| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 577
Location: Zurich
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 8:37 pm Post subject: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
 |
|
wolan wrote:
Hi,
I own a Takumar 50mm f1.4 and I am very happy with it.
Since I like telephoto primes, especially around the 135mm focal length, wanted to ask which Takumar tele you would recommend me.
I have looked around a bit, as I understand it the 135 f2.5 has the best optical performance.
Anyway, what counts mostly for me are bokeh and colour rendition.
Thanks.
Last edited by wolan on Sat Nov 14, 2015 9:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
starlights
Joined: 04 Apr 2015
Posts: 96
Location: Washington DC
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
starlights wrote:
You could also look at Takumar 120mm 2.8 (just slightly bigger than 50mm)
_________________
Lenses for Sale: http://www.ebay.com/sch/starxlights/m.html?item=281825389989 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
The Super (and Multi-Coated variant) Takumar 135 f/3.5 is quite sharp and no discernible aberrations or fringing.
The 150mm f/4, which is rarer and close sibling is very sharp and almost the same size. My copy is slightly sharper than my 135-f/3.5's.
Their 200mm f/4 is also very good with little coma wide open. The Super and S-M-C look the same to my eyes.
The 135mm f/2.5 is satisfactory, but in my opinion, it didn't meet my expectations based on its rep. Could be due to not being the limited version with extra element.
For any of these telephotos, they came with a screw-on lens hood from Pentax. Make sure it comes with it, or adjust the price accordingly.
If you want more focal length, their S-M-C Takumar 300mm f/4 is excellent. Better than a Konica Hexanon AR 300-f/4.5, matching my Olympus OM Zuiko 300-f/4.5. It's also quite light for its age. I think this one uses some plastic for the rotating rings instead of aluminum.
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr
Last edited by WNG555 on Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I had the Pentax-M 3.5/135 and found it to be a pretty impressive lens, one of the best 135s I've tried. If the Takumar version of that lens is as good, it would be well worth having.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:46 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
| wolan wrote: |
| what counts mostly for me are bokeh and colour rendition. |
Hi, I realise you're looking primarily at Takumar teles but I wonder if you would consider other M42 makes as well.
I've never owned the 2.5 Tak but I have the SMC 135/3.5 and it's certainly a fine lens. Nicely sharp, the SMC coating makes the contrast
vibrant, the bokeh is smooth and I would class the colour rendition as "standard". But I do find it a bit boring, I hardly ever use it.
I prefer the CZJ 3.5/135 (perhaps a little out of sentiment as I've owned my copy since about 1975). But I think it's sharper than my
Tak, with equally pleasant bokeh. The colours have a slightly cooler temperature. I like the Meyer Pentacon 2.8/135 (the "bokeh
monster") but this has the usual Pentacon slightly-faded look. If you're looking for rich and solid colours (plus very acceptable
sharpness, bokeh and contrast) there's nothing comes close to Russian glass, for instance the Jupiter 37A or AM or the Tair 11A.
This thread has a huge comparison of 12 135s
http://forum.mflenses.com/twelve-2-8-135mm-lenses-compared-on-5dmkii-t39463.html
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
invisible
Joined: 06 Jun 2013
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
invisible wrote:
| WNG555 wrote: |
| If you want more focal length, their S-M-C Takumar 300mm f/4.5 is excellent. Better than a Konica Hexanon AR 300-f/4.5, matching my Olympus OM Zuiko 300-f/4.5. It's also quite light for its age. I think this one uses some plastic for the rotating rings instead of aluminum. |
Maybe you're referring to the S-M-C Takumar 300mm f/4? Does a 4.5 version exist? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 4569
Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
in case you go for a 135mm Takumar consider an early preset, they come in 2 versions, one all black, one chrome and black. lovely looking lenses, very small in size, great handling and build. Very good sharpness, distinct colors, beautiful bokeh, if I am not mistaken 'only' 8 aperture blades ( other preset Takumars have more ) but that's still more than the 6 blades of the later versions. Some blooming wide open.
The 4/150 is a great lens!
