GeneW
Veteran
My avatar was taken with a Pentax H1a with S-T 55/2 lens. Excellent camera (pre-Spotmatic) but I traded up to Olympus OM-1 and still prefer the Oly.
Gene
Gene
bmattock
Veteran
doubs43 said:Bill, I'd say that the Oreston acquitted itself very nicely. The color looks to be accurate and they're certainly sharp enough. Nice-looking puppies too!
Walker
Looking at those photos again this morning, I think they have a 'old time' look to them. I don't know how to describe what I see, but these photos just look 'old' even though I took them last night with a digital SLR body and the old lens. I notice that the bokeh is weird and swirly - I see something somewhat similar with my Mamiya/Sekor Super Deluxe rangefinder when shooting wide-open (f1.5 in that case).
Ann-Marie is going to the beach today - I'm not a beach fan, so I'll try to get some sample shots with different lenses of the same focal length on the same camera and see if there really is any difference in them.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Walker, yes; you can see in the picture the lever/knob on the lens that is used to crank the diaphragm back open after the exposure. This semi-auto diaphragm lens carried the "Auto-Takumar" name, but confusingly the first full-auto diaphragm lenses were also called "Auto"... Thereafter, "Super Takumar" meant a full-auto diaphragm lens.
One drawback to the full-auto diaphragm is that there's a practical limit to the stiffness of the spring that pops the diaphragm blades back open, and this led to lowering the weight of the assembly by reducing the number of blades. The 55mm f/2.2 Auto-Takumar has 10 aperture blades!
If your 105mm is an Auto-Takumar with the aperture reopening lever, then it has a semi-auto diaphragm... I wouldn't use the "pre-set" term here, as that's for a more primitive aperture control method! The first step away from a plain manual diaphragm was adding a second aperture ring that could move freely between wide open and whatever the main ring was set to. This aided focusing wide open, then quickly stopping down to the f/stop that you had pre-set on the main aperture ring. I had a 105mm Spiratone lens with this feature; it was cheap, but it was a pain to use once spoiled by full-auto lens convenience! In the heat of the moment I would sometimes forget to stop the lens down, ruining the picture. But no such problem with the Auto-Takumars of course. One doesn't necessarily have to reopen the lens for subsequent shots with the same subject distance.
There were some pre-set Pentax lenses, and these were lumped with manual lenses under the "Takumar" name.
These older Auto-Takumars were excellent in their time, and surprisingly good even now. Hope you enjoy your "new" 105mm and get some great pics!
One drawback to the full-auto diaphragm is that there's a practical limit to the stiffness of the spring that pops the diaphragm blades back open, and this led to lowering the weight of the assembly by reducing the number of blades. The 55mm f/2.2 Auto-Takumar has 10 aperture blades!
If your 105mm is an Auto-Takumar with the aperture reopening lever, then it has a semi-auto diaphragm... I wouldn't use the "pre-set" term here, as that's for a more primitive aperture control method! The first step away from a plain manual diaphragm was adding a second aperture ring that could move freely between wide open and whatever the main ring was set to. This aided focusing wide open, then quickly stopping down to the f/stop that you had pre-set on the main aperture ring. I had a 105mm Spiratone lens with this feature; it was cheap, but it was a pain to use once spoiled by full-auto lens convenience! In the heat of the moment I would sometimes forget to stop the lens down, ruining the picture. But no such problem with the Auto-Takumars of course. One doesn't necessarily have to reopen the lens for subsequent shots with the same subject distance.
There were some pre-set Pentax lenses, and these were lumped with manual lenses under the "Takumar" name.
These older Auto-Takumars were excellent in their time, and surprisingly good even now. Hope you enjoy your "new" 105mm and get some great pics!
dominicLF
EV Zero
GeneW said:
That's funny because I did the opposite and traded (down?) to Pentax SV. I love the the two SVs that I have. Since I recently bought a Gossen digi-flash light meter (which is the greatest invention since rollfilm/sliced bread) I don't use any cameras with TTL anymore.
Does anyone here have an appriciation of the difference between the 35/3.5 and the 35/2.8 Super Takumars? I recently bought the 2.8 but was wondering what the differences were.
