The Super version of this lens came in three productions: an early and a late first model, and a second model. The first model featured a slightly differently designed distance scale than the second model.
The first model has a filter diamteter of 58mm and the early version has a smallest aperture of f/22 whereas the late version only reaches f/16. The aperture ring of the early model has fine ribs, the late version coarse ribs.
The second model takes 49mm filters and go to f/16, and was later issued as a Super-Multi-Coated version.
Pictured to the left is the first model, early version; in the center the second model; to the right the Super-Multi-Coated version of the second model.
Variants:
1962: Super-Takumar 1:3.5/28 - first model, early version - refer first picture above and fist lens diagram
Weight
Diam x Length
Filter Size
Min. Focus
Max. Magnification
260 g
58 mm
40 cm
Diagonal FOV (APS-C)
Horizontal FOV (APS-C)
Min. Aperture
Max. Aperture
55 degrees
46 degrees
f/22
f/3.5
Diagonal FOV (24x36)
Horizontal FOV (24x36)
Diaphragm
Optical Construction
75 degrees
65 degrees
Automatic
7 elements, 6 groups
1965: Super-Takumar 1:3.5/28 - first model, late version - see first lens diagram
Weight
Diam x Length
Filter Size
Min. Focus
Max. Magnification
260 g
58 mm
40 cm
Diagonal FOV (APS-C)
Horizontal FOV (APS-C)
Min. Aperture
Max. Aperture
55 degrees
46 degrees
f/16
f/3.5
Diagonal FOV (24x36)
Horizontal FOV (24x36)
Diaphragm
Optical Construction
75 degrees
65 degrees
Automatic
7 elements, 6 groups
1966: Super-Takumar 1:3.5/28 - second model - refer second pricture above and second lens diagram
1971: Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 - refer third picture above and second lens diagram
Simply a terrific lens that re-produces woderful textures in all its images. It is sharp all the way down to f/3.5 and is a small, light lens.
Chromatic aberration/purple fringing is very low, probably due to the relatively small f/3.5 aperture.
Obviously this isn't as good a low-light choice as the 28/2.8 lenses unless you're comfortable at high ISOs.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $50.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Image quality, compact size, build quality
Cons:
speed
A wonderful, compact lens that produces beautifully sharp photos. The focus is smooth and precise, and the build quality is outstanding, like all the old Takumars. The only drawback is the small aperture wide open. This sometimes makes it difficult to focus precisely when using Av mode, because the diaphragm remains stopped down. A very small price to pay for such a great little lens.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $88.00
| Rating: 9
Pros:
Image quality, build quality, size
Cons:
speed
Going on the images above ... I have a late first version by the looks of things.
My first foray into M42 and manual lenses ... this is a very nice lins indeed ... the construction and build quality of this lens is superb. The focus ring is smooth (but not loose at all). The aperture ring clicks reassuringly throughout the entire range.
First images from this on my K10D was crisp wide open. Colours had nice saturation and great contrast (little to no PP was needed). Focus is sharp.
One thing that is a drawback is that in low-light it isn't the quickest. That's all that I can fault on it. Other than that ... it's a great lens and performs much better than I was expecting for the price.
I do recommend this lens though ... it is good value for money.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $65.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
build quality and center sharpness
Cons:
slow, corner sharpness and vignetting wide open
I once owned the SMC version of this lens. Later got myself a K28/3.5 and decided to let this one go.
It really is a lovely little lens. I couldn't believe how compact it is when I first got it. The build quality is excellent and I enjoy the field of view of the 28mm focal length on APS sensor.
I did some non-scientific test of this lens vs the K28/3.5. I found that wide open both lenses show dark corners, which is probably common for all older wide angle lenses. Once stopped down the vignetting is gone.
Center sharpness is about the same but the K28/3.5 beats the Takumar hands down in corner sharpness. The Takumar looks a little warm or maybe you can say the K looks a little cool. I can't really tell cause my monitor is not calibrated.
At F3.5 the lens is on the slow side for a prime and manual focus can be a little difficult in darker places. But somehow I find myself using this lens mostly at hyper-focal length anyway.
Overall I think this lens is pretty good. Though I prefer my K28/3.5, it's a lot harder to come by than the Takumar.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $30.00
| Rating: 9
Pros:
Well-rounded IQ, cute, easy to use
Cons:
Lens hood uses a rotating collar mount (+/-)
Very pleased with this lens. Mine is the 2nd version Super Takumar (the one with the gold coloured coating).
