Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2012, 08:11 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 121
Nikon 50mm 1.4G vs SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4

Hi,

Alright, last annoying question before I start spending my money on lenses.

Nikon 50mm 1.4G vs SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4? (I'm not a nikon fan, I just saw it in a video and it looks nice, please keep your hate to yourselves. I noticed this is a pentax forum.)

Thanks!
Nicole

08-11-2012, 08:16 AM   #2
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
You mean aside from the fact that the Nikon is AF and the Takumar is MF?
08-11-2012, 08:21 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 121
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
You mean aside from the fact that the Nikon is AF and the Takumar is MF?
Yes, aside from that.. I'm mostly making videos so I won't be needing AF.
08-11-2012, 08:30 AM   #4
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
I'm going to say that the 1.4G has much better coatings than the Tak. Other than that, it has 9 blades and the bokeh seems to be very nice as well. Though I don't think the Tak is a good match for the 1.4G myself. Perhaps an SMCP-FA 50mm F/1.4 AF Lens?

08-11-2012, 09:01 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
steve1307's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,128
The video on YT by "thatnikonguy" that your probably referring to was done a Nikon D5100 with a Nikkor AF-S 50mm f 1.4 G (a $500 lens).

What I was referring to in the other thread was that you could get similar shallow DOF and smooth blurry background with really any 50mm 1.4 or even 1.7 lens which isn't too expensive if manual focus.
Its not the "Nikon lens" that make this effect its the shallow depth of field which you can get with really any large apeture lens generally longer than about 35 ish.

This includes your Tak 50 /1.4 or the K ,M, A, F or FA versions of the 50mm. or othe lengths for example 85mm f2 , 100 2.8, 135 3.5, 200 f4 all have shallow dof.
Just find one with decent smooth bokeh.

BTW the video imbedded in thread thread probably plays as 360p so I would expect your videos as captured (K-5 1080p, K-7,K-x 720p) would look much better than that.
08-11-2012, 09:01 AM   #6
Senior Member
simbon4o's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 258
FA 50 1.4 is worse than the tak it is the same lens but softer wide open and with worse handling when MF. I'm thinking about this: the 1.4G Nikkor has no aperture ring, how are you going to use it? If that is not a problem for you you can go straight for the 1.8G, which is better for everything. Personally me, I like my KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 in terms of smoothness of the render and low contrast, it makes such pleasing images. The Nikkor 50 1.8G has very good render too and nice swirly bokeh you can check the samples in the web.
08-11-2012, 10:42 AM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 2,141
Just so it's extremely clear: The Nikkor was released in 2008, so it's a modern lens. The Tak is IMHO a better choice of the two for video, for starters because the Nikon will remain at minimum aperture if you don't tape it up. It's a waste of money buying modern Nikon glass to use on Pentax bodies.
08-11-2012, 08:27 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 579
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I'm going to say that the 1.4G has much better coatings than the Tak. Other than that, it has 9 blades and the bokeh seems to be very nice as well. Though I don't think the Tak is a good match for the 1.4G myself. Perhaps an SMCP-FA 50mm F/1.4 AF Lens?
Just out of curiosity, what is your basis for saying the 1.4G has much better coatings than the Takumar? Have you made hands-on comparisions of the two lenses? Can't comment on the NIkon lens, haven't used a Nikon 50 since the first generation AF 1.8. That particular lens was not as good as an SMC Takumar IIRC. The SMC Takumar is very good in terms of controlling flare and internal reflections. In what way is the Nikon 1.4G better? Thanks.

08-11-2012, 08:58 PM   #9
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
Just out of curiosity, what is your basis for saying the 1.4G has much better coatings than the Takumar? Have you made hands-on comparisions of the two lenses? Can't comment on the NIkon lens, haven't used a Nikon 50 since the first generation AF 1.8. That particular lens was not as good as an SMC Takumar IIRC. The SMC Takumar is very good in terms of controlling flare and internal reflections. In what way is the Nikon 1.4G better? Thanks.
I used the 1.4G on a D700 which did quite well in broad daylight, whereas the K 50/1.4's tends to loose contrast in the blue spectrum. Aside from that, its likely tough to gauge lenses across systems, especially when were dealing with different sensors, but I concluded performance difference were likely due to coatings.

Last edited by JohnBee; 08-12-2012 at 06:45 AM.
08-11-2012, 09:34 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 579
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I used the 1.4G on a D700 which did quite well in broad daylight, whereas the K 50/1.4's tends to loose contrast in the blue spectrum. Aside from that, its likely tough to gauge a lenses performance across systems, especially when were dealing with different sensors, though my conclusion was that the contrast differences was likely due to the coatings.
Thanks. Coatings are a possibility, although I wouldn't rule out other hardware differences or software algorithms.
08-13-2012, 01:35 AM   #11
Veteran Member
msatlas's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 309
QuoteOriginally posted by simbon4o Quote
FA 50 1.4 is worse than the tak it is the same lens but softer wide open and with worse handling when MF. I'm thinking about this: the 1.4G Nikkor has no aperture ring, how are you going to use it? If that is not a problem for you you can go straight for the 1.8G, which is better for everything. Personally me, I like my KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 in terms of smoothness of the render and low contrast, it makes such pleasing images. The Nikkor 50 1.8G has very good render too and nice swirly bokeh you can check the samples in the web.
I think the FA 50/1.4 gets a bad rap for softness at wider apertures because so many people are using them without a lens hood. This lens needs a hood BAD. Which is why I have one. $15 for the Pentax collapsing rubber hood is money very well spent.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
50mm, k-mount, nikon, pentax lens, slr lens, smc, takumar, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon SB-25 not working using MF lens like SMC-M 50mm trunk Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 11 06-11-2012 02:53 PM
Takumar 50mm 1.4 eight element vs Takumar SMC 50mm 1.4 eight leaf Ozfreebird Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 02-22-2012 03:41 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-F 50mm 1.7, Super-Takumar 50mm 1.4, Takumar-F 70-200mm (Worldwide) causey Sold Items 7 06-03-2011 08:06 AM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 / Pentax-A 50mm 1.7 / Pentax-M 50mm 1.4 (US) JP_Seattle Sold Items 3 09-02-2010 06:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:34 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top