[Blue]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

So I got my 8 element Super Tak, and it does appear to have a gold coating, not the yellowing I ad before with an SMC Tak 50/1.4. First few shots are quite nice. But will I be able to replace my A50/1.2 with it? It'll take more shooting on my part to determine. Any thoughts?

Its a different animal than the A 50/1.2. That f1.2 will be the last 50 I get rid of and I have a lot of 50s and 55s. I think this 8-element Tak can hang with or out perform any of the AF f1.4 and 1.7 lenses, but not that f1.2.

[Nick Siebers]

I am guessing I can miss focus at f/1.4 just as well as at f/1.2, although I don't doubt that in competent hands the A50/1.2 does better. I suppose I will just practice with both and see how it goes. And maybe get one of them Katzeye thingies.

[blende8]

What is special about the 8-element?
Who says that it is sharper? Compared to what?
What are the corners? Corners are always a problem with M42 lenses.

That said, to identify it one should probably weight it.
The 8 element one is about 15 g heavier, IIRC. Makes sense.

[Lowell Goudge]

What is special about the 8-element?
Who says that it is sharper? Compared to what?
What are the corners? Corners are always a problem with M42 lenses.

That said, to identify it one should probably weight it.
The 8 element one is about 15 g heavier, IIRC. Makes sense.

the 8 element, at it's time was the sharpest 50 on the market. Sopmewhere in this thread, I think it is posted.

Yes weight is different, but it is kinda hard when looking at an item on e-bay to guess the weight.

this is why there is such a long and drawn out discussion of what positive indicators such as serial number range, location of the IR focus mark, and the convex /protruding nature of the rear element are discussed. In fact these latter 2 are the only visual indicators, and weight is the obvious physical indicator.

[Blue]

What is special about the 8-element?

It had a cemented 3 element group. This was one of 3 lenses that Asahi made that had such a group. It also made them expensive to make in that era. In fact, that's why they moved away from the lenses that had them.

Who says that it is sharper? Compared to what?

The experts of the day. It was specifically made to dethrone the Zeiss lenses.

What are the corners? Corners are always a problem with M42 lenses.

Rectangles and squares have 4 of them. Triangles have 3. That said, it did better than the best f1.4 m42 that existed when it was released.

That said, to identify it one should probably weight it.

The 8 element one is about 15 g heavier, IIRC. Makes sense.

Actually, that's just one of the specs. As has been pointed out in numerous threads, the most reliable way is the rear element followed by the red stripe inside the 4. It isn't always feasible to weigh something in a photo. Relying on other peoples measurements of weight can be problematic depending on what the have to weigh it with and there procedures.

[Yaro]

I'm contributing to this thread with some images I have shot with one of my 8 element 50/1.4's.

It is by far my favorite "arty" lens.
The speeds these were shot at are 1/4000, 1/2000, 1/4000,1/1500. I'm guessing 1 and 4 are wide open, 2 maybe @ f2 and 3 at f8. Camera is k100d.

1

2

3

4


100% crops:

[estudleon]

Can occur that the lens with the IR mark between the diamond and the "4" hasn't the protrude last convex element?. And it should be an 7 elements Super Takumar?

Very rare, isn't it? Yes, there are overlaped lenses but from there to the wrong IR place there is a large distance.

The IR mark between diamond and "4" anbd the last convex element must be together, And what happend if not? Anybody saw this case any time?

[manntax]

I KNOW it is a very old post but nonetheless

Can occur that the lens with the IR mark between the diamond and the "4" hasn't the protrude last convex element?. And it should be an 7 elements Super Takumar? Very rare, isn't it? Yes, there are overlaped lenses but from there to the wrong IR place there is a large distance. The IR mark between diamond and "4" anbd the last convex element must be together, And what happend if not? Anybody saw this case any time?

I think you are talking about so called 'hybrid' or transitional unit. I saw one online - an interesting read here : "Hybrid", 3rd version of Super Takumar f1.4/50mm?!

From that story you could come up with the impression that those were simple lenses altered by some servicemans etc. but from my personal experience I can say that it is not the case - these were genueinly designed and sold like that - with red IR mark painted wrongly on the mark '4' on DOF scale instead to left from it. Here is one on eBay sold just few days ago with camera - I was interested in it just to round up my collection but finally decided not to go for it ( having already several 50's and the Takumar 8-elemenet I am more inclined towards the A50 1.2 now :P - here is the link : Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP vintage camera | eBay

From the photos in that auction it is no so obvious but the seller actually emailed me the photo of the back of this lens attached and so I know it is regular 7 element with partially body from 8-element and DOF scale painted wrongly from the factory

[mglowe]

I KNOW it is a very old post but nonetheless


I think you are talking about so called 'hybrid' or transitional unit. I saw one online - an interesting read here : "Hybrid", 3rd version of Super Takumar f1.4/50mm?!