Not much to add to what has already been said. Not as prone as other Super Takumars to flaring or fringing even in bright light or high contrast -- smallish f3.5 aperture helps with that.
It has a very wide hyper-focal range as well which is a definite advantage with digital since many digital only lenses aren't so much suited to deep hyper-focusing.
Bought mine for a song, $30, with the official lens hood and cases so that skews my rating up from an 8-8.5 to a 9 since I'm just tickled with anything stamped Asahi Pentax and Super Takumar
Only drawback is the Takumar lens hood since it doesn't screw on. That being said, it is also a plus since the hood can be left mounted and filters/lens cap can be added or removed without having to unscrew it.
All around a terrific lens, I think with some practice it will proudly sit right along side my SMC-K 28/3.5 lens that cost 5x as much.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $20.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Size/cute factor, IQ, good geometry
Cons:
speed
I have two copies, a Super and a S-M-C.
First the positives: sharp image, little geometric distortion, very good color.
The negative: slow max aperture.
I think the metal shade is way cool by the way, it twist locks over the barrel, leaving the filter threads open.
The intangible, or why I'm not as excited as I could be: In direct comparison to the SMC-A 28, I don't see any significant difference. The SMC-A is a 2.8 and has slightly better resolution. Color rendition is very similar. On this basis, I wouldn't say the Takumars have any real advantage... except for the coolness factor and the screw mount.
Based on my samples of Pentax 28's, the focal length is not typical of other Pentax lenses: the rendition is very high resolution but without the contrast bump and color pump many of the other lenses have. These are not Technicolor, which isn't a bad thing...
I love the focal length on both film and digital crop. These are excellent lenses capable of truly great photographs.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $25.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
sharp, great build quality, cheap
Cons:
f3.5
Got this one together with the Super Takumar 55/1.8 for $50. It's the late version Super Takumar.
For a 28mm I find it really compact, especially when you consider its age. Like the other Takumars the build is great and focusing accurate. My tests indicate that it is one of the sharper 28mm lenses available. It is rather slow at f3.5, but in most cases there wouldn't be much point in having f2.8 if images became a lot softer I guess.
As usual the coating is not as good as more modern versions and it seems to have a bit light falloff in the corners. The color rendition on my copy is quite cold compared to newer lenses. Perhaps even more so than my K-lenses. I've never really decided which one I prefer. The slightly bluish images from the 28/3.5 can be cool at times.
I think this is a must-have if you own a spotmatic or some other cool m42 camera. On more modern cameras it may have more competition. Although there are a lot of different 28s out there, not all are excellent performers. If you are willing to take the extra hassle of using a screwmount on your camera, this one may be a cool one to buy. It might be better to find the K-version and have wide open diaphragm while focusing. Optically I think they are pretty much the same. They are certainly both able to produce some great images.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): N/A
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Very nice focus feel--high quality build--sharp
Cons:
This is a great little 28mm, even @ 3.5 wide open. The lens has such a polished look and feel to it, that it demands respect from that alone. I have an early version of the early versions. It was gifted to me by a family member who bought it brand new and cared for it religiously; the lens, except that its build somewhat dates it, appears brand new in all other respects. This says something about the original owner, but also about the Takumar quality as well.
If I could ask a little more out of the lens, I would ask for a bit more contrast. I am not a big fan of post-processing.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $25.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
small, light, cheap
Cons:
slow aperture
I'm usually a low light / shallow DOF shooter so I never really use my Super Multi Coated Takumar 28mm, and it's my loss. Although usually in my bag, I never tend to use it due to it's slow aperture but it can produce some high quality shots.
I want to test this lens on the street and landscapes to see where it can fit into my style of shooting, I love Takumar lenses and it's a shame I don' use this one more often.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $40.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Compact, can be very sharp
Cons:
Distortion, corner softness (even on APS-C)
This reviews a "minty" Super Takumar tested on 1.5X crop APS-C digital.
I really like 28mm lenses, especially on full frame, but it isn't very wide on APS-C. That said, images look like a cropped 28mm wide-angle, not a 42mm normal, in terms of depth of focus and that "detail everywhere" look.
Sharpness is good wide open, but better around f/5.6-f/8. There is a mild color shift toward blue when stopped down on my Sony A350, but colors are generally good and I haven't seen flare yet. (One would expect flare problems given the flatness of the front element, but nope.) There is some distortion and corner softness (yes, even on APS-C); it's not bad, but it is worse than many 28mm lenses and might be pretty bad on full frame. Close focus also isn't very close.
Overall, I think the 35mm f/3.5 makes slightly better images.