Sonnar2
Well-known
Hi Doug,
I was very surprised about the excellent build quality and compactness of the Auto-Takumar 2/55 from 1960... level with the best Canon RF lenses but cheaper! I love the black-chrome look as well! In my feel the "Semi-Automatic" is more comfortable than the dual-aperture ring Canon FL system of the same vintage - let aside their big size! So I look forward at a small telephoto, maybe a 2.8/105. I also hear that the 3.5/35 Takumar was a sharp lens, but best Pentax lenses seem to be "standards". Maybe the primary 2.4/55 is also an interesting lens - very early (ceased 1957) and 5 elements in 3 groups, which sound like a "Heliar" type lens..
cheers, Frank
I was very surprised about the excellent build quality and compactness of the Auto-Takumar 2/55 from 1960... level with the best Canon RF lenses but cheaper! I love the black-chrome look as well! In my feel the "Semi-Automatic" is more comfortable than the dual-aperture ring Canon FL system of the same vintage - let aside their big size! So I look forward at a small telephoto, maybe a 2.8/105. I also hear that the 3.5/35 Takumar was a sharp lens, but best Pentax lenses seem to be "standards". Maybe the primary 2.4/55 is also an interesting lens - very early (ceased 1957) and 5 elements in 3 groups, which sound like a "Heliar" type lens..
cheers, Frank
I had an Argus/Cosina STL1000 for my first SLR.
Bought one off of Ebay not long ago, here with a Pentax 85mm F4.5 Super-Achromat
Bought one off of Ebay not long ago, here with a Pentax 85mm F4.5 Super-Achromat
back alley
IMAGES
hey brian, how ya doin'?
love the colours in that shot and dare i say it, the out of focus areas too.
joe
love the colours in that shot and dare i say it, the out of focus areas too.
joe
doubs43
Well-known
Doug said:
I hestitated before typing "pre-set" and probably should have said "re-set" instead. I have two Vivitar pre-set lenses for my Exaktas that I bought new back in the late 1960's; a 135 & a 200, both f/3.5's. I also have a 500mm f/6.3 Vivitar that's a pre-set and a pretty sharp lens. They are slower to operate but optically very good.
The surprising thing about the semi-auto Takumar 105mm is it's small size. It's pretty much on par with my 100mm Zuiko lens for the OM's. It has good weight for it's size too so I'd say the quality material is there and it has 8 diaphram blades.
Walker
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Hi,
Your brother's camera was probably an H3v, this is the US badged version of the SV. It would have had a self itmer around the base of the rewind knob.
I never knew there were so many "closet Pentaphiles" in the group I was almost afraid to admit thatI am a Pentaphile at heart!! If anyone needs any info on the Pentax line, you might find my website helpful www.pentax-manuals.com
Regards
Kim
Your brother's camera was probably an H3v, this is the US badged version of the SV. It would have had a self itmer around the base of the rewind knob.
I never knew there were so many "closet Pentaphiles" in the group
I was almost afraid to admit thatI am a Pentaphile at heart!! If anyone needs any info on the Pentax line, you might find my website helpful www.pentax-manuals.comRegards
Kim
dmr436 said:My brother had a Pentax screw mount with the meter over the prism, but H2 wasn't it. I want to say HV or XV or something. The meter was coupled to the shutter speed but not to the aperture. His did go to 1/1000.
My second "Real Camera" was a Spotmatic. Original Spotmatic "black press" model. Got it up at the old Minifilm shop on 8th Av. and 30-something. I eventually got the real Pentax Takumar 135 and the Vivitar 28mm wide, which I very much preferred over the regular wide angle of 35mm, and still do. My only real gripe about this camera was the time and hassle of changing lenses. That was the real reason I sold it many years later and got the K1000, which is still my main camera for serious stuff. Ironically, before I got any lenses other than the normal one for the K1000 I got a 28-135 zoom, so changing lenses is a moot point. If I had to do it over, I would have probably kept the Spotmatic and just got a zoom. So much for 20/20 hindsight.
