Need help to identify this Takumar 50mm f4 macro lens

xiff · 05-31-2010, 07:57 AM

Hi,
I'm new to this forum and it was first here I found about how great the Super Takumar lenses were so I decided to pick one up and maybe some other too due to its compact size and high quality optics.

Anyways this lens I have is a M42 mount from what I've observed on the different lens mount but havn't been able to find the same model in the "lens review" area so I was wondering if anyone can identify this lens and know any pros or cons compared to the one in the "lens review" database and have an idea when it was made? Thanks in advance.

Question two is: does anyone have any experience with the Super Takumar 35mm f3.5 M-mount version? I would like to know if there are any major difference between the M and the K mount, after searching through the "lens review" archieve I could not find it under M review either, in the K mount section of the 35mm f3.5 bobrapp stated the M variation as "descent lens". So I'm unsure about getting the M version or not. Please advice.

Ira · 05-31-2010, 08:02 AM

Well, the macro lens you're showing is a true gem. It's tops in every way.

Wish I had one, but it's at the bottom of my list right now in lieu of other stuff.

However, in a few months, it will be on my immediate to-buy list.

Asahiflex · 05-31-2010, 08:06 AM

In the lens review database the two versions of this lens have the same entry. It's this one: Pentax Lens Review Database - S-M-C/Super Macro-Takumar 50mm F4 Lens Reviews. "Super-Multi-Coated" is often abbreviated to "S-M-C" to make it shorter. You have gotten the most recent and best one

There is no M version of the 35mm f/3.5 Takumar in all its varieties. There exists a SMC PENTAX 1:3.5 35mm, which is the K-mount version of the 35mm f/3.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. The 35mm f/3.5 Super-Takumar is older but with regards to the optical layout not different to the S-M-C version. It lacks the multicoating, however, making it theoretically more prone to flare (so always use a hood!)

tvfd911 · 05-31-2010, 08:22 AM

Looks like your questions have been mostly answered. On the 50mm/f4 it is a great lens that goes to 1:2 macro. I have the same lens, but prior to the SMC coatings.

As far as the mount difference between M & K: What is typically called a K series lens isn't its actual name. Pentax never marked them as that, but they picked up the name because they are the original family of lenses released with the bayonet mount. Many of the "k" lenses are optically the same or near the SMC M42 mount lenses from just before them. The "M" series lenses use the same exact mount, but the lenses are generally smaller. Some claim the reduced size came at the cost of some optical quality.

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-31-2010, 09:10 AM

not only have your questions been answered, largely by your own photos, there is one special thing you should note about this lens, if you ever look to get a film body.

This lens has an aperture coupling, allowing open aperture metering on Spotmatic F and ES cameras.

xiff · 05-31-2010, 09:21 AM

I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses.

I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see.

Ira · 05-31-2010, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by xiff

I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses.

I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see.

The M42 Taks give you a different "look," so even though you may have a focal length covered in another lens, it's not the same thing:

I have the Tamron 90 macro, but my Super Taks 85 and 105 deliver very different results. The Tamron gives me laboratory quality, but the Taks have a personality all their own.

They're just different.

xiff · 05-31-2010, 12:54 PM

What I noticed is that the Taks gives 3d look like the SMC Pentax 30mm F2.8 which I'm currently looking for atm. I don't know if there are any other Taks that has this look but I'm totally loving it and the bokeh is very nice too.

Check out the pictures in this link.

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-31-2010, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by xiff

I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses.

I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see.

the 35 f3.5 is probably an M42 but don't let that disuade you, it is still a great lens.

if you are looking for a 35 you should also check out the SMC Takumar 35mm F2. the extra speed is great in low light. (the 35 F2 was my first M42 lens I now have 10)

xiff · 05-31-2010, 06:13 PM

How can u tell Super Takumars, SMC and S-M-C takumars apart? Are there any page I can read all this from? Thanks in advance.

