[Cloapex]

I´m thinking about bying a 135 mm lens.

The options are:
* Mint with original box and bag SMC Takumar 135 3,5 M42 for ~60$
* A- condition Sears 135/2,8 MC (with Macro mode that gets soft images as well) (mentioned in posts here at forums) ~ 57$ (it´s sold by a camera shop and therefor the higher price)
* M 135 3,5 - good condition 61 $

M42 is no problem since the original adapter is on the camea mostly because of an newly bought SMC Takumar 50 1,4

Also..
Looking at 35:s
Super Weistar 35 3,5 vs Sigma mini wide.
yeah i love cheap but good stuff

These options mostly because i found sellers having them here

[mickey]

I can only vouch for the M135/3.5 and say that is a solid performer.

[slip]

I have an smc M 135 F 3.5 and it is a great lens. Very sharp but no macro capabilities that (for me, anyway) limits my use for it. Even though it is F 3.5 I find it needs a lot of light to have sharp shots so I don't use it indoors. After acquired a 50-135 2.8 and a 70mm -200mm f2.8 my 135mm doesn't see much light anymore

Good luck

Randy.

[Cloapex]

This what I hope about the sears...

????? AUTO Sears MC 1:2.8 f=135mm. ???? Sears Auto MultiCoated 135/2.8

[GeneV]

I don't know about the Sears model, but I do know that I greatly prefer a 135 with a larger aperture than F/3.5.

[Just1MoreDave]

I'd choose the M135/3.5, mostly for its size and integral hood. It is really close to the Takumar in performance, sometimes a bit better and sometimes a bit worse, but only on a splitting-hairs level. The only Sears I've used is the non-macro one.

The Sigma Mini-Wide should be a 28mm f2.8. Later versions had a KA mount which is useful. Some people like it and some don't. There aren't many cheap old 35mm lenses around so I'd go with that one just to see what it's like. You can always wait for another 28mm.

[DeepThrob]

I've given up on M42 mount because it doesn't work as designed. The aperture diaphragm control is by a pin instead of the lever that has been used from the Manual (K?) series to current. It’s too useful a function to give up.

[everydaylife]

I have the m135 f3.5 and would agree with others that it is a solid performer. A couple of images.

[IMG]
[/IMG]

[IMG]
[/IMG]

[stevebrot]

I've given up on M42 mount because it doesn't work as designed.

Welcome to the forum! The M42 mount as implemented originally by Carl Zeiss (Jena) and Praktica, did not support automatic aperture actuation. At a later date both cameras and lenses were developed that provided auto-aperture using the familiar pin. The A/M switch (or sometimes slider) was added to insure backward compatibility to cameras that lacked the body-side "flipper" that depresses the pin.

Sooo...long story short, manual stop-down at exposure time is actually the legacy behavior for the mount and is part of its design. Unfortunately, it is also a bit cumbersome and highlights why "auto" aperture was a strong selling point for SLR lenses up through the early 1980s.


Steve

(...has used fully manual and pre-set aperture lenses on both my vintage and modern gear...pain in the rear, they are...)

[toukan]

I have had the M135/3.5, K mount, for a couple of months now and really like it. it is small, excellent build quality, built-in hood, and most importantly, has produced some very nice images. Note though that i have only used it for outdoors use, with lots of natural light, and i can appreciate some peoples concerns about wanting a faster lens. Ironically, i just bought yesterday a mint Sears Auto 135/2.8 M42 with the macro mode. I haven't had a chance to use it yet (mount adapter K is still back-ordered.....argh...i have now acquired about a half dozen M42 lenses and have not been able to use any), but i can say that it is built like a tank. Very sold feel, and has the unusual rotating extra front element. I can't wait to use it, but since i can't, i spent a lot of time today researching others opinion of it. It has gotten almost universally favorable reviews, at least from those that have this particular version. But remember that it is bigger and noticeably heavier than the M135. Hope his helps, even though i cant offer anything on the differences in the IQ of these choices.

[DeepThrob]

Welcome to the forum! The M42 mount as implemented originally by Carl Zeiss (Jena) and Praktica, did not support automatic aperture actuation. At a later date both cameras and lenses were developed that provided auto-aperture using the familiar pin. The A/M switch (or sometimes slider) was added to insure backward compatibility to cameras that lacked the body-side "flipper" that depresses the pin.

Sooo...long story short, manual stop-down at exposure time is actually the legacy behavior for the mount and is part of its design. Unfortunately, it is also a bit cumbersome and highlights why "auto" aperture was a strong selling point for SLR lenses up through the early 1980s.


Steve

(...has used fully manual and pre-set aperture lenses on both my vintage and modern gear...pain in the rear, they are...)

Thanks for the greet Steve. I do remember the 'slider' from my Pentax's in the mid sixties...it works if you've got plenty of time, it was better than nothing but just. When the pin/lever auto function arrived it felt amazingly fast and luxurious.

My point is that pin lens' were designed to have an auto function that isn't happening with an adapter. I have all M lens ( 28-50-135 ) for my 3rd hand K2000.

[Cloapex]

It would be nice to hear from someone who has the sears. The one im looking at has the K mount but with the rotating front (macro mode) I heard it can vary from copy to copy, perhaps due to different manufactuers?
I laso now fond an Tamron Adaptall 2 lens (135mm/f2,5 for 23 $ seems in exellent condition.

[wombat2go]

I have the Auto Sears MC 1:2.8 135mm same as shown in your link.
I have never used it.
I used the Takumar (Bayonet) 1:2.5 135mm at indoor soccer this week and it suffers from flare and loss of contrast in the floodlights.
I just put the Sears on the K-01 and I will try to get some shots today.
135 mm is too long for me on aps-c, I suppose it is better on 35 mm.

[slip]

All wide open or close to it







Randy

[Kerrowdown]

I'm really happy with my 135 and usually it's in use on a daily basis.

It's just a nice focal length which gives the right distance to various subjects.

When you finally decide which one, leave it on the camera for a while and really get to know it.