Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-06-2013, 11:45 AM   #61
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 200
This seems like a good thread to ask in:

Why does the 135/2.5 have such volatile pricing?

It has very high reviews on the lens database, and it's faster than f/2.8, I would expect it to be more expensive on eBay than it is.

Prices in the forums here are nuts, but on eBay it regularly goes for less than $50.


While I'm here, I'll also say that I've tried *lots* of m42 135/2.8 lenses. Most of them seem good.

My favorite (so far) is Yashica Yashinon. I forget if it's a DX or some other version.

08-06-2013, 12:05 PM   #62
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Northern California
Posts: 27
I don't know if 1/3 stop is really worth that much. I understand 1/2 stop or better, but below that it doesn't make much sense to me. From looking around, I'm guessing it's a little of both rarity and good performance in the case of the EBC Fujinon. It sells at auction for quite a bit more than a screwmount SMC Takumar 135/2.5. The tab and the lack of an M-A switch on the Fujinon make it a bit of a bother to deal with.
08-06-2013, 12:40 PM   #63
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 200
Ha ha ha, ha ha ha, ha ha ha...

I thought the prices on the forum for the Takumar 135/2.5 were crazy high, but I just ran across this while looking for something else...

Used Pentax Telephoto 135mm f/2.5 Manual Focus Takumar B&H Photo

$350!!! I should buy them all off eBay and sell them to BHP, even if they only pay 20% of their price (I have no idea what the actual percentage they pay is).
08-07-2013, 11:33 AM   #64
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,859
QuoteOriginally posted by thornburg Quote
This seems like a good thread to ask in:

Why does the 135/2.5 have such volatile pricing?
This link is a good example of why:

That ad combines the price and photo for the SMC Pentax f2.5 135mm, the title is something close to what's engraved on the Takumar Bayonet f2.5 135mm, and the description morphs it into a third lens, an f2.8 135mm. Volatile pricing happens when people confuse the real deal with a far more common, not as good substitute.

The Pentax or Takumar 135mm f2.5 lenses:

Super-Takumar - 5 elements, 4 groups, 58mm filter, all metal, basic M42 mount, part number 43801 stamped into the mount side of the A/M switch, six aperture blades.
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar version 1 - same optical formula as the Super-Takumar, better coating, all metal, part number 43802 stamped into the mount side of the A/M switch, not sure about aperture blades.
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar version 2 - six element six group formula, same S-M-C coating, all metal, part number 43812 stamped into the mount side of the A/M switch, different markings on the distance ring than 43802, added lugs for open-aperture metering (not sure if these are on 43802), eight aperture blades.
SMC Pentax - same 6/6 formula as 43812, K mount, rubber focus grip, 8 blades. The same performance as 43812 except in a K-mount.

all those have a minimum focus distance of 1.5 meters, 58mm filter, and a separate hood marked for the 135/2.5 and 200/4. The Pentax has a later version with a different typeface for the name ring but same otherwise, and the later hood is plastic.

Takumar Bayonet - four element, four group optical formula, lens name on the side (focus ring), color-coded aperture ring and distance scale, 1.2 meter MFD, slide-out hood, square blocks on the rubber focus grip, 52mm filter, 8 aperture blades.

08-07-2013, 03:04 PM   #65
Senior Member
GnipGnop's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 130
135mm was traditionally the longest focal length you could use on a rangefinder camera (comfortably). It is a hangover from that era, and has thus fallen out of favour with most photographers.
08-12-2013, 07:37 AM   #66
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Woodstock, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,524
Ok so I did get the Pentax-A 135mm f2.8 and did a quick comparison with the Taku Bayonet f2.5. Like everybody says, yes the Pentax-A is clearly superior... but that doesn't mean that the Takumar isn't a good lens. It's pretty good, but the Pentax-A is just awesome. I am in awe of the build, and the quality of the images that it produces.
I love how the 135mm lenses make subjects look so completely natural, at least to my untrained eyes...
08-12-2013, 08:06 AM   #67
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Photos: Albums
Posts: 71
Nice samples by everyone.

I've always liked 135mm FL. It's takes a trained eye to spot photo opportunities.

I've got one on order and will report back!
08-13-2013, 03:34 AM   #68
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,104
QuoteOriginally posted by jcdoss Quote
Excellent shots, Flix! Can you recall the aperture used? I have recently acquired a few M lenses, and I'm sort of re-discovering photography again. My first two purchases were a 135/3.5 and an M 200/4, both of which seem fairly soft wide open. Is this your impression? I haven't spent enough time with either one, though, to come up with a final opinion. I'm loving their petiteness and ease of use, though.
I like my M135/3.5, one click closed down or at F5.6. Not a whole lotta love for the M200 though. Seems to take to F8 to get its act together. My M100/4 macro is plenty sharp, still need to have a serious session or two with the M*300 to really get to know it.

08-13-2013, 03:36 AM   #69
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,104
QuoteOriginally posted by filoxophy Quote
These were taken with my K-7 and M135/3.5 on a slightly overcast morning with a polarizer at our city's botanical gardens' outdoor lily ponds. Previously had the Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5, but I couldn't get what I wanted with it. This slightly fungified M135, however, has been golden for me! Only real complaint is the ~5ft MFD--any other quibbles are just part of the charm of a film-era manual lens. So yes, my 135 gets love from me!











The saturation and colours are great. Is that just the benefit of the polariser or is there a little fill flash in the mix as well?
08-13-2013, 04:16 AM   #70
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
I'm a fan of 135mm lenses too - but only on FX format*. On APS-C 135mm lenses are around 200mm which is too long for portraiture, too short for wildlife...and for my purposes: completely useless. I presently have my A*135mm f/1.8 on my LX, I'm going through my last brick of T-max with my favorite cameras and lenses. I'll have to post some samples when I make prints....


* I have a Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO on order in Nikon F mount, when it arrives I'll pit it against my Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 APO SLII Macro
08-13-2013, 08:00 AM   #71
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,120
QuoteOriginally posted by southlander Quote
The saturation and colours are great. Is that just the benefit of the polariser or is there a little fill flash in the mix as well?
Thanks for your comments! No flash--that's next on my list of skills to learn. I think it was just that type of overcastness which brings out the color in things, combined with the polarizer. Shot raw, tweaked in Lr, but the images are faithful to what I saw.
08-13-2013, 09:27 AM   #72
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,155
My M135/3.5 is probably one of the sharpest lenses I own although the focal length doesn't fit much for me either. I also have a JC Penny 135/2.8 which gets used even less. Another reason I don't use it as much is simply because my eyesight isn't what it once was and I'm not as good with manual focusing as I was when I was younger. As a result, when I'm shooting in the short-medium telephoto range, I go for an AF zoom. If Pentax built an AF version of the M135/3.5, keeping the size and weight similar along with the 49mm filter threads, I would buy one in a minute.
09-09-2013, 06:59 AM   #73
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Woodstock, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,524
QuoteOriginally posted by gifthorse Quote
Takumar 2.5 (Bayonet) 135











Just want to tell you how much I admire your photographic skills, especially for those birds-in-flight pictures!
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, f/2.8, k-mount, length, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why No Love for AK & HI in the Marketplace? sb in ak General Talk 9 01-04-2013 10:21 PM
No Love for Pentax at Consumer Reports Pioneer General Talk 10 10-20-2011 07:24 PM
Suggestion No love for spotmatics? summonbaka Site Suggestions and Help 6 04-23-2010 11:27 PM
no love for the 14mm Pentaxor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 08-22-2009 02:54 PM
No love for the LX? juniusbugg Pentax Film SLR Discussion 33 10-18-2008 01:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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