But anyway, the Spotmatic was a great camera. Back in those days (early 70's) the holy grail of SLRs was the Nikon F series but nobody my age (my age then) could afford one. Several people I knew got the Nikkormat as a second choice, but I chose the Spotmatic, mainly because my brother had a Pentax, and I had used it and liked it.
I'm receptive enough in Deutsch to understand most of that page, but I know I'm missing many of the nuances. If you look around on the site, they also have a very good English language page covering some of the early Canon rangefinders too. Lots of information about the Canon lenses, including the f.095 normal lens. I've always been fascinated with fast lenses like that, but never got to play with one.
R
Roman
Guest
Well, if it's outing-time for closet Pentaphiles, I have to admit to really liking my MX (and the MZ5n, too) - the MZ-M was my first SLR, and I also own a K2; the only Pentax I did not like that much was the Super A.
Roman
Roman
Last edited by a moderator:
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Hi,
As far as I know, there are 2 versions of the 35/F2 and the 35/F3.5 Super Takumars and a 2.3 Auto Tak but the only 35/F2.8's were bayonet mount. Check here http://www.aohc.it/tak02e.htm If you really have a 2.8 Super Takumar, there woul be a lot of Pentaphiles very interested in it! The link to the table will give you the major differences between the models and I can supply more if required. There were all very good performers.
Regards
Kim
As far as I know, there are 2 versions of the 35/F2 and the 35/F3.5 Super Takumars and a 2.3 Auto Tak but the only 35/F2.8's were bayonet mount. Check here http://www.aohc.it/tak02e.htm If you really have a 2.8 Super Takumar, there woul be a lot of Pentaphiles very interested in it! The link to the table will give you the major differences between the models and I can supply more if required. There were all very good performers.
Regards
Kim
Dominic Le Fave said:
I am as well, Kim! I've had only Pentax SLRs since 1964, except an anomaly a couple years ago when I got a 3rd-party lens thinking I could change the mount to fit Pentax, but ended up buying an OM-G just to use the lens! Besides the 4 screw-mount bodies, I have 9 other Pentaxes in three film formats, the most recent addition a few weeks ago being a black K2DMD. The K2 is just back from CLA along with repair to my 1.8/85mm SMCP, and a test roll finished at the Farmers Market yesterday. Pentax has made good gear that I'm comfortable relying upon.Kim Coxon said:I never knew there were so many "closet Pentaphiles" in the group
dmr
Registered Abuser
Roman said:
Closet Pentaphiles.
LOLI admit being a Pentaphile. I know this is a rangefinder group here, but I still use (and prefer) the K1000 for most of my semi-serious work. I really see the GIII as my primary low-light camera.
There are really 2 things that I see as advantages to the Pentax SLR over the GIII rangefinder:
1. Zoom lens. I'm spoiled by it.
Question to the Teeming Millions here, do any rangefinders have anything like a coupled viewfinder to a zoom lens like many of the point-and-shoot cameras do?
2. Polarizer. I don't see any practical way of using it on a RF. Anybody use one on a RF?
Graham Line
Well-known
Leica has the Tri-Elmar verifocal that's supposed to click in the right finder frame. Optical quality is supposed to be good but some of the early ones supposedly had problems bringing up the right frame. There's also a very rare Konica varifocal for M-mount.
The Contax G2 finder zooms with the focal length of their varifocal; some people love the lens.
I've used polarizers a couple times with RFs but it isn't very convenient. Either you hold the polo up to your eye, rotate it for effect, note the position and then screw it on the lens .... or you leave it on the lens, note the meter readings at various positions, and then pick the degree of polarization you want.
Neither way is very satisfactory.
Leica and some aftermarket suppliers have made polos that swing over the finder for composition and over the lens for taking. Never used one.
The Contax G2 finder zooms with the focal length of their varifocal; some people love the lens.
I've used polarizers a couple times with RFs but it isn't very convenient. Either you hold the polo up to your eye, rotate it for effect, note the position and then screw it on the lens .... or you leave it on the lens, note the meter readings at various positions, and then pick the degree of polarization you want.
Neither way is very satisfactory.
