Pentax Takumar F 70-210mm 4/5.6 AF lens review

skydragoness · 03-27-2007, 11:02 AM

I snagged one of these lens for the sweet, sweet price of $75. It was being sold on Fleabay well below it's worth, so i took a risk and bid on it.

I'm glad I did!

As soon as I got it today I snapped it on and let my dogs out in the backyard and started shooting. The AF is surprisingly fast, and the focus ring works smoothly.
The glass is clear w/ no fungus. There's a tiny tiny hair of dust on the inner glass but not anything I'm concerned with. Otherwise very clean, and the barrel shows light use.

Here's some shots that i took at f/4, these are just high res jpeg's, so before they were compressed they were even sharper:

Ok. I think i'm done buying lenses...

for now.

skydragoness · 03-27-2007, 11:17 AM

Ah now i know why it was so cheap.
It's not SMC.
Does that even matter? I know multicoated is better, but could i just band-aid with a super nice uv filter (not a cheap one)?

Oh well. The pics speaks for themselves me thinks. I think it's a cool lens.

**Adam** · 03-27-2007, 12:00 PM

The lack of coating kills the lens when it's sunny, but otherwise it has little effect. $75 is pretty much a bargain for that lens, but I've seen good copies go for as little as $56.

GaryML · 03-27-2007, 12:26 PM

I have a Takumar F 70-200 f4-5.6 lens that is, at present, part of my wife's kit. The Takumar F lenses do not have SMC, but they do have a conventional coating on the glass surfaces. They were economy versions of lenses, often using an older optical formula. Some of them are pretty decent lenses, and we've gotten some wonderful images from the Takumar F 70-200.

I would suggest using a good lens shade with it to keep the sun off the front element. I would also suggest stopping down from the maximum aperture for sharper images. Finally, it is a slow lens and at 200mm camera shake is an issue, especially using it with an 18x24mm digital sensor (giving the equivalent of a 300mm lens). A tripod or some other form of camera support will help to get sharp images.

skydragoness · 03-27-2007, 12:46 PM

Ahhaha. I knew something was 'different' when I compared the pics of the two lenses. The SMC ones have a red-colored coating, and are going for $200+ on ebay.

Darn. Well, is it worth trying to get the SMC one instead?

I think the AF is decent, and like i said, these pics don't do any justice to what the originals looked like.

woogi4u · 03-27-2007, 03:03 PM

I got this lens at $16 shipped from ebay today.

skydragoness · 03-27-2007, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by woogi4u

I got this lens at $16 shipped from ebay today.

Your'e KILLING me man. I would'nt have posted. Now I feel like a buffoon.

woogi4u · 03-27-2007, 08:38 PM

what't the filter size on this lens? I tried to get more info on this lens, but got nothing.

GaryML · 03-27-2007, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by woogi4u

what't the filter size on this lens? I tried to get more info on this lens, but got nothing.

Filter size is 49mm for the Pentax-F 70-200, Takumar F 70-200 and the Takumar F 70-210. And looking at Bojidar Dimitrov's entries for these lenses, they seem to have exactly the same dimensions and optical formulas. I believe they are the same lenses with slightly different labels.

woogi4u · 03-27-2007, 10:22 PM

Thank you very much for the info, GaryML.

skydragoness · 03-28-2007, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by GaryML

Filter size is 49mm for the Pentax-F 70-200, Takumar F 70-200 and the Takumar F 70-210. And looking at Bojidar Dimitrov's entries for these lenses, they seem to have exactly the same dimensions and optical formulas. I believe they are the same lenses with slightly different labels.

Hmm
I know SMC is cool and all, but why the $200 dollar price difference for a used version vs my non-SMC version if they all have the same glass config/etc? Crazy!

clm · 03-28-2007, 04:17 PM

You are looking at the wrong lenses.
The expensive one is the SMC Pentax F 70-210/4-5.6 ED (extra low dispersion ). It has 13 elements in 9 groups and has SMC coating. I never had any of the others, so I don't know how much better the SMC version is.

clm · 03-28-2007, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by skydragoness

Darn. Well, is it worth trying to get the SMC one instead?

I wouldn't. Your 50-200 is probably better unless you want to shoot film.

GaryML · 03-28-2007, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by clm

You are looking at the wrong lenses.
The expensive one is the SMC Pentax F 70-210/4-5.6 ED (extra low dispersion ). It has 13 elements in 9 groups and has SMC coating. I never had any of the others, so I don't know how much better the SMC version is.

The SMC Pentax F has a different optical formula than the Takumar F/Pentax F and has SMC. It does not have "ED" in the lens title although some people claim that it has an ED optical element. It also takes a 49mm filter. I'm sure the SMC F 70-210 is a better lens than the Takumar F, but I couldn't say how much better as I never directly compared them. But the Takumar F is a pretty good lens and it is fine for casual use.

Personally, I agree with clm who stated that the Pentax DA 50-200 as the logical upgrade for use with a digital body. It is smaller and lighter, has the Quick-Shift feature, is definitely an ED lens, is optimized for use with a digital sensor, and should perform at least as good as the older, larger and heavier SMC-F 70-210. I just looked at the O.P.'s profile and she has the DA 50-200. I don't know why you would bother with the Takumar F or consider buying an SMC-F 70-210. If you want top performance, then wait for the DA* 50-135 f2.8 or DA* 60-250 f4, which are likely to be outstanding lenses in the M*/A*/F*/FA* tradition. Another option would be a fixed focal length lens like the FA 135mm f2.8 or the soon to be released DA* 200mm f2.8. I have the FA 135 and it is a very high performance lens and quite compact for it's focal length.