Sleeper manual focus PK lenses?

[kuuan]

How good are the macro lenses?

very!
see e.g. for the 4/50: http://www.verybiglobo.com/four-macro-50mm-lenses-brief-shot-out/
the 4/100, quote: "They ( samples ) illustrate perfectly the imaging abilities of the Macro Takumar 100/4: beautiful colors, smooth rendering and perfect bokeh (it's a Heliar formula lens). Just have a look at this bokeh sample from the last picture, it's perfect, without any trace of double-lining or bright circles:"
taken from + samples seen: http://forum.mflenses.com/super-multi-coated-macro-takumar-100mm-f-4-macro-t73403.html

 

[p.giannakis]

I also highly recommend the Rikenon 50 f/2 (seen here on a Pentax ME)

It is not the kind of lens that it will receive glowing reviews all over the internet but its optical performance is excellent, it is very small in size and it is plentiful in car-boot sales, never selling above £5 (usually together with a Ricoh SLR).

Here are two pictures taken with it: One wide open f/2

and one at f/11

 

[mcfingon]

p.giannakis has got a couple of good sleeper photos there 🙂
Raid, my very brief test of a friend's M42 Macro Takumar 50 on my A7S impressed me with its high contrast, flare-resistance and sharpness. I think from its lens diagram that it is a Tessar-type lens, which is unusual but apparently very effective.

 

[jamin-b]

How good are the macro lenses?

I have the M42 version of the 100/4 Macro and it is pretty compact, has amazing IQ for close up and portraits and feels really solid in use. I think the K version is the same optical formula, perhaps with improved coatings?

 

[Abbazz]

the 4/100, quote: "They ( samples ) illustrate perfectly the imaging abilities of the Macro Takumar 100/4: beautiful colors, smooth rendering and perfect bokeh (it's a Heliar formula lens). Just have a look at this bokeh sample from the last picture, it's perfect, without any trace of double-lining or bright circles:"
taken from + samples seen: http://forum.mflenses.com/super-multi-coated-macro-takumar-100mm-f-4-macro-t73403.html

I pertty much agree with the above quote 😀; I just would like to add that the Macro Takumar 100/4 is not only good for macro, it's also a wonderful portait lens, if you can live with the F/4 max aperture (which I consider more than enough for portraiture on a 100mm lens because faster apertures would blur parts of the face).

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Sleeper manual focus PK lenses?

I actually use the M42 100mm macro takumar to scan film...

 

[Michael Markey]

I had a 50/1.2 SMC which I foolishly sold.
That`s an interesting lens.

 

[bmattock]

I actually use the M42 100mm macro takumar to scan film...

How do you do that?

 

[kuuan]

I pertty much agree with the above quote 😀; I just would like to add that the Macro Takumar 100/4 is not only good for macro, it's also a wonderful portait lens, if you can live with the F/4 max aperture (which I consider more than enough for portraiture on a 100mm lens because faster apertures would blur parts of the face).

Cheers!

Abbazz

😀 + thank's for the added suggestion for portrait lens, will try that!

 

[raid]

Thanks for all the recommendation for the macro lenses. They are sold very cheap these days. Has anyone tried using the 135/4 macro lens for the Pentax 67 camera on a M 4/3? You can get one for $50. It would become a 270mm macro.

 

[Fixcinater]

The 67 macro 135mm doesn't get all that close and is huge and would have lots of wasted image circle. PK or M42 135mm plus cheap extension tubes would be preferable.

 

[nobbylon]

My 28 2.8 turned up this morning and like a lot of sales turned out to have a gummed up aperture mechanism. It drives me mad. Why don't people just say so.
Anyway took it apart, bit of a fiddle but 3 hours later, some cleaning of the aperture mechanism and it's blades and it's as new. I'll shoot a test roll this week as i'm taking this on holiday in a couple of weeks.

 

[jwnash1]

A great place for info on Pentax lens is:http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/. Pentax lens all the way back to the old M37s as well as many third party lens are rated and reviewed by forum users, many of whom are very knowledgeable.
Regards,
John

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I actually use the M42 100mm macro takumar to scan film...

How do you do that?

I've got the macro attached to a Fuji X-Pro1 via some extension tubes and an adapter, then mount that on a copy stand and point it at a film carrier sitting on a light pad. It works pretty well!

A great place for info on Pentax lens is:http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/. Pentax lens all the way back to the old M37s as well as many third party lens are rated and reviewed by forum users, many of whom are very knowledgeable.
Regards,
John

Yes, I used to contribute to that database back in the day—it's very useful! I'm also fond of Stan's Pentax page, which I don't think is updated anymore but is packed with great field reviews of lenses.

http://stans-photography.info/BriefComments.html

 

[robry]

My PK experience so far:
M 28/3,5-has given me some nice photos, sharp correct and cheap, some vignetting at 3,5, VG
K 30/2,8- a very nice lens, nice shades of grey, great detail. VG+++
K 35/2- very useful, interesting rendering, and very good detail from f4. A keeper, VG++
K 35/3,5-very Sharp, but for me limited in use. VG++
M 50/1,4- fun to use, not anything developed yet
K 55/1,8- great qualities, nice portraits at f2, landscapes at f8, VG+++
M 85/2- Nice to use, VG+ and with some personality. Quite new to me.
M 100/2,8- VG+ has given some really beautiful shots.
K 105/2,8- Very versatile lens, high quality, my best short tele VG+++
M200/4 Much better than expected and thanks for the size, VG
K200/4 VG+ but bigger
Film only, LX only
I´m sure you have already tried all these but anyway, cheers Robert

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

My PK experience so far:
M 28/3,5-has given me some nice photos, sharp correct and cheap, some vignetting at 3,5, VG
K 30/2,8- a very nice lens, nice shades of grey, great detail. VG+++
K 35/2- very useful, interesting rendering, and very good detail from f4. A keeper, VG++
K 35/3,5-very Sharp, but for me limited in use. VG++
M 50/1,4- fun to use, not anything developed yet
K 55/1,8- great qualities, nice portraits at f2, landscapes at f8, VG+++
M 85/2- Nice to use, VG+ and with some personality. Quite new to me.
M 100/2,8- VG+ has given some really beautiful shots.
K 105/2,8- Very versatile lens, high quality, my best short tele VG+++
M200/4 Much better than expected and thanks for the size, VG
K200/4 VG+ but bigger
Film only, LX only
I´m sure you have already tried all these but anyway, cheers Robert

Great rundown! No, I've only tried a few of those. Glad to hear you like the 30, which, as I said, I'm curious about...

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

My votes for the old Spotmatic's 50mm f/1.4 and the more modern f/2 85mm that came out about the time of the M series cameras.

Regards, David

 

[raid]

I favor my 35/2 50/1,4 85/1.8

These are excellent lenses.

 

[Michael Markey]

For many years my favorite was the 100/2.8 ....got some lovely shots with that lens.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I ended up eschewing the 24-35 in favor of that K 30/2.8, because of this thread and because of the ludicrously valedictory reviews on Pentax Forums, which compare it favorably even to the 31mm Limited:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-K-30mm-F2.8-Lens.html

Found a good condition one on eBay for a decent price. This whole kit is so affordable.

David, can you say anything more about the M 85/2? Reviews tend to be middling, but it's so, so tiny...