Leica and some aftermarket suppliers have made polos that swing over the finder for composition and over the lens for taking. Never used one.
kiev4a
Well-known
Back before the Spotmatic Pentax made a 105 preset lens (or maybe it 100mm--I can't remember) I borrowed one from a guy at the office and shot a portrait of my father-in-law with it. Every wrinkle, spot and hair was crystal clear. I don't think I've used any lens since that was sharper. My early Pentax was a Asahi -- as were the lenses -- probebly was purchased in Japan by a serviceman.
bmattock
Veteran
Thought a few of you might like to see this.
I went on a trip today over to the Wilson Rose Garden with the specific purpose in mind of shooting all my 50mm (roughly) M42 mount prime lenses. Turned out to be a bit of a bust, because it was so bright out - I could not shoot wide-open, even though the camera (Pentax *ist DS) will do 1/4000 at ISO 200. So, I settled for a wide-open shot of a sundial art thing there - with the roses in the background. I wanted to see color, sharpness in the focus point, and how the lenses handled the out-of-focus areas.
The point of sharpest focus on all the following shots should be the Roman number VII. In some cases, it appears I was off a scosh, not sure why.
For those of you who have thought of putting an M42 lens on a DSLR, here's how it is done on a Pentax P/K mount:
Up first, we have the Pentax Super Takumar 55mm f1.8 at f1.8:
Next, we have the Former USSR Helios 55M 58mm f2 at f2:
It is very nice, but look how the OOF areas go all swirly! Interesting...
Next, we have classic Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58mm f2 at f2:
I think I am seeing the same swirly OOF areas in the Biotar. By the way, the Biotar is a preset lens - it has no click stops for the aperture, and it has no 'pin' for the camera to automatically stop the camera down to take the photo. You must stop it down manually on all cameras, not just a Franken-Pentax like my *ist DS. Also, FYI - the body goes into the camera a ways - I discovered that I cannot use it at all on my Bessaflex TM - the 'shoulder' of the back of the lens gets in the way of the 'kicker' that normally depresses the stop-down pin. So when you try to take a shot with the Bessaflex TM, the kicker can't, so the mirror does not pop up, and no photo is taken. Hmph!
Next up, we have the Isco Westenar 50mm f2.8. It's a funny little thing. Shaped kinda funny, and it has a spring-loaded button on the side of the lens that you're supposed to pre-load before each shot - the usual M42 pin-kicker would then kick the pin, which would stop the lens down using the sspring tension you wound up in it before. However, the lens then stays stopped down until you rewind the spring. Since my Franken-Pentax has no pin-kicker, I just don't cock the lever and it works fine as a pre-set lens. Here it is, bear in mind it is wide-open at f2.8, so it looks a bit different than the others:
Next we have the Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm f1.4. A classic in every way, it is well-made, heavy, like a jewel in mechanism, it just feels good. Shot at f1.4, so bear that in mind - it is a tad bit faster than the others, so has a shorter DOF:
http://www.cameramentor.com/images/m42_50mm_primes/rose_garden_pentax_super_multi_coated_tak_1_4.jpg
This is the final lens, a Meyer Gorlitz Oreston 50mm f1.8. This lens has the classic zebra-stripe pattern, and it has a pin, but there is no auto/manual switch to do manual stop-down. Instead, it has a push-button on the side of the lens that stops the lens down while the button is held down. Pretty convenient, if you remember to do it. I kept forgetting. Here it is at f1.8:
Here is what the lenses themselves look like:
My conclusions? Hard to say. I did find out some interesting things while out shooting today.
1) The Biotar has a reputation of being a shot-focus king. Not so, the Oreston can focus down much closer. The Pentax Super Takumar 1.8 nearly as close as the Biotar.
2) The Pentax Super-Multi-Takumar 50mm f1.4 is a sweet lens, just like everybody says. I found it surprisingly sharper at f5.6 than I did at f8 or f16. Interesting! Also, it had the best color rendition to my color-blind eyes, anyway.
3) The Isco Westenar is a better lens than I gave it credit for. Not bad at all.
4) The Helios is a fine lens - subject to a bit of lens flare, but overall, not bad. Not in the same league with the Pentaxes, IMHO. It requires does not allow for close focusing, the worst in that regard. Build quality is okay - feels solid, but not as smooth as a Pentax.
