Super Taks VS. S-M-C Taks? - Page 2

Nesster · 09-19-2008, 04:04 AM

If you have a spare $100... that book's expensive!

Mike Cash · 09-19-2008, 05:44 AM

I always go for either the S-M-C or SMC versions for the simple reason that I own an ESII and like to take advantage of the open-aperture metering function.

Fritz · 09-19-2008, 09:17 AM

All my Takumars are the Super variety. The reason being mostly because they were available, and cheaper then the Super-Multi-Coated and SMC versions. I'm quite happy with the colors and contrast of all my Taks. So I don't miss the better coatings for the most part. You do have to be a little more careful about flare though.

jocko_nc · 09-19-2008, 10:04 AM

For what it is worth, I am keeping SMC-M's. Not for any technical or other valid reason, just because that is what I like. ???. The Takumar focus is indeed sweet. Not crazy about adapters, though. I don't care for the plastic feel of the A's I guess the M's are the best compromise between the old and the new. They feel great, too.

I am mostly a collector. A collection of stuff that I can take nice photos with.

jsherman999 · 09-19-2008, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by jocko_nc

For what it is worth, I am keeping SMC-M's. Not for any technical or other valid reason, just because that is what I like. ???. The Takumar focus is indeed sweet. Not crazy about adapters, though. I don't care for the plastic feel of the A's I guess the M's are the best compromise between the old and the new. They feel great, too.

I am mostly a collector. A collection of stuff that I can take nice photos with.

What M's do you have? You should post some shots in the "M-club" forum in this section.

.

Zewrak · 09-19-2008, 12:28 PM

To make things even more complicated for you.

I prefer the even earlier preset Takumar lenses that I have, before the Super Takumars I have of the same focal length. The pictures are much more crispy and clear for some reason. Yes, they do flare a bit, if your not careful. But if you know what you do, you can use it to an advantage aswell.

Sun... flower..? on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I like the flare effect in that picture for example.

Nesster · 09-19-2008, 01:43 PM

ZEW!!!! SHHHHHHHH!!!

jocko_nc · 09-19-2008, 02:21 PM

Right now...

SMC Pentax M 50 1.4
SMC Pentax M 50 1.7
SMC Pentax M 50 2.0
SMC Pentax M 135 3.5
SMC Pentax M 80-200 4.5
SMC Pentax M 200 4.0
SMC Pentax A 35-135 3.5 ok, its an A, but it is the early style A. Its a sweet lens.

Always on the prowl for more...

The best condition stuff I find comes as part of a kit. Goodwill is best, the stuff has not passed through a dozen hands yet.

the_snark · 09-24-2008, 08:07 AM

Originally Posted by Abbazz

Yes and no. For some lenses, the optical formula or the build quality has changed between the Super-Takumar and the S-M-C version. The 135/3.5 is one of these lenses: the earlier version of the Super-Takumar with 5 elements (product number 43540) had better chromatic aberrations control than both the later Super-Takumar (product number 43541) and the S-M-C version (product number 43542), which had only 4 elements.

Cheers!

Abbazz

OK, I just received my Super Takumar 135/3.5 in the mail, and it doesn't have the product code on the Auto/Manual switch. Can anyone tell me, from these photos (e.g. form the serial number), whether it's an early or late Super Tak?

AlpenTak · 09-24-2008, 09:09 AM

Most 135/3.5s with serial numbers of 19xxxxx seem to be "version 2" lenses.

Unfortunately nothing is ever 100% certain with Takumar serial numbers, often they seem to be just pulled out of a hat, but I am fairly certain that yours is indeed a version 2.

Nesster · 09-24-2008, 10:22 AM

I read somewhere that you count the number of internal reflections to figure this out.

Bob Miller · 10-15-2009, 01:37 PM

In general, the Version 1 Super Takumar 135mm/3.5 lenses have "4" marked on the aperture ring between 3.5 and 5.6, while the Version 2 lenses do not show the "4".

I own a lens with a serial number in the 17xxxxx range that appears to be Version 1, but others in the same range may be Version 2.

Based on things I've read, the transition may have occurred around 1967.

Fixcinater · 10-15-2009, 01:49 PM

I have a Super-Takumar 135mm f/3.5 that has the "4" on the aperture ring, and it's serial is 593868. The font used is pretty close to the same font as what is on my girlfriend's Auto Takumar 135mm f/3.5.

Neat info, guys!

ddhytz · 10-16-2009, 05:03 PM

Check the product number that is engraved on the Auto/Manual lever. Both 43541 and 43542 are later version that has 4 elements, while the early version has 5 elements.

*raymeedc* · 10-18-2009, 10:30 PM

An acquaintance of mine has a 135 with an 85xxxx serial number, a 4 next to the 3.5, and, for some unexplained reason, no model number on the underside of the auto/manual switch (at least that's what he tells me..... I haven't seen the lens myself). I'm wondering if I can be reliably sure this is a version 1 without the engraved model number. He's willing to sell me the lens but, as I already have a version 2 Super, I would have no need for another unless I was sure I was purchasing a version 1.