Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-08-2013, 07:43 AM   #1
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Tamron SP 90mm 2.5 vs. Super-Takumar 135mm 2.5?

I'm having a hard time deciding between these two lens... I can get both for pretty cheap (compared to market price) still the Tamron is gonna put me back about $40 ($70 vs. $110)
And I'm going to use them mainly for portraits and flowers. I've already have a 135mm 3.5 Super-Takumar so is the 2.5 version gonna be much better?

So far this is what I've read:

Pros
Super Takumar (early 5-elements version)
- Shallower DOF
- Sharper (not sure because not many people said that the Tamron was sharp?)
- Cheaper
Tamron
- More conventional focal length (on an APS-C camera)
- Terrific bokeh (not many people mentioned the bokeh on the Takumar though?)
- Shorter focusing distance
- 49mm filter (I have a bunch of these, also screw on hood)
- 1:2 macro for flower shots

So far the Tamron seems superior but I wonder if it's worth the extra $40.
And also is there much difference between the normal and the SMC version of the f/3.5? Considering that I use a hood all the time and shoots digital.
Pleas let me know what you think. Thanks!

05-08-2013, 08:07 AM   #2
New Member
sinkols's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 5
I have the Tamron 90, 2.5, and I love it. It is an excellent lens and it is so easy to manuel focus with the k5. The focus point just pop out. It is one of my best lens and in that price I wouldn't hesitate for a moment.
05-08-2013, 08:25 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,383
Does the Tamron come with the Adaptall-2 adapter ... and if so, is it a PK/M or PK/A ... ? Without the adapter, one cannot use the Tamron and it would be an extra cost ...

Plus for the Tak, you will need a M42 adapter ... J
05-08-2013, 08:46 AM   #4
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Original Poster
I have the M42 adapter so that's no trouble for me. But the Adaptall-NEX adapter is going to cost me $15. But still, I have no trouble getting the lenses to work if I want to.

05-08-2013, 09:06 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,817
The Super-Takumar is not as sharp as the Tamron. That usually helps with portraits and hurts with flowers. The Tamron is possibly too sharp for portraits for some tastes. It does work for me most of the time, and I have a Super-Takumar 85mm f1.9 that I'll use when I want to deemphasize sharpness. Its other characteristics really work for portraits. The wide open sharpness really aids manual focus. I like the 90mm focal length better for portraits too. I would choose the Tamron and see if the sharpness works for you.

Bokeh, I don't know. I think even the 49mm filter version has 9 blades, and the Super-Takumar only has 6.

I ended up selling a lot of my 135mm lenses because they were great lenses but harder to use on APS-C. Minimum focus distance is 5 feet, few have KA mounts, and the best ones are costly.

The Super-Takumar 135/2.5 has one review problem: everyone knows there's the more awesome six-element formula out there. I thought it was a pretty good lens in its own right. My impression is that it was a bit sharper than the 135/3.5, much better than the Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5 and looked great on the camera.
05-08-2013, 10:34 AM   #6
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,502
QuoteOriginally posted by sinkols Quote
The focus point just pop out
I had the BB1 version - that lens had thje most obvious snap into focus I've ever seen in a lens and it was VERY sharp. I should never have sold it - I would buy it back if given the chance. I have the K135/2.5, which is a fine lens but not a Macro and not quite as sharp.
05-08-2013, 12:05 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,417
Wide open, the Tamron would not be "too sharp" for portraits. It gets very sharp from f5.6 to f11.
05-08-2013, 12:52 PM   #8
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Original Poster
A lens can never be too sharp! And also we have post processing.
Seems like the Tamron is the winner here. Still, additional experience are always welcome.
And also, to not buy the Super Takumar 135mm 2.5 for $70 is quite a waste... So if anybody is interested please PM.

05-08-2013, 06:29 PM   #9
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Does the Tamron 90mm f2.5 macro have the 1:1 adapter? Not sure if it can focus to infinity with it mounted, though
I would jump all over it as it is a great price...
It is a lot nicer to soften a shot then to sharpen

Good luck with your decision

Randy
05-08-2013, 06:34 PM   #10
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Original Poster
I don't think so - still I don't think there's anything special about that tube so I can just use a generic one?
And also does anybody has experience with normal Super Takumar vs SMC ones? Provided that I use a hood all the time.
05-08-2013, 07:47 PM   #11
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Original Poster
Damn. I was a little bit too slow. I lost it.
Now there's one that cost $150 but it's the 52BB version and I don't know if it's worth spending that much cash on.
05-09-2013, 07:24 AM   #12
Pentaxian
ChatMechant's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 670
I have the 52BB version and it is my favorite lens.
05-09-2013, 05:17 PM   #13
New Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 17
Original Poster
OK. Let's bring another beast into the competition since I've lost the Tamron SP 90mm. What do you guys think of the Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Close-Focusing?
05-10-2013, 05:18 AM   #14
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
QuoteOriginally posted by tuan2195 Quote
I don't think so - still I don't think there's anything special about that tube so I can just use a generic one?
And also does anybody has experience with normal Super Takumar vs SMC ones? Provided that I use a hood all the time.
Yeah a plastic tube would do but I figured the real one would add value to the lens.
IMHO though

Randy
05-11-2013, 02:17 PM   #15
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tampa Bay Fl.
Posts: 55
Hi All,
I just picked this lens up. Tamron SP Tele Macro Lens 1:2.5 90MM 27 BBAR MC F49 This was the description on the lens. Anyone know anything about this lens? Any info would be greatly appreciated.
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!
135mm, bokeh, hood, k-mount, pentax lens, people, slr lens, takumar, tamron, tamron sp 90mm, time, version, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 90mm f/2.5 SP Macro Adaptall-2 ddjchemist Sold Items 4 10-22-2012 06:00 PM
super SMC takumar 135mm f/2.5 - 6 elements vs 5 elements ki-no-pio Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 09-23-2011 09:32 PM
135mm : Super Takumar f/2.5 vs f/3.5 vs Vivitar - Which one is better ? zzz47 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 12-16-2009 05:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 90mm/2.8 macro (AF), Tamron SP 90mm/2.5 macro (MF) chemxaj Sold Items 11 06-19-2008 08:36 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:02 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