View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:22 am Post subject: What's the best version of the Takumar 1.4/50? |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
and by "best" i suppose i mean "what are the differences in terms of IQ between the different versions of this lens?".
So how about it? which version do you like best and why? _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008 Posts: 733 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
This is the best one: http://web.aanet.com.au/bayling/repair.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
That website is BANNED on this forum!
There are only two optical versions of the lens, the original non-thoriated Super Tak was 8 elements in 7 groups, and then all the other versions were thoriated and had 7 elements in 6 groups. I have no experience of the original version as they're quite rare, but I'm pretty sure the thoriated element made a big improvement. CarbonR or Spotmatic will know about that better than me. The only other advance to the design after that was the introduction of Super Multi-Coating which improved light transmittance and contrast. The S-M-C and SMC versions have better coatings than the Super-Taks, but there's not a lot of difference in my experience.
One important point - if you're using a Spotmatic F then you definitely need the S-M-C or SMC versions with the lever in the mount in order to make use of the camera's open aperture metering function, but you can use a S-Tak in stop-down mode. The SP and SPII have stop-down mode only. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
That website is BANNED on this forum! |
+1
thanks for the info peterqd! _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Keysersoze27
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 Posts: 466 Location: Greece
Expire: 2012-12-24
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keysersoze27 wrote:
S-M-C and SMC Takumar versions... _________________ Canon EOS 5D MkII , EOS 50E, Contax RTS, Olympus OM2n, Nikon Z6ii
28mm: Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28 MMJ
35mm: CZ Distagon 2/35 ZE , S-M-C Takumar 3.5/35
40mm: CZJ Tessar T 4.5/40 1Q
50mm: CZ Planar 1.4/50 MMJ,CZ Planar 1.7/50 AEJ+MMJ,Leica Summicron 2/50 v3,S-M-C Takumar 1.4/50,Pentax SMC 1.4/50 K,Pentax SMC 1.8/55 K,Nikkor 1.8/50 ,CZJ Tessar T 3.5/50 1Q , CZ Planar 1.8/50 (QBM),Zuiko 1.4/50, Zuiko 1.8/50, Icarex Tessar 2.8/50, Nikkor 2/50 Ai,Schneider Kreuznach Xenar 2.8/50 Preset, Pentacon Prakticar 2.4/50 MC v1, CZJ Pancolar 1.8/50 Zebra , Rikenon 1.4/50 P
55mm: Fujinon 1.8/55 EBC
58mm: Helios MC 44-3 2/58
85mm: Zeiss Sonnar 2.8/85 AEJ
90mm: Voigtl�nder APO-Lanthar 3.5/90 SLII , Leica Elmarit-R 2.8/90 v2
100~105mm:Zeiss Sonnar 3.5/100 MM, Nikkor 2.5/105 AiS, S-M-C Takumar 2.8/105
135mm: Leica Elmarit R 2.8/135 v2, S-M-C Takumar 3.5/135, CZJ 4/135 Sonnar Exakta leatherette (1963),CZJ 4/135 Triotar
Macro:Leica Macro-Elmarit R 2.8/60, Micro-Nikkor Auto 3.5/55 Compensating type (1964) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10959 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Super-Takumar early version optical formula difference noted 8/7 vs 7/6 elements/groups. There are conflicting stories. Some say early lens was best on planet at the time, better than Zeiss best, too expensive to produce, Asahi changed it. Some say lens performance was so bad Asahi changed it. Three coatings.
Super-Multi-Coated adds four coatings (7 total) for more contrast, better flare control.
It is said Asahi kept improving coating chemistry, the best being the Pentax SMC Takumar. There is controversy (nobody knows ) if there is any difference between coatings on M42 and PK mount versions. Both were produced during the same period.
I personally see no results differences between S-M-C and SMC M42 versions. The S-M-C version loos way cooler imho _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
Super-Takumar early version optical formula difference noted 8/7 vs 7/6 elements/groups. There are conflicting stories. Some say early lens was best on planet at the time, better than Zeiss best, too expensive to produce, Asahi changed it. Some say lens performance was so bad Asahi changed it. Three coatings.
Super-Multi-Coated adds four coatings (7 total) for more contrast, better flare control.
It is said Asahi kept improving coating chemistry, the best being the Pentax SMC Takumar. There is controversy (nobody knows ) if there is any difference between coatings on M42 and PK mount versions. Both were produced during the same period.
I personally see no results differences between S-M-C and SMC M42 versions. The S-M-C version loos way cooler imho |
I currently have a Super-Tak (and it's currently my favorite lens. it's wonderful) , but i've heard the SMC and/or S-M-C versions were better, so i plan on picking one of those up one day, i was just curious as to which one to hunt down, or if there is a difference at all. _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
The best Takumar 50/1.4 is the one that you are using _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson
Last edited by dude163 on Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:23 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
dude163 wrote: |
The beat Takumar 50/1.4 is the one that you are using |
i like the way you think _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
We can say that the best tak is the one that you have not try yet.