My overall favorite lens from this test today is a bit of a surprise to me - the Pentax Super Takumar 55mm f1.8! I like the bokeh, I like the short-focus. It is a physically small and light lens, very transportable, but it feels as well-made as it's big brother the SMC Tak 1.4. Second favorite, based on image quality alone - the Meyer Gorliz Oreston, but tied with the Pentax SMC 1.4. I didn't like the Biotar best for anything, I'm surprised, it is a cult classic.
Keep in mind that this was a very subjective test, so your milage may vary. I used a tripod on all the lenses, tried not to move things around, and tried to keep the conditions the same for each lens tested. I am only showing the 'fast' or wide-open tests with one subject in the interest of brevity - I have lots of other images if anyone wants them. I can also supply full-size images if anyone wants them to do in-depth analysis. But otherwise, this is pretty much it.
It was fun - and I found it useful. Hope you enjoyed it too.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
I went on a trip today over to the Wilson Rose Garden with the specific purpose in mind of shooting all my 50mm (roughly) M42 mount prime lenses. Turned out to be a bit of a bust, because it was so bright out - I could not shoot wide-open, even though the camera (Pentax *ist DS) will do 1/4000 at ISO 200. So, I settled for a wide-open shot of a sundial art thing there - with the roses in the background. I wanted to see color, sharpness in the focus point, and how the lenses handled the out-of-focus areas.
The point of sharpest focus on all the following shots should be the Roman number VII. In some cases, it appears I was off a scosh, not sure why.
For those of you who have thought of putting an M42 lens on a DSLR, here's how it is done on a Pentax P/K mount:
Up first, we have the Pentax Super Takumar 55mm f1.8 at f1.8:
Next, we have the Former USSR Helios 55M 58mm f2 at f2:
It is very nice, but look how the OOF areas go all swirly! Interesting...
Next, we have classic Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58mm f2 at f2:
I think I am seeing the same swirly OOF areas in the Biotar. By the way, the Biotar is a preset lens - it has no click stops for the aperture, and it has no 'pin' for the camera to automatically stop the camera down to take the photo. You must stop it down manually on all cameras, not just a Franken-Pentax like my *ist DS. Also, FYI - the body goes into the camera a ways - I discovered that I cannot use it at all on my Bessaflex TM - the 'shoulder' of the back of the lens gets in the way of the 'kicker' that normally depresses the stop-down pin. So when you try to take a shot with the Bessaflex TM, the kicker can't, so the mirror does not pop up, and no photo is taken. Hmph!
Next up, we have the Isco Westenar 50mm f2.8. It's a funny little thing. Shaped kinda funny, and it has a spring-loaded button on the side of the lens that you're supposed to pre-load before each shot - the usual M42 pin-kicker would then kick the pin, which would stop the lens down using the sspring tension you wound up in it before. However, the lens then stays stopped down until you rewind the spring. Since my Franken-Pentax has no pin-kicker, I just don't cock the lever and it works fine as a pre-set lens. Here it is, bear in mind it is wide-open at f2.8, so it looks a bit different than the others:
Next we have the Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm f1.4. A classic in every way, it is well-made, heavy, like a jewel in mechanism, it just feels good. Shot at f1.4, so bear that in mind - it is a tad bit faster than the others, so has a shorter DOF:
http://www.cameramentor.com/images/m42_50mm_primes/rose_garden_pentax_super_multi_coated_tak_1_4.jpg
This is the final lens, a Meyer Gorlitz Oreston 50mm f1.8. This lens has the classic zebra-stripe pattern, and it has a pin, but there is no auto/manual switch to do manual stop-down. Instead, it has a push-button on the side of the lens that stops the lens down while the button is held down. Pretty convenient, if you remember to do it. I kept forgetting. Here it is at f1.8:
Here is what the lenses themselves look like:
My conclusions? Hard to say. I did find out some interesting things while out shooting today.
1) The Biotar has a reputation of being a shot-focus king. Not so, the Oreston can focus down much closer. The Pentax Super Takumar 1.8 nearly as close as the Biotar.
