo II with the Super-Takumar 28mm arrives at an indicted distance of between 4-5ft (1.5-1.5M) on the distance scale. So I can focus to infinity and beyond with this lens. This is great news, and thank you for suggesting that I experiment with it. However, I still have to be very careful when connecting the lens that the focus is not set at infinity, or damage will occur due to the physical interference. I think that the problem is compounded by the M42 to MD adapters that I am using. I think that they are too thin. I am going to try an official Minolta P adapter, and see how that works.

quidam: Thanks a bunch for that link! That's awesome!

LucisP: I will be primarily using this focal length with the FLR for landscapes, and will therefore be well stopped down.

memetph & Lightshow: One of the W.ROKKOR MD's is definitely on my shopping list.

[iangreenhalgh1]

There's no increase in IQ, that's all marketing guff. If you need a sharp rendering across the entire frame, then forget using them, the centre of the image might be okay but the edge performance is degraded significantly. The Mk1 I tried was garbage, even with a very good lens, the results were low IQ.

I suppose it depends on what you want to shoo, but if landscapes, cityscapes or anything where you want the edges to be sharp and rendered clearly then these boosters are not the way to go.

[Toecutt3r]

I concede that the FLR will be less sharp on the edges of the frame than using the lens alone on a crop sensor, as the FLR will render almost the entire image from the lens on the crop sensor, including the less than sharp corners that would not have otherwise rendered. I also don't believe that the Lens Turbo II is going to magically out-resolve (not to be confused with sharpness) the combination of a FF lens on a FF sensor, but I have a very limited budget, which is why I opted for the sub $500 a6000 rather than a $1,200 plus full frame, and I already have the MF lenses, most of them were given to me as a gift. So, to get the "full frame look" within my budget, and with my existing lenses, I am looking to the $150 Lens Turbo II to help with that. I hope that my images are engaging enough that nobody will ever notice a loss in corner sharpness.

[Lightshow]

The OM 21/3.5 on my NEX-7 was a good combo and sharp enough, and for most requirements was wide enough(31.5mm).
The Tokina RMC 17 would work nice if you need wider(25.5mm).

[kuuan]

[Aanything]

The lens turbo is a nice tool, but after triyng one (a zhongyi mk1 with m42 mount) for a while, i decided it was not for me.
It works great with normal-short tele lenses: with a fast-ish 50mm it can really give that "full frame look", where you achieve thinner dof even at not-so-close foucs distance, that is great. On the other hand, as others have pointed out, performance with wides (especially faster ones) tends to be the weak - at least, that was my impression, based on first hand use, and on some threads that appeared here.

However, for wides on aps-c, I found that a 20mm (jena flektogon f4 in my case) covers 90 percent of my needs, and for the remaining 10% the 16-50 kit zoom that came with my nex, with all the auto corrections turned on, does the job better than most of my manual lenses. Another option that gives decent IQ, but it's not usable in every situation, it's the zenitar fisheye 16mm: i find the "cropped fisheye distortion" really odd in many cases, but when I manage to control it I am always pleased with the results.

[kuuan]

Small and light Voigtlaender 4.5/15 and 4/21 are handled well by both Ricoh GXR M and NEX5N, good lenses, impressive little distortion. Most NEX ( APS-C ) do, I believe it's only the NEX7 that has corner problems

[Toecutt3r]

I have solved my Lens Turbo II problem. I had suspected that the cheap adapter that I had for M42 to MD was at fault because it was too thin, and indeed it was. I have gotten ahold of an official Minolta P adapter, and now all is good. The Super-Takumar 28mm f/3.5 now focuses to infinity just a hair before the infinity focus stop, and the rear element of the lens does not bottom out on the Lens Turbo II. The soft corners are there at f/3.5, but clear up nicely at f/11.

Another benefit to the Minolta P adaper is that now the focus mark on all of my Super-Takumars are exactly where they should be with relation to the camera body, and they all focus to infinity ever so slightly before the infinity focus stop.

I have also noticed using the Lens Turbo II improves focus peaking with the a6000, even when using focus magnification. Now when I use focus magnification, I get some indication of focus peaking. How cool is that?! With the regular adaptor, as soon as I attempt to use focus magnification, all signs of focus peaking disappear. I don't know why the Lens Turbo II makes focus peaking behave this way, but I'm happy about it.

One issue that I have with the Lens Turbo II build is the lens release pin on the MD (or more correctly SR) version of the adapter. It is not very ergonomic, and I wish that they had included a button on the end of the pin such as they do on some of their other models. I know that I should "man up", but this thing actually hurts the fingertip when depressed. Perhaps I will have to fashion a button of my own.

Finally, fearing that I was not going to be able to use the Super-Takumar with the Lens Turbo II, I jumped the gun and purchased Minolta X-700 with a MD 28mm f/2.8 (post Rokkor) off of eBay earlier today for around $30. I did this before I picked up the Minolta P adapter. Oh well, now I can do a comparison of these two lenses on the Lens Turbo II, and I am crossing my fingers that the corner sharpness improves before f/11 as required with the Super-Takumar.

[Lightshow]

Good to hear, good luck with the MD.

[simbon4o]

Well this lens is known for its soft corners on full frame cameras so... I think it is a normal thing. But the other stuff - yes that's nice.
You must try the later versions of this lens. The K and M 28 3.5 are much better.

[Toecutt3r]

I received my Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 today. Nice lens for sure, but this one won't work with the Lens Turbo II. It's rear element contacts the element in the lens turbo, just as my Super-Takumar did with the cheap (Photodiox) adapter. However, unlike my Super-Takumar, this cannot be fixed with this lens because it is a direct mount (no adapter used). I really wanted to compare these lenses on the Lens Turbo II. Oh well... at least my Super-Takumar works on it now.