K135/2.5 question........

John Kovarik · 03-03-2008, 11:57 AM

........I have one of these which yields superb results w/my K100 & (new) K20. Does anyone know if this is the same internally as the SMC TAK 135/2.5? I understand from AOHC that there were two lens formulations for the TAK; one, #43812 which has the 6/6 lens array. My
version of the SMC, though it has the right Honeywell box and paperwork is stamped #43802 which is a simpler lens configuration per AOHC. The odd thing is that this lens comes with the right Honeywell product number (7267) and the lens serial # is on the warranty card.

Anyone have any comments?

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-03-2008, 12:37 PM

I have the SMC version. and I believe the Tak is different optically, it sure is mechanically.

Next time I am scrounging around, I will take a closer look at the 2 Taks sitting in one of my favourite haunts. I passed them by, becaus eI got the SMC for the same price. Mine also came with the optional lens hood.

**David Whiteley** · 03-03-2008, 12:53 PM

I have the SMC version. Can't speak to the Tak version directly, but in researching what I've got, I've seen several times (Stan's Pentax Photography among them: Stan's Pentax Photography but watch out as some posts re SMC version seem to be about Tak version, despite the site trying to emphasize the distinciton) that optical quality is great on SMC, lousy on Tak, which suggests different construction. Different lens filter size (58mm vs 52mm) confirms at least Lowell's note that they're mechanically different, if not optically.

PS Yay for all the Canadians on this forum!

tybeck · 03-05-2008, 03:16 PM

There was some talk about this on another forum related to M42 version of the Tak. The common opinion for the 135/2.5 non-SMC bayonet lenses seemed to be that they weren't as good as the Pentax or Tak SMC versions. This fellow lists some other variations. I have an 135mm/3.5 SMC Tak I bought off this forum and it's quirt sharp. Many 135mm lens have been putout of the years and the quality seems to vary quite a bit.

Serge · 03-06-2008, 12:32 AM

John, you're right. The only SMC Tak that is optically the same as K135/2.5 has part number 43812 (later version, 6/6 design). Another distinguishing feature of it is the DOF scale. It runs from f/4 to f/22 (earlier version has to be from f/8 to f/22).

Steven7 · 03-06-2008, 01:42 AM

John, the later version (part#43812) Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 M42 mount and the SMC 135/2.5 k-mount are the same (superior 6-6) design. The earlier S-M-C Tak part#43802, the Super Tak and the K-mount Takumar Bayonet (52 mm filter I think) are different and optically not as good.
Reviews are mixed since it isn't always clear exactly which version is being commented on - I don't think the part # on the rear of the auto-manual switch is widely known about.
The #43812 S-M-C Tak is an excellent, and very sharp, lens.

03-03-2008, 11:57 AM	#1
John Kovarik Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: West Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 338	K135/2.5 question........ ........I have one of these which yields superb results w/my K100 & (new) K20. Does anyone know if this is the same internally as the SMC TAK 135/2.5? I understand from AOHC that there were two lens formulations for the TAK; one, #43812 which has the 6/6 lens array. My version of the SMC, though it has the right Honeywell box and paperwork is stamped #43802 which is a simpler lens configuration per AOHC. The odd thing is that this lens comes with the right Honeywell product number (7267) and the lens serial # is on the warranty card. Anyone have any comments?

03-06-2008, 12:32 AM	#5
Serge Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: St.-Petersburg, Russia Photos: Albums Posts: 40	John, you're right. The only SMC Tak that is optically the same as K135/2.5 has part number 43812 (later version, 6/6 design). Another distinguishing feature of it is the DOF scale. It runs from f/4 to f/22 (earlier version has to be from f/8 to f/22). Last edited by Serge; 03-06-2008 at 12:46 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: PENTAX K135 f2.5 (with a few problems) -- (Worldwide)	JeffJS	Sold Items	0	08-31-2010 08:39 PM
A Day in the Park (K-7 + K135/2.5, F100/2.8 Macro, F*300/4.5)	arpaagent	Video Recording and Processing	1	12-15-2009 04:01 AM
Tarmon 70-200 1:2.8 VS SMC Pentax K135 1:2.5 review and samples.	ilya80	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	11-17-2009 10:30 PM
Some shots with K135/f2.5	kjao	Post Your Photos!	6	11-09-2007 06:35 PM

03-03-2008, 12:37 PM	#2
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	I have the SMC version. and I believe the Tak is different optically, it sure is mechanically. Next time I am scrounging around, I will take a closer look at the 2 Taks sitting in one of my favourite haunts. I passed them by, becaus eI got the SMC for the same price. Mine also came with the optional lens hood.

03-03-2008, 12:53 PM	#3
David Whiteley Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Ottawa-Gatineau, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 372	I have the SMC version. Can't speak to the Tak version directly, but in researching what I've got, I've seen several times (Stan's Pentax Photography among them: Stan's Pentax Photography but watch out as some posts re SMC version seem to be about Tak version, despite the site trying to emphasize the distinciton) that optical quality is great on SMC, lousy on Tak, which suggests different construction. Different lens filter size (58mm vs 52mm) confirms at least Lowell's note that they're mechanically different, if not optically. PS Yay for all the Canadians on this forum!

03-05-2008, 03:16 PM	#4
tybeck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 452	There was some talk about this on another forum related to M42 version of the Tak. The common opinion for the 135/2.5 non-SMC bayonet lenses seemed to be that they weren't as good as the Pentax or Tak SMC versions. This fellow lists some other variations. I have an 135mm/3.5 SMC Tak I bought off this forum and it's quirt sharp. Many 135mm lens have been putout of the years and the quality seems to vary quite a bit.

03-06-2008, 01:42 AM	#6
Steven7 Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 25	John, the later version (part#43812) Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 M42 mount and the SMC 135/2.5 k-mount are the same (superior 6-6) design. The earlier S-M-C Tak part#43802, the Super Tak and the K-mount Takumar Bayonet (52 mm filter I think) are different and optically not as good. Reviews are mixed since it isn't always clear exactly which version is being commented on - I don't think the part # on the rear of the auto-manual switch is widely known about. The #43812 S-M-C Tak is an excellent, and very sharp, lens.