2) The Pentax Super-Multi-Takumar 50mm f1.4 is a sweet lens, just like everybody says. I found it surprisingly sharper at f5.6 than I did at f8 or f16. Interesting! Also, it had the best color rendition to my color-blind eyes, anyway.
3) The Isco Westenar is a better lens than I gave it credit for. Not bad at all.
4) The Helios is a fine lens - subject to a bit of lens flare, but overall, not bad. Not in the same league with the Pentaxes, IMHO. It requires does not allow for close focusing, the worst in that regard. Build quality is okay - feels solid, but not as smooth as a Pentax.
My overall favorite lens from this test today is a bit of a surprise to me - the Pentax Super Takumar 55mm f1.8! I like the bokeh, I like the short-focus. It is a physically small and light lens, very transportable, but it feels as well-made as it's big brother the SMC Tak 1.4. Second favorite, based on image quality alone - the Meyer Gorliz Oreston, but tied with the Pentax SMC 1.4. I didn't like the Biotar best for anything, I'm surprised, it is a cult classic.
Keep in mind that this was a very subjective test, so your milage may vary. I used a tripod on all the lenses, tried not to move things around, and tried to keep the conditions the same for each lens tested. I am only showing the 'fast' or wide-open tests with one subject in the interest of brevity - I have lots of other images if anyone wants them. I can also supply full-size images if anyone wants them to do in-depth analysis. But otherwise, this is pretty much it.
It was fun - and I found it useful. Hope you enjoyed it too.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Hey Joe!
Been doing pretty good! I have to hook my other machine up to the net to upload some more pictures.
This particular lens, the "Super-Achromat" used all Calcium Fluorite. It can shoot from UV through Midwave Infrared. In visible, it gives color like nothing else that I have ever seen.
Been doing pretty good! I have to hook my other machine up to the net to upload some more pictures.
This particular lens, the "Super-Achromat" used all Calcium Fluorite. It can shoot from UV through Midwave Infrared. In visible, it gives color like nothing else that I have ever seen.
W
wierdcollector
Guest
Pentaphile thru and thru. I have 2 Slll, a Spotmatic, Spotmatic F, SP 500, H1a, P3, 3 K1000's, a Super Program, and even a dealer's limited edition Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SPll wall display that is approx. 16x10 inches with a camera above a suspended Asahi Pentax logo board.
Liked the shots Bill, good work as usual. Great info on the various lenses as well. I have all except the Biotar. Had one on an Exakta before but long gone now, stupid me. I've got 2 of the semi-auto 55 but also have 2 Yashica 50 f2 semi autos. Didn't even know they'd made such a critter till lately. The Pentax are smoother with the Yashicas tending to have a slow aperture occasionally.
Liked the shots Bill, good work as usual. Great info on the various lenses as well. I have all except the Biotar. Had one on an Exakta before but long gone now, stupid me. I've got 2 of the semi-auto 55 but also have 2 Yashica 50 f2 semi autos. Didn't even know they'd made such a critter till lately. The Pentax are smoother with the Yashicas tending to have a slow aperture occasionally.
Interesting comparson, Bill!
doubs43
Well-known
Bill, I'd have to see those pictures in a side-by-side comparison to even think about making a choice as to which I'd prefer. They all look pretty darned good to me!
Pentaphile? I have a Spotmatic II that is a really nice camera and takes great pictures. It's smooth and a pleasure to use. However (isn't there always a "however"?) I also have about seven Prakticas, all but one having the vertical-running metal focal plane shutter. If the Spotmatic is a Crown Victoria, the Prakticas are a Taurus; real workhorses.
I suppose I belong to the M42 Club which has lots of options and they are all pretty good ones IMO.
Walker
Pentaphile? I have a Spotmatic II that is a really nice camera and takes great pictures. It's smooth and a pleasure to use. However (isn't there always a "however"?) I also have about seven Prakticas, all but one having the vertical-running metal focal plane shutter. If the Spotmatic is a Crown Victoria, the Prakticas are a Taurus; real workhorses.
I suppose I belong to the M42 Club which has lots of options and they are all pretty good ones IMO.
Walker