_________________
my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
hard to get dissapointment with takumars.. take any of them
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
| invisible wrote: |
| WNG555 wrote: |
| If you want more focal length, their S-M-C Takumar 300mm f/4.5 is excellent. Better than a Konica Hexanon AR 300-f/4.5, matching my Olympus OM Zuiko 300-f/4.5. It's also quite light for its age. I think this one uses some plastic for the rotating rings instead of aluminum. |
Maybe you're referring to the S-M-C Takumar 300mm f/4? Does a 4.5 version exist? |
Yes, thanks for catching the error. I meant f/4. Will correct it above.
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11027
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:17 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| wolan wrote: |
Hi,
I own a Takumar 50mm f1.4 and I am very happy with it.
Since I like telephoto primes, especially around the 135mm focal length, wanted to ask which Takumar tele you would recommend me.
I have looked around a bit, as I understand it the 135 f2.5 has the best optical performance.
Anyway, what counts mostly for me are bokeh and colour rendition.
Thanks. |
There are three M42 versions of the 1:2.5/135 lens -- 1. Super-Takumar, 2. Super-Multi-Coated 5 elements, and 3. Super-Multi-Coated 6 elements. I have had all three. The #3 lens is best imho, sharper wide open -- I kept it. Product Number 43812 (located on camera side of the Auto/Manual switch button.
Bokeh & color rendition is fairly uniform among Takumars -- the Super-Multi-Coated lenses have more contrast and color fidelity than the Super-Takumars & earlier Takumars.
Of course the other tele- lens to get is the S-M-C 1:1.8/85.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
Last edited by visualopsins on Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 940
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| hard to get dissapointment with takumars.. take any of them |
Takumars were my first love . The A7 replaced my Spotmatic and I bought some more....
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 577
Location: Zurich
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:41 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
|
|
wolan wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the tip, I guess you are referring to this model: http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_1522.html
They say it is a bit hard to find. Let us see if it shows up any soon on ebay.
Cheers.
| visualopsins wrote: |
| wolan wrote: |
Hi,
I own a Takumar 50mm f1.4 and I am very happy with it.
Since I like telephoto primes, especially around the 135mm focal length, wanted to ask which Takumar tele you would recommend me.
I have looked around a bit, as I understand it the 135 f2.5 has the best optical performance.
Anyway, what counts mostly for me are bokeh and colour rendition.
Thanks. |
There are three versions of the 1:2.5/135 lens -- 1. Super-Takumar, 2. Super-Multi-Coated 5 elements, and 3. Super-Multi-Coated 6 elements. I have had all three. The #3 lens is best imho, sharper wide open -- I kept it. Product Number 43812 (located on camera side of the Auto/Manual switch button.
Bokeh & color rendition is fairly uniform among Takumars -- the Super-Multi-Coated lenses have more contrast and color fidelity than the Super-Takumars & earlier Takumars.
Of course the other tele- lens to get is the S-M-C 1:1.8/85. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolan
Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 577
Location: Zurich
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
|
|
wolan wrote:
Thank you for the link.
To my eye the Porst MC 2.8/135mm is the best in terms of contrast and colour rendition. Is it a lens you would recommend as alternative to the Takumars?
N.
| peterqd wrote: |
| wolan wrote: |
| what counts mostly for me are bokeh and colour rendition. |
Hi, I realise you're looking primarily at Takumar teles but I wonder if you would consider other M42 makes as well.
I've never owned the 2.5 Tak but I have the SMC 135/3.5 and it's certainly a fine lens. Nicely sharp, the SMC coating makes the contrast
vibrant, the bokeh is smooth and I would class the colour rendition as "standard". But I do find it a bit boring, I hardly ever use it.
I prefer the CZJ 3.5/135 (perhaps a little out of sentiment as I've owned my copy since about 1975). But I think it's sharper than my
Tak, with equally pleasant bokeh. The colours have a slightly cooler temperature. I like the Meyer Pentacon 2.8/135 (the "bokeh
monster") but this has the usual Pentacon slightly-faded look. If you're looking for rich and solid colours (plus very acceptable
sharpness, bokeh and contrast) there's nothing comes close to Russian glass, for instance the Jupiter 37A or AM or the Tair 11A.
This thread has a huge comparison of 12 135s
http://forum.mflenses.com/twelve-2-8-135mm-lenses-compared-on-5dmkii-t39463.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11027
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:32 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar tele lens recommendation |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
You're welcome. That is the correct lens.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
