Takumar 1,4/50 and the CA

[estudleon]

All the takumars 50 (Super, S-M-C- and SMC) have excesive CA?

[Digitalis]

they all have CA and LOCA...it just depends on what one considers to be excessive. though some lenses are worse culprits than others. I find the super Takumar has the least of the three., but it's tolerance to flare isn't as good as the others.

[estudleon]

Thanks Digitalis, very much.

I saw in my S-M-C- 50 a very strong CA at F/2. I did a test and at F/ 5,6 - 8 the CA was minimal almost negligible.

It's a pitty because the lens is very good.

I want to change to other version or lens.

[Digitalis]

Originally Posted by estudleon

I want to change to other version or lens.

Even the Legendary pentax 31mm f/1.8 limited has CA wide open, the Pentax 50mm f/1.2 has a lot of it too. Even the zeiss planar 50mm f/1.4 has CA wide open, the Leica summilux 35mm f/1.4 has it too...it's just a fact of life. Wide angle lenses suffer more from it than telephotos because wide angle lenses are rather difficult to design. The only lenses that don't have CA are Apochromatic lenses,which are usually 100mm and longer. However in recent times even labelling a lens APO doesn't actually mean it is actually Apochromatic. Some manufacturers label a lens APO if it has more than two pieces of ED glass in it which doesn't make it Apochromatic at all, it just makes it better corrected than a normal lens.

[estudleon]

Thanks again, Digitalis.

I used a MC Pancolar 1,8/50 CZJ. Great normal lens too. But very strong green fringe at F/5,6!!

In Leica lenses I used 3 versions of summicron M 50 (Wow!! wanderfull the three).

The S-M-C- 1,4/50 reminds me the IQ of my summilux M 1,4/50 of 1966. Excelent!!

Smooth images, with definited centers. Not so contrast like the pancolar, but has a special IQ.

But the CA. . . .

Regards.

[Digitalis]

Originally Posted by estudleon

The S-M-C- 1,4/50 reminds me the IQ of my summilux M 1,4/50 of 1966

well that isn't surprising, since the lens designs are contemporary. However to really make a takumar shine is put it on a ME super with some T-max 100 and print using a dichroic enlarger...the prints would have this ethereal "glow" to them especially at the wider apertures. My grandfather who used to shoot Leica cameras religiously, when he first saw this effect he immediately went out and bought two spotmatics because of that lens!..the look is what I call the "Pentax glow" ( I doubt that radioactivity of the older takumars had anything to do with that)

[Psynema]

Just tested my Takumar 50mm 1.4 M42 mount today. YES VERY NOTICEABLE CA/PF wide open and existent up to 2.8, but you'd have to pixel peep past 1.4 for the most part.

Bokeh isn't as good as I'd hoped, but I'll figure away around it I guess. 6 blades is better than the 5 on the canon 1.8 at 1/3 the price on ebay, but it's comparable bokeh wise with busy backgrounds.

Quite sharp though, only $40 so I won't complain. Quite a bit of dust/dirt inside, but didn't affect pic quality and don't see anything.

Wish the focus ring would be the standard clockwise foreground, CC background, instead of the reverse.

[Digitalis]

with the focusing ring Pentax has always been that way, when I switch back to my canon gear and I have to use manual focus, sometimes I will turn the focus ring the wrong way...life is full of small challenges.

[k100d]

CA, PF all that fun stuff is also a by-product of digital sensors.
shoot film and a lot of the crap that i get from the FA Limiteds on digital is gone

[stevebrot]

Originally Posted by Digitalis

... dichroic enlarger...

Yes, an enlarger with diffusion glass is best for those lenses. The condenser heads are brighter, but oh, so harsh!

Steve

[Digitalis]

condenser heads are harsh enough you can spend hours spotting the scratches and flaws in the prints afterwards....which reminds me I was developing some film and the fixer had sulphated and the film had scratches and pockmarks in it...a conservative print size and a dichro head saved me so much time.