That said, IQ is easily in the 7-8 range, the lens build quality is superb, and the lens is quite tiny for what it has to do. It's an easy lens to like, but probably not love.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): N/A
| Rating: 8
Pros:
It's a Takumar:-)
Cons:
It's a tad hard to focus for me.
I was reading through the Takumar section and saw Bellakelpie's review. Hmmm I thought, something sounds weird about this. I checked my copy and sure enough I have the 4th version! But in my case I have the Asahi Pentax cap. Mine has 58mm threads and only stops down to f/16. I took a couple of pics. The second one has the filter that came with the lens when I bought it (hopefully readable) showing the 58mm threads.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $45.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Compact Size and build
Cons:
f3.5 is a bit slow
This is for the Super Tak that takes the 49mm filters. This lens is capable of good colors. The contrast is improved with the matching shade.
Note to people review the 28mm Taks: It is important that you specify which lens you are reviewing. The Super Tak with 58mm filter lenses have 7 elements in 6 groups while the 49mm filter Super Tak and S-M-C tak lenses have 7 elements in 7 groups.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $75.00
| Rating: 9
Pros:
Build, Sharpness, colour rendition
Cons:
None to speak of
I have the "4th version" and the newer Super Tak 49mm filter thread version. See pics below. Both lenses perform similarly. In fact I really can't tell the difference in the images. The older 4th version is substantially larger in every respect.
A nicely built (like all M42 Taks) I love the colour quality of this lens and nice and sharp even wide open. Nice Bokeh. Stopped down, it's a very sharp lens. No issues with PF/CA even in tough light.
Highly recommended even though the price has increased, at around $75.00 consider that a lens like the FA28mm f2.8 is going to cost $350.00 and IMO isn't as good a lens (soft wide open).
You'll notice from the attach photos that the construction is very different. The new 49mm lens has a flat front element and the older 58mm is curved. Size is quite different as well.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): N/A
| Rating: 9
Pros:
Build
Cons:
This is for version 2 of model 1 of this lens. In other words, it has 58mm filter threads and the aperture is f3.5-16. I like this one better than the later Super Tak model for looks if for no other reason. The later one is smaller, but if I want small, I'd go with one of the 35mm f3.5 Taks. I believe the different optical formula in this lens gives images different look than the later versions.
I use a Nikon HN-22 hood with a 58-62mm Tiffen step-up ring with this lens. If you don't use a hood/shade with this lens, you aren't doing the lens justice.
I can recommend the S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5: Yes |
Price (U.S. Dollars): $70.00
| Rating: 8
Pros:
Sharp, great colors stopped down, fantastic build.
Cons:
Not very fast, focusing difficult.
I own the first version and early build, Super-Takumar 28/3.5. Has the F22 position, different distance scale, rounded font, and 58mm front end.
This is the first wide I've picked up for my Spotmatic, and it is a great lens. I didn't know much about it until I went looking at it online after purchase, and was blown away to find out that this particular version was produced between 1962-1964, making it the oldest Takumar I own. I've never been let down by the constrast and sharpness of this lens. I usually shoot it at 5.6 and out, and it always surprises, especially with a good high-resolution film behind it (think Kodak Ektar 100).
There are a few caveats. First is, for a prime, it's relatively slow wide open, but this can be rectified with faster film. I say relatively because, as far as I'm concerned, it's not a deal breaker. If you're shooting outdoors you can use 100ISO film without fault, and still manage 60-125th/second speeds at 5.6 to 8. If you need slow grain film and indoor shots, use a tripod. Second is the focusing mechanism. I make allowances for these lenses' focusing feel due to their age (my SMC Takumars are a lot stiffer focusing than the Super-Takumars, and I don't know if that's a lens thing or an age thing), but I have considerable difficulty getting proper focus out of this lens if I'm not shooting at infinity. Everything is so small in the viewfinder that confirming proper focus requires outdoors-or-equivalent lighting. Compounding matters, the focus scale is the shortest I've yet encountered on a Takumar. Third, your early models only had a 5 blade aperture, which makes for some interesting bokeh, although I suppose this is subjective, as I like the busier look. And lastly, due to the wide optics and the lack of super-multi-coating, it flares pretty consistently when aimed at a light source, even with an SMC UV filter in front of it.
That may sound like a lot of complaints, but really, you have to hand it to this lens. It produces great shots so long as you don't go pushing it's problem areas as noted above, and it cost peanuts, at least when I found mine. Digital users pay $400+ for this kind of wide angle performance in a prime lens. Just don't point it at the sun, and you're good to go.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