The first 8 elements is very prone to flare and less contrast lens. Different rendering in bokeh.
The SMC (S-M-C) is a bit different lens than the Super Tajumar, and less radioactive one, so less yellowish too.
The rendering is different too. The SMC has more contrast and a bit sharper (perhaps because less yelowish).
The colors are more real in the SMC.
My option? My lens, the metal and glass S-M-C.
Rino. _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TBaker
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 Posts: 344 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TBaker wrote:
gearsNcogs wrote: |
dude163 wrote: |
The beat Takumar 50/1.4 is the one that you are using |
i like the way you think |
No...it's the I'm using. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
indianadinos
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 Posts: 1310 Location: Toulouse, France
Expire: 2011-12-05
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
indianadinos wrote:
Hi,
estudleon wrote: |
We can say that the best tak is the one that you have not try yet.
|
Well, LBA symptoms ? This thread is pushing me to find a Super-Takumar 50/1.4, to complete the series and trying it ... _________________ Please visit my blogs Shooting with a Pentax K10D / FF Visions
Takumar: 24/3.5, 28/3.5, 35/2, 35/3.5, 50/1.4, 55/1.8, 85/1.8, 105/2.8, 120/2.8, 135/3.5, 150/4, 200/4
Pentax-K: M28/2.8, K28/3.5, M50/1.4, A50/1.7, M50/4 Macro, K85/1.8, K105/2.8, K135/2.5, M200/4, M70-150/4
Zeiss: Flektogon 20/2.8, 20/4, 35/2.4, 35/2.8, Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, Biotar 58/2, Sonnar 135/3.5, Sonnar 180/2.8
Meyer: Primagon 35/4.5, Domiplan 50/2.8, Oreston 50/1.8, Primoplan 58/1.9, Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Orestor 135/2.8
Schacht/Steinheil: Travenar 90/2.8, Travenon 135/4.5, Quinar 135/2.8, Quinar 135/3.5
Russian: MIR 37B, Industar 50/3.5, Helios 44M & 44M-2, Jupiter 37A
P6: Flektogon 50/4, Biometar 80/2.8, Orestor 300/4
Nikkor: Nikkor-O 35/2, Micro 55/3.5, Nikkor-S 50/1.4, Nikkor-Q 135/2.8
Fuji: EBC 28/3.5, EBC 55/3.5 Macro, EBC 135/2.5
Misc Lenses: Kiron 105/2.8 Macro, Tamron SP90/2.5
... and a few other Vivitar, Tamron, Sigma and Soligor lenses ...
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
indianadinos wrote: |
Hi,
estudleon wrote: |
We can say that the best tak is the one that you have not try yet.
|
Well, LBA symptoms ? This thread is pushing me to find a Super-Takumar 50/1.4, to complete the series and trying it ... |
I know how you feel! only for me its getting a S-M-C tak. _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008 Posts: 733 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
dude163 wrote: |
The best Takumar 50/1.4 is the one that you are using |
With a sledgehammer? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mike Deep
Joined: 25 Oct 2008 Posts: 319 Location: Upstate New York
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mike Deep wrote:
I notice some are saying the 8-element Super Takumar is radioactive, but other sources, including other threads on this forum, say it is not (And that the 7-element versions are). Which is it? _________________ Rocket Launch Photography
Olympus: 24/2.8 MC, 28/3.5, 28/2.8 MC, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, 50/1.8 MC, 50/1.4 MC, 35-70/3.6, 75-150/4
Nikon: C 24/2.8, AI-S 28/2.8, K 35/2.8, F 55/3.5, C 55/1.2, 105/2.5 (5/3), 105/2.5 (5/4), F 135/2.8, F 200/4, No. 5T
Pentax: 28/3.5, 35/3.5, 50/1.4 (8/6), 50/1.4 (7/6), M 50/1.4, SMC 55/1.8, 105/2.8, SMC 135/3.5, 150/4
Tamron: SP 17/3.5 151B, 28/2.5, 135/2.8 T-135, SP 300/2.8 60B, SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 01A, 80-210/3.8-4 103A, SP 1.4x TC 140F, SP 2x TC 01F
Vivitar: 24/2 (Kino), 28/2 (Kino), 50/1.4 (Cosina), S1 90/2.5 (Tokina), S1 28-80/2.8-3.5 (Kino), 70-150/3.8 (Kino), S1 70-210/3.5 (Kino), 2x Macro TC
Etc: Yashica 3.5cm/2.8, Fujinon 50/1.4, Yashica ML 50/1.4, Tomioka Yashinon 55/1.2, Mamiya/Sekor 55/1.7, Sigma 90/2.8
That's a lot of 50s. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
The difference between the 8 element and 7 element Super Takumars is very small and any preference for one or the other would be subjective. There is no "best", just favorites.