From that story you could come up with the impression that those were simple lenses altered by some servicemans etc. but from my personal experience I can say that it is not the case - these were genueinly designed and sold like that - with red IR mark painted wrongly on the mark '4' on DOF scale instead to left from it. Here is one on eBay sold just few days ago with camera - I was interested in it just to round up my collection but finally decided not to go for it ( having already several 50's and the Takumar 8-elemenet I am more inclined towards the A50 1.2 now :P - here is the link : Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP vintage camera | eBay

From the photos in that auction it is no so obvious but the seller actually emailed me the photo of the back of this lens attached and so I know it is regular 7 element with partially body from 8-element and DOF scale painted wrongly from the factory

They just used some old parts from the 8 element design while switching over to the 7 element version. The SMC or K 50 1.2 is the best 50 I've shot other than the 8 element 1.4 lens. The 8 element 1.4 and the K 50 1.2 are the ones I'd keep above all others. My two cents.

[manntax]

They just used some old parts from the 8 element design while switching over to the 7 element version. The SMC or K 50 1.2 is the best 50 I've shot other than the 8 element 1.4 lens. The 8 element 1.4 and the K 50 1.2 are the ones I'd keep above all others. My two cents.

Thanks for stepping in .. that's what I thought. Will have to bite the bullet and find a nice SMC A 50 1.2 for myself :P

[Blue]

I KNOW it is a very old post but nonetheless


I think you are talking about so called 'hybrid' or transitional unit. I saw one online - an interesting read here : "Hybrid", 3rd version of Super Takumar f1.4/50mm?!

From that story you could come up with the impression that those were simple lenses altered by some servicemans etc. but from my personal experience I can say that it is not the case - these were genueinly designed and sold like that - with red IR mark painted wrongly on the mark '4' on DOF scale instead to left from it. Here is one on eBay sold just few days ago with camera - I was interested in it just to round up my collection but finally decided not to go for it ( having already several 50's and the Takumar 8-elemenet I am more inclined towards the A50 1.2 now :P - here is the link : Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP vintage camera | eBay

From the photos in that auction it is no so obvious but the seller actually emailed me the photo of the back of this lens attached and so I know it is regular 7 element with partially body from 8-element and DOF scale painted wrongly from the factory

This is why I have never felt comfortable relying solely on the IR mark to determine if it is an 8-element lens. The rear element is really key.

[manntax]

This is why I have never felt comfortable relying solely on the IR mark to determine if it is an 8-element lens. The rear element is really key.

Exactly right , but since I already own a mint copy I've become hungry for more and so will shift my searching onto the mythical SMC-A 50 1.2 - that's an entirely different league though (money wise) and entirely different story :P

[Blue]

Exactly right , but since I already own a mint copy I've become hungry for more and so will shift my searching onto the mythical SMC-A 50 1.2 - that's an entirely different league though (money wise) and entirely different story :P

You will like the A 50/1.2 when you get one!

[manntax]

You will like the A 50/1.2 when you get one!

Yeah I believe so.. the only concern I have is that I wanted it for some late evening/night walks with my film camera and not sure if this is good idea :P

[mglowe]

Yeah I believe so.. the only concern I have is that I wanted it for some late evening/night walks with my film camera and not sure if this is good idea :P

As long as no one takes it away from you, it sounds like a great idea. I used to use the super tak 55 at a measly 1.8 for night walks on the Strand in Galveston. Very light, small, and easy to use. Focused with a finger! I got great results and really enjoyed using the lens. I suppose that a much faster lens would be a blast on a night walk except for being kind of big and heavy. The K 1.2 is bright and, to me, quite easy to focus at 1.2. I saw one of those, just a few years ago, at around 150.00 and in quite perfect condition. Probably won't find K and certainly not A for near that price very often though. I don't think that the 1.2 will do much for you that you can't get from your 1.4, that is, image wise, say, on a typical night walk. What I found about the 1.2 K is that for some shots, and only certain types of shots, the image produced has a quality that the1.4s can't get. The so called bokeh has a character that is awfully beautiful at 1.2 and, as I said, it lets in a lot of light to the viewfinder at 1.2 which is a joy. I think its best reserved for indoor shooting or shots where you have a lot of color and shapes outside the focus area where you want maximum smoothness and beauty in the blur! And that means you do need to shoot at 1.2, shooting shots that bring forth this fine quality. Otherwise you don't gain much if anything, perhaps not enough to warrant having the lens. Of course the 1.2s are wonderful all around lenses and are sharp at all apertures-great landscape lenses-if you want to carry the weight around. But again, I have a kind of still life shot I like to take, mostly indoors, and only that kind of shot really benefits greatly from having a 1.2.

I also use my 1.4 8 element for night shots and it is fantastic for image quality. During the so called golden hour or whatever, late evening, the color of images is just gorgeous. I think I recall that you may be the reviewer of the 8 element that pointed that out.