The Takumar Lenses

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Fujifilm Fujicolor Pro 400H, expired in 2008, at E.I. 100.


2018.09.16 Roll #182-69860004.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 55mm f/3.5, Panoramic Adapter, ORWO N74+, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 6.5 minutes.


2019.07.04 Roll #210-36.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[BobBill]

# 383 is brilliant metaphor...open doors...ears...age though not monotone.

Recall Mom saying, "...looks like a standing cab, with the doors open."

And Carter's (364) keeps drawing my attention...lovely picuture! Hope survives.

 

[BobBill]

SLR, RF blurred view of tools? To me, Camera's are either fixed ("box") or rangefinder (RF) but I understand the situations. Just notions.

 

[charjohncarter]

Thanks Bob.

 

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 55m f/3.5, Kodak 400TX, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 6 minutes.


2018.05.30 Roll #159-02280-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 90mm f/2.8 LS, Fujifilm Fujicolor Pro 400H, expired in 2008, at E.I. 100.


2018.06.22 Roll #166-69870008.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Fujifilm Fujicolor Pro 400H, expired in 2008, at E.I. 100.


2018.09.16 Roll #182-69860006.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2019.09.22 Roll #219-04002-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[charjohncarter]

Nice going ^^. Here is a recent of mine:

Tmax100 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

Bare Island | La Perouse

Pentax MX, SMC Takumar 50/f1.4 and Portra400

 

[dourbalistar]

Nice going ^^. Here is a recent of mine:

Tmax100 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr

Thank you, John. Which version of the 55mm do you have? I have an earlier f/3.5 version, the one with the comically large 100mm front element. 😀

 

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2019.09.22 Roll #219-04006-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[charjohncarter]

Mine is the f4.0, I like it, it does require (as you know) careful focusing. The one above that you just posted shows off the 105mm: at it's best with two nice looking kids. Someday we have to get together and complain about the problems of the Pentas 67 6x7 bodies.

 

[dourbalistar]

Mine is the f4.0, I like it, it does require (as you know) careful focusing. The one above that you just posted shows off the 105mm: at it's best with two nice looking kids. Someday we have to get together and complain about the problems of the Pentas 67 6x7 bodies.

Thanks, John! I think with the weight of the rig and the sometimes very shallow depth of field, careful focusing is required with most 6x7 lenses. I shoot much more deliberately and judiciously with my 6x7, especially when you only have 10 shots per roll!

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2019.09.22 Roll #219-04027-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

While maybe not a true Takumar, the Pentax-M 50/1.4 is a good lens.

It’s a great lens, but Takumar it ain’t...

For Pentax more broadly there’s the Pentaxians thread. Let’s keep this one on topic 😉

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142992&page=8

 

[blumoon]

Super-Takumar 1.9/85 on Lumix G7

[/url]Peeps 12-20-2019 [/IMG]

 

[dourbalistar]

Pentax 6x7, S-M-C Takumar 6x7 105mm f/2.4, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2019.01.26 Roll #196-03240-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr



2019.09.22 Roll #219-04016-Pano-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

Quick question for my fellow members of the Takumar fan club. I have a seven-element 50mm f/1.4 with the built-in warming filter (aged, amber-colored radioactive lens elements). I use either Sunny 16 or a light meter app on my phone and was wondering if I am losing enough light due to the color of aged lens elements that I need to compensate in my exposures.

Thanks!

 

[charjohncarter]

I don't know the answer to that question, but I have two of these lenses and I have never found a need to apply a correction. Both of them have responded to the UV light treatment.

Thorium Cure by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[dmr]

I don't know the answer to that question, but I have two of these lenses and I have never found a need to apply a correction. Both of them have responded to the UV light treatment.

I'm sure many of you have seen this, but there is one site (probably long gone) that suggested "repairing" the affected Takumar lenses with a sledge hammer. 🙂

 

[CMur12]

I have one of the affected lenses, as well. I have put it under different lamps, left it in the window, left it outside in sunlight, and it's still yellow! (Possibly less than it was, but it's hard to tell.)


To respond to AAlfano's question about exposure compensation, I'm sure it would be needed. A simple 81B warming filter requires 1/3 stop compensation and there is definitely more light loss than this in my 50mm 1.4.


- Murray