I did a quick comparison and the 7 element did appear to be a bit sharper and the 8 element had a rendering just a bit different, but would I be able to recognize each lens if someone would show me photos taken with them? Nope, I don't think so. _________________ http://www.ipernity.com/home/2419272
https://laurphoto.blogspot.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
Mike Deep wrote: |
I notice some are saying the 8-element Super Takumar is radioactive, but other sources, including other threads on this forum, say it is not (And that the 7-element versions are). Which is it? |
Mike, I gave you this info in my first post above! _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
To be honest the 55mm is probably better value.
The 1.4 is softer wide open, but may render better when stopped down. If I have a 1.4 that I can't use at 1.4 then it's rather pointless IMO. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10959 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote: |
To be honest the 55mm is probably better value.
The 1.4 is softer wide open, but may render better when stopped down. If I have a 1.4 that I can't use at 1.4 then it's rather pointless IMO. |
+1 about the 1:1.8/55 and 1:2/55 probably better value.
The 1.4 isn't THAT soft. The 'soft'-ness is the perfect amount for portraiture imho. Also imho, the 1:1.4/55 gives better results at infinity,the 1:1.4/50 gives better results at closer distance. I like the bokeh of 1:1.8/55 more, but it is unclear how much is the effect of different focal length on bokeh. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
Mike Deep
Joined: 25 Oct 2008 Posts: 319 Location: Upstate New York
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike Deep wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
Mike Deep wrote: |
I notice some are saying the 8-element Super Takumar is radioactive, but other sources, including other threads on this forum, say it is not (And that the 7-element versions are). Which is it? |
Mike, I gave you this info in my first post above! |
I was confused a bit by the posts that followed. I'll take your post to be the correct explanation, thanks. _________________ Rocket Launch Photography
Olympus: 24/2.8 MC, 28/3.5, 28/2.8 MC, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, 50/1.8 MC, 50/1.4 MC, 35-70/3.6, 75-150/4
Nikon: C 24/2.8, AI-S 28/2.8, K 35/2.8, F 55/3.5, C 55/1.2, 105/2.5 (5/3), 105/2.5 (5/4), F 135/2.8, F 200/4, No. 5T
Pentax: 28/3.5, 35/3.5, 50/1.4 (8/6), 50/1.4 (7/6), M 50/1.4, SMC 55/1.8, 105/2.8, SMC 135/3.5, 150/4
Tamron: SP 17/3.5 151B, 28/2.5, 135/2.8 T-135, SP 300/2.8 60B, SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 01A, 80-210/3.8-4 103A, SP 1.4x TC 140F, SP 2x TC 01F
Vivitar: 24/2 (Kino), 28/2 (Kino), 50/1.4 (Cosina), S1 90/2.5 (Tokina), S1 28-80/2.8-3.5 (Kino), 70-150/3.8 (Kino), S1 70-210/3.5 (Kino), 2x Macro TC
Etc: Yashica 3.5cm/2.8, Fujinon 50/1.4, Yashica ML 50/1.4, Tomioka Yashinon 55/1.2, Mamiya/Sekor 55/1.7, Sigma 90/2.8
That's a lot of 50s. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gearsNcogs
Joined: 20 Oct 2010 Posts: 215
|
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
gearsNcogs wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
martinsmith99 wrote: |
To be honest the 55mm is probably better value.
The 1.4 is softer wide open, but may render better when stopped down. If I have a 1.4 that I can't use at 1.4 then it's rather pointless IMO. |
+1 about the 1:1.8/55 and 1:2/55 probably better value.
The 1.4 isn't THAT soft. The 'soft'-ness is the perfect amount for portraiture imho. Also imho, the 1:1.4/55 gives better results at infinity,the 1:1.4/50 gives better results at closer distance. I like the bokeh of 1:1.8/55 more, but it is unclear how much is the effect of different focal length on bokeh. |
with my copy, i find the lens to still be sharp at 1.4 (although, i am using it on a cropped sensor). my biggest problem with the lens at 1.4 is the CA, which is only bad depending on what i'm shooting. _________________ Stills: SLR: Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP, DSLR: Canon EOS Rebel XTi, Canon EOS 7D
Cine: 16mm: Krasnogorsk-3 (M42 mount) 8mm: Revere Model 88 Super 8: Bell and Howell 1235 XL Filmosonic
MF Lenses: M42: Meteor 5-1 KMZ 17-69mm 1:1,9 (Cine Only), Asahi Super Takumar 50mm 1:1.4, Focal MC 28mm 1:2.8, Tele-Lentar 135mm 1:2.8, Helios-44 KMZ 58mm 1:2, Helios-44-2 KMZ 58mm 1:2 M39: Industar-26M 50mm 1:2.8 F: Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 EF: Lensbaby Composer f2 w/Double Glass Optic, Rokinon 35mm 1:1.4 AS UMC, Rokinon 85mm T1.5 AS IF UMC
AF Lenses: EF-S: Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 II, EF: Tamron AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO (1:2), Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Fixed-Focus Lenses: D: Elitar 6.5mm 1:1.9, Wollensak-Revere 13mm 1:2.5 Velostigmat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|