Pentax M 75-150 F4, Compared 105mm, 135mm Super Takumar

[tromboads]

This is just for my sake, and the google bots sake.

There has been countless times where I have trawled through other threads to find the discussion on what it was I first set out for, Sorry to those that have seen this already, it's a copy paste from the 80's zoom thread. This is probably just for future me whom forgot he ever had said lens, and goes about using google to find information about it.

JPEG's Below.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B54h0BnJ-q35fm90eGtmZzdMYUpRS2N6MkxIdWt4NWtKeG1TX2JHbUUxOTdqMUdhRk9GaE0&usp=sharing

So I lined them up;

-Super Tak 105mm f.28
-Super Tak 135mm f3.5
-Pentax M 75-150 f4

And shot my wall. well my bookcase.

EXIF will say:
Pentax K5,
ISO1600
f4 = 1/20
f5.6 = 1/10
f8 = 1/6

Subject was about 2m away.
Jpegs at max quality, shot with 2sec timer, no PP.

Super boring subject matter true, but maaaaaan next to the Super Taks, it's well.. the Zoom ain't so bad... well...

@100mm,
The Tak is sharper at f2.8 then this things is at f4. At 5.6 the 105mm Tak is still cleaner, but by f8 the zoom looks sharper.

@135mm
At f4, I'll give it to the Tak just. There isn't much in it at 5.6 either. By f8 I'm calling it a draw.

I've included shots at 75mm and 150mm for you to look over also. Not a very scientific test, but perhaps consider a general overview.

Sadly the 40yr old Taks are the only lens of similar focal length I have to compare it too. So... This 80's zoom is more or less at quality of the 135mm f3.5 Super Tak of 1975ish

[memetph]

I have a Super multi caoted Takumar 105mm f2.8 which I bought in 1971, it is a very nice lens . I like very much its rendition but it is not the sharpest 100/105 mm which I have.
A Canon FD 100 2.8 or a Nikon E 100 2.8 are sharper wide open and stopped down than my old Tak.