[scottydoesnt]

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.

---

I'm looking at buying a Takumar 17mm fisheye lens and have noticed there are Super Multi Coated, and what appears top be non multi coated. Is one much more preferred over the other, or will either do ?

To make things worse, an auction just ended today for a SMC model on ebay for $222.50, but my phone didn't get my bid in on time

Asahi Super Multi Coated Fish Eye Takumar 17mm F 4 M42 Excellent Condition | eBay

I welcome all input, as I am a novice at most of this.

[jatrax]

Here is the info page: S-M-C/Super Fish-Eye-Takumar 17mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Extreme Wide-Angle Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[Julie]

SMC has an extra coating, which is said to minimize flare, which leads to better contrast.
How much of a difference it makes when you're out shooting in the real world and how noticeable it is is pretty hard to say as things can be done to reduce flare and up the contrast (for example, using a lens hood or fixing in post-processing).

If it were me, personally, I would not jump for the SMC if there was a big price difference between the two. If they were priced similarly, then I'd probably lean towards the SMC.

EDIT: Notice that the link jatrax posted is for both the SMC and regular version.
One person notes, "It does exhibit some flare even in the Super-Multi-Coated version."

[jatrax]

Flare is going to be an issue with this lens no matter what. The front element really sticks out there with nothing around it. Using a hood is not really an option either. I have the S-M-C version and it is fine if you take due precaution but if anything is going to show as flare it will. I've no experience with the ST version, I decided early on to only buy S-M-C Takumars.

[Just1MoreDave]

If you are using this lens on APS-C digital, it's not going to have a lot of fisheye effect. Used prices for the Samyang-made 8mm f3.5 fisheye are close to this, it has a far greater fisheye effect and better coatings. You also get a KA mount.

[pickles]

I have this lens, & like an earlier poster, I only go for the SMC versions.
This seems to be a very reasonable price for this lens, although it does not have the correct rear cap, nor does it have its original Pentax case, neither important for "operational" use I suppose, but as this lens has a bit of a "collectable" nature for some users, the lack of these items could affect value.
Cheers, Pickles.

[stevebrot]

using a lens hood

Ummm...this is a fisheye and has no mechanism to mount a hood.

To the OP...Too bad you did not get the lens from you link. $222 USD for that lens is a great deal. The concerns regarding veiling flare are very valid, IMHO. In addition, I would disagree with those who say that it is a fact of life regardless of the quality of the coatings. I don't own the Tak 17, but I do own the MC Zenitar 16/2.8 and have been amazed at how flare resistent that lens is.

...bottom line is that given the choice between SMC and non-SMC at a similar price point (say within $50 for the 17mm), I would definitely spring for the SMC.

BTW...If you do buy a fisheye, I would recommend considering an aftermarket focus screen with split-image. Fisheyes are notoriously difficult to focus and the so-called "infinite DOF" is pretty much an illusion.


Steve

[Julie]

Ummm...this is a fisheye and has no mechanism to mount a hood.

I made a DIY hood for mine... out of an old Minolta hood that you pinch like a lens cap, not screw in.

[stevebrot]

I made a DIY hood for mine... out of an old Minolta hood that you pinch like a lens cap, not screw in.

I have seen similar solutions for the Zenitar.


Steve