05-31-2010, 07:57 AM	#1
xiff New Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Oslo Photos: Albums Posts: 7	Need help to identify this Takumar 50mm f4 macro lens Hi, I'm new to this forum and it was first here I found about how great the Super Takumar lenses were so I decided to pick one up and maybe some other too due to its compact size and high quality optics. Anyways this lens I have is a M42 mount from what I've observed on the different lens mount but havn't been able to find the same model in the "lens review" area so I was wondering if anyone can identify this lens and know any pros or cons compared to the one in the "lens review" database and have an idea when it was made? Thanks in advance. Question two is: does anyone have any experience with the Super Takumar 35mm f3.5 M-mount version? I would like to know if there are any major difference between the M and the K mount, after searching through the "lens review" archieve I could not find it under M review either, in the K mount section of the 35mm f3.5 bobrapp stated the M variation as "descent lens". So I'm unsure about getting the M version or not. Please advice.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro Takumar f/4 50mm	Asudef	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	02-17-2012 07:45 AM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Macro Takumar 50mm/F4	maxwell1295	Sold Items	8	09-15-2009 09:29 PM
For Sale - Sold: Asahi Pentax SMC-Takumar 50mm f/4 1:2 Macro M42 Mount Lens	wallyb	Sold Items	3	07-24-2009 06:48 PM
For Sale - Sold: Super Macro Takumar 50mm, Super Takumar 200mm, F 35-80mm Lenses	Nick Siebers	Sold Items	4	02-01-2009 08:56 PM

05-31-2010, 08:02 AM	#2
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Well, the macro lens you're showing is a true gem. It's tops in every way. Wish I had one, but it's at the bottom of my list right now in lieu of other stuff. However, in a few months, it will be on my immediate to-buy list.

05-31-2010, 08:06 AM	#3
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	In the lens review database the two versions of this lens have the same entry. It's this one: Pentax Lens Review Database - S-M-C/Super Macro-Takumar 50mm F4 Lens Reviews. "Super-Multi-Coated" is often abbreviated to "S-M-C" to make it shorter. You have gotten the most recent and best one There is no M version of the 35mm f/3.5 Takumar in all its varieties. There exists a SMC PENTAX 1:3.5 35mm, which is the K-mount version of the 35mm f/3.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. The 35mm f/3.5 Super-Takumar is older but with regards to the optical layout not different to the S-M-C version. It lacks the multicoating, however, making it theoretically more prone to flare (so always use a hood!)

05-31-2010, 08:22 AM	#4
tvfd911 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 354	Looks like your questions have been mostly answered. On the 50mm/f4 it is a great lens that goes to 1:2 macro. I have the same lens, but prior to the SMC coatings. As far as the mount difference between M & K: What is typically called a K series lens isn't its actual name. Pentax never marked them as that, but they picked up the name because they are the original family of lenses released with the bayonet mount. Many of the "k" lenses are optically the same or near the SMC M42 mount lenses from just before them. The "M" series lenses use the same exact mount, but the lenses are generally smaller. Some claim the reduced size came at the cost of some optical quality.

05-31-2010, 09:10 AM	#5
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	not only have your questions been answered, largely by your own photos, there is one special thing you should note about this lens, if you ever look to get a film body. This lens has an aperture coupling, allowing open aperture metering on Spotmatic F and ES cameras.

05-31-2010, 09:21 AM	#6
xiff New Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Oslo Photos: Albums Posts: 7 Original Poster	I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses. I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see.

05-31-2010, 10:02 AM	#7
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by xiff I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses. I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see. The M42 Taks give you a different "look," so even though you may have a focal length covered in another lens, it's not the same thing: I have the Tamron 90 macro, but my Super Taks 85 and 105 deliver very different results. The Tamron gives me laboratory quality, but the Taks have a personality all their own. They're just different.

05-31-2010, 12:54 PM	#8
xiff New Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Oslo Photos: Albums Posts: 7 Original Poster	What I noticed is that the Taks gives 3d look like the SMC Pentax 30mm F2.8 which I'm currently looking for atm. I don't know if there are any other Taks that has this look but I'm totally loving it and the bokeh is very nice too. Check out the pictures in this link.

05-31-2010, 01:16 PM	#9
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by xiff I see, many thanks for all the answers. Guess I have to look deeper into the review section since I somehow managed to overlook the screwmount lenses. I'm still debating on if I'm going to get the 35mm f3.5 or not since there are alot of positive respons to the lens I think I might as well get it even when I have that range (35) on my EF 24-70 f2.8L. Any suggestions of if it could be better than my lens at the 35mm range? Another thing which I'm alittle confused about if the SMC 35mm f3.5 is m42 mount or K-mount, since the lenses comes from the same user which had it on a Pentax ES II camera, the only thing I could think of is that its a m42 mount version of 35mm f3.5 but I'm still waiting for an answer from the seller so I have to wait and see. the 35 f3.5 is probably an M42 but don't let that disuade you, it is still a great lens. if you are looking for a 35 you should also check out the SMC Takumar 35mm F2. the extra speed is great in low light. (the 35 F2 was my first M42 lens I now have 10)

05-31-2010, 06:13 PM	#10
xiff New Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Oslo Photos: Albums Posts: 7 Original Poster	How can u tell Super Takumars, SMC and S-M-C takumars apart? Are there any page I can read all this from? Thanks in advance.