[Colorado CJ]

Well, cruising Ebay tonight, I couldn't help but buy two lenses. First I found a Tele Takumar 200mm F5.6 Preset for $56.00 shipped in near new condition. I've been wanting one since getting my Tak 200mm F3.5 Preset (my now favorite lens) to see what the difference is. I could NOT pass at that price.

Just a couple of minutes later, I stumbled upon a Tele Takumar 300mm F6.3 Preset for $89.00! It looks like it is in great shape and comes with the original lens hood and case but no caps. Some of the images taken with this lens look very similar to what I am getting out of my 200 F3.5, so I'm REALLY excited to get this one and start shooting wildlife with it. I can usually get very close for the 200mm to work great, but that extra 100mm will come in handy in some occasions.

If I end up liking the Tele Tak 300mm F6.3, I'll probably end up selling my much used and liked Sigma 70-300 APO as I probably won't be using it much any more. I REALLY prefer to use the Takumars over any other lens, so I'll sell the Sigma to recoup nearly all of the money spent on these two lenses.

I can't wait for them to arrive and start comparison shooting! I'm not much good at scientific comparisons though, I'd much rather be out there in the wild shooting landscapes and wildlife. BUT, for these lenses, I might try to concentrate and do a nice comparison.

Sorry to be grabbing up all these Takumars, I just can't resist them, especially at these prices

[Lowell Goudge]

Watch out for the minimum focusing distance, when working in close on s,all birds, the minimum focus distance of thie 300 might make it no more suitable than the 200 because you can't focus close enough. For larger subjects it does not matter but for the little bitty birds It does.

I have to also one other question, did I start a new addiction since posting my 200/3.5 shots.?

[Colorado CJ]

Thanks Lowell for the heads-up. Your post over in the lens forum was one of the deciding factors as I searched for posts on this lens.

[RioRico]

I haven't tried the 300 but I love the 200, so small and crisp! A trick I use with several of my longer M42s: use a cheap safe wide-flange NIF (no infinity focus) M42-PK adapter, and maybe even a thin M42 macro tube section. Such slight extension pulls-in both near and far focus; stopped-down, DOF may still reach infinity. And the reduced focus range make me look very carefully and judge distances of all potential targets. A great way to focus attention, eh?

[ducdao]

I have the Tele Tak 300mm F6.3 and it's great despite being slow at f6.3

I ike it more than my Super Takumar 300/f4. Like RioRico, the form factor is a plus, it's pretty small and light compared to the 300/f4

[reeftool]

I have a Super Tak 200/4 and although I don't use it a lot, it's a fine lens. I completely understand your love for Taks. I'd hang on to the Sigma though, an AF zoom does come in handy on occasion and the total investment you have in all of them is still pretty low.

[Lowell Goudge]

Thanks Lowell for the heads-up. Your post over in the lens forum was one of the deciding factors as I searched for posts on this lens.

but you didn't answer my second point have you succumbed to preset LBA

[Colorado CJ]

but you didn't answer my second point have you succumbed to preset LBA

Oh yeah, DEFINITELY. I bought these two specifically because they are Preset and that they have the aperture on the front of the lens.

Now to look for some normals in preset with the aperture on the front.

[Lowell Goudge]

Oh yeah, DEFINITELY. I bought these two specifically because they are Preset and that they have the aperture on the front of the lens.

Now to look for some normals in preset with the aperture on the front.

watch out. I have been thinking the same thing, but not decicively so.

at present, you have the early taks, the early version of the russian lenses, the Meyer optic lenses (pentacon) and the Carl Zeiss Jena, as well as the lentar lenses.

not sure there are many other well known presets out there.

I have only 3 at present, a 105mm Vernon Edonar (don't really know who makes it) a 135mm Tele lentar, and my 200mm Tak.

[riff]

Cool beans CJ! I'm looking forward to future reports on these lenses.

Lowell, yeah your the one whats to blame! (/cockney accent off)

[Lowell Goudge]

Cool beans CJ! I'm looking forward to future reports on these lenses.

Lowell, yeah your the one whats to blame! (/cockney accent off)

It's funny actually, because I posted the shots a while back in the "definitely not the flat earth society" thread discussing presets and round apertures, but posting them in the sample archive seems to have set off a real interest especially in the 200/3.5, where you and at least 3 others by my count have bought one of these beasts.

but Honestly, it is a great lens, and under valued at the moment, although I am sure this will change if any more people get one.

[riff]

the "definitely not the flat earth society" thread

Oops.. I missed that thread completely.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/87425-definite...h-society.html

[RioRico]

Now we're off in the magickal realm of presets and many iris blades. I hunger for these.

They render differently than modern lenses. Partly it's the older coatings, partly it's the build. Presets predate mechanical aperture automation with stop-down levers and pins. For efficient aperture automation, you want fewer iris blades, with the aperture positioned close to the lens base, for less friction. Preset lenses tend to have more blades, and a more centrally-located aperture. Lenses of that era also tend to lack the optical corrections found in newer lenses. They may have more field curvature, which helps give more 'pop' to photos.

Most Exakta-mount lenses I've seen (without the stop-down button) are such presets, and are very easy to adapt to PK mount.

One quibble: we may not mean the same thing when we say 'preset'. Some apply that term only to two-ring presets, or the occasional single-ring. These allow setting a tightest aperture, then spinning a ring to open up for framing, then spinning it down for metering and exposing. Many other multi-iris-blade lenses don't have that second ring -- ya sets yer aperture and ya takes yer chances. I don't kn ow if there's a special term for such; I just call them 'manual'.

And that leads to a taxonomy of apertures, which gets off-topic here. I'll whine about it elsewhere.

[Lowell Goudge]

Oops.. I missed that thread completely.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/87425-definite...h-society.html

ive been trying to get the mod's to move this into the lens club forum, so it is a discussion of presets, and round apertures.

But no luck so far,it almost seems like the sample photo archive gets more attention.

[ducdao]

Here is a couple from Tele-Takumar 200/5.6, all wide open, I believe.

I only boosted the contrast in LR3.