rolleistef
Well-known
Just got a new lens! A SMC takumar 135 2.5, version 1 (with 5 lenses, unlike it's successor with 6 lenses) and it's a really nice lens - quite impressive too, with its 58mm front lens! Here're a couple of pics, the lens on a Pentax SP1000, (the lens is is provided by Pentacon), test shot from my kitchen with a K100D (200mm equivalent, the building is some 250m away), and (just for fun and the focusing isn't really precise) the tak' along with a 3x-converter (eq. 600mm). Will post proper tests soon!
Attachments
Rhoyle
Well-known
I used to have that same lens. I lent it to my broher a couple of years ago, but he somehow heard that I "gave" it to him. Poor me...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Nice lens, I have one in the K-mount.
P
polaski
Guest
Good lens
Good lens
I have the same lens (non-SMC). It is much maligned for not having all the requisite lens coating. However, a long time ago I learned how to use a lens hood and watch carefully for sources of light. Amazing how that fixes the problem.
It's a good lens, a lot of fun, and 135mm on a film SLR is a classic street lens.
Good lens
I have the same lens (non-SMC). It is much maligned for not having all the requisite lens coating. However, a long time ago I learned how to use a lens hood and watch carefully for sources of light. Amazing how that fixes the problem.
It's a good lens, a lot of fun, and 135mm on a film SLR is a classic street lens.
peterm1
Veteran
I have the same lens in the earlier Super Takumar form. It too has the optical design which you describe - apparently the clue is in the lens model number marked upon the underside of the little aperture control slide. Afficionados tell me that the later design is sharper, but to be honest I have never found anything wrong with the sharpness of mine and I thoroughly enjoy putting it to use. More recently I have acquired a Nikkor 135mm f2.8 and should I suppose eventually get around to doing some comparative tests to see which is the better lens
rolleistef
Well-known
what I like with that lens is that it's somehow quite soft wide open. 2.5 is ultra-fast for a 200mm! (with a DSLR) It's very convenient for people shooting, you can shoot many without them noticing... (ahaha i'm a psychopath!) I got the m42-K adapter yesterday took at least 5 people in my class today, "ni vu ni connu", and the result was superb. Thanks to the anti-shake sensor, the lower speed limit is 1/30th, which is really convenient, otherwise it would be 1/250 or so, which isn't really practical. Some people prefer the 3.5 version(ligher, cheaper), but i suspect the 2.5 to be a better performer at f:4.
will be posting a sample as soon as the stransfering cable as re-appeared...
will be posting a sample as soon as the stransfering cable as re-appeared...
Jerevan
Recycled User
I bought one of these, instead of a 105/3.5 (which I regret) and I have used it two times in six years I think. Way too heavy and clumsy to use handheld on a Spotmatic for me.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Takumars are excellent lenses. Enjoy!
rolleistef
Well-known
how original! A photo of my cat, focusing at about 2.5m (6feet for those who still didn't
a Revolution against Imperial measures
). The rendering is quite cold, the bluish color may be due to the mix between natural light and tungstene compensation (there was artificial light too). There are some other pics but I cannot post "stollen pics" of people who're in my class and who don't particularly like the fact that I hang around with a camera round the neck.
"Why do you take all the pics?" asked somebody today. That was the question I wasn't waiting for. Why? "Well, why not?" "Are you doing anything with them?" "Do people who draw in the margins of their books find an utility to it?" "i mean, do you put them on your blog or something?" "Some of them, yes" (do come and have a look)
How bizarre...
a Revolution against Imperial measures
). The rendering is quite cold, the bluish color may be due to the mix between natural light and tungstene compensation (there was artificial light too). There are some other pics but I cannot post "stollen pics" of people who're in my class and who don't particularly like the fact that I hang around with a camera round the neck."Why do you take all the pics?" asked somebody today. That was the question I wasn't waiting for. Why? "Well, why not?" "Are you doing anything with them?" "Do people who draw in the margins of their books find an utility to it?" "i mean, do you put them on your blog or something?" "Some of them, yes" (do come and have a look
)How bizarre...
