Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-30-2013, 05:51 PM   #1
Senior Member
Oldhand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mid North Coast NSW Australia
Posts: 176
Which Pentax 135 is this please

A little confused and need some assistance please.
Can someone set me straight - which of the 135 f2.5 lenses is this one - M, A, K ....unsure
Thanks
OH

Attached Images
 
09-30-2013, 05:55 PM   #2
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,720
That appears to be the Takumar Bayonet one, the least desirable one.
09-30-2013, 06:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
Oldhand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mid North Coast NSW Australia
Posts: 176
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by elliott Quote
That appears to be the Takumar Bayonet one, the least desirable one.
Thanks Eliot.
What makes the Takumar bayonet least desirable?
OH
09-30-2013, 06:10 PM   #4
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,720
It doesn't have the SMC coatings, so it won't have the contrast or flare resistance of the K series (there was no M or A). It is a different optical design as well, it is similar to the earlier screwmount version with 4 elements in 4 groups.

Still a decent lens if you keep it away from harsh light and use a properly sized hood. They are very sharp.

09-30-2013, 06:18 PM   #5
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,182
Well they are enigmatic; I have seen excellent, sharp shots by some good photographers on the forum here.
So do try the lens.
But for me ( I have 2 , plus 2 other 135's which work much better) the 135 Takumar Bayonets tend to flare badly if the sun is over the yard-arm, even with the hood out.
Last year I tried to use one in indoor soccer with the K-01 but the flood lamps caused flare and loss of contrast.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-01  Photo 
09-30-2013, 06:30 PM   #6
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,770
It should have integral hood that pulls out. It can deliver nice shots but as noted above you have to watch where you are shooting it flares quite badly.
09-30-2013, 06:32 PM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,720
With the APS-C crop they really need a longer hood than they are supplied with, I don't know that it was even adequate for full frame.
09-30-2013, 06:45 PM   #8
Senior Member
Oldhand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mid North Coast NSW Australia
Posts: 176
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by elliott Quote
With the APS-C crop they really need a longer hood than they are supplied with, I don't know that it was even adequate for full frame.
Thanks everyone for the feedback. I am looking for a 135/2.5 and saw this one. Which is the most favoured version - or is there only one other?
OH

09-30-2013, 06:52 PM   #9
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince George, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,342
I have the SMC Tak 135/2.5 and use it for astro photos. No chance of flare with this photo genre. Nice sharp lens and has a real infinity so all you have to do is rack it out all the way and you are golden. Slight hint of a decentered element, though.

Jack
09-30-2013, 07:04 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
OH, there is a Pentax SMC 135mm f/2.5 lens, also known as a "K" series lens, that is very highly regarded. There are some SMC Takumars that share the optical formulation, but some that do not, and it is hard to tell the difference. I happen to be selling my K 135/2.5 because I prefer the auto focus of the Pentax-F 135/2.8, which is another stellar lens (and the FA, the same except the outer casing I think). But the AF lenses are more expensive.

For less money, the Pentax-M 135mm f/3.5 is supposed to be quite good. I have never used one.
09-30-2013, 11:45 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern England
Posts: 495
The 135/3.5's are excellent, and affordable. They come in various forms:

Early Super Takumar
Late Super Takumar
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar
Pentax SMC (often referred to as the "K")
Pentax SMC M (often just referred to as the "M")

The best of the Taks is the S-M-C, as it has better coatings for better contrast and flare resistance (it is otherwise the same as the late Super Takumar). You can distinguish between the early and late Super Taks by looking at the aperture markings: the early version has f4 marked, the late version doesn't. The late version is preferable, in my opinion. All Taks ("proper" Taks, that is) are M42. The Takumar Bayonets aren't proper Taks, they're entry level lenses.

All (proper) Takumars are beautifully made, with ultra-smooth focusing action.

The K 135/3.5 is optically the same as the S-M-C Takumar, but not quite so nice to focus.

The M 135/3.5 is completely different optically, but offers nearly as good IQ. It's outstanding feature is its small size - smallest Japanese 135 out there.
10-01-2013, 12:26 PM   #12
Veteran Member
hongzhibin1987's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 441
QuoteOriginally posted by elliott Quote
That appears to be the Takumar Bayonet one, the least desirable one.
I think it is.
10-01-2013, 03:09 PM   #13
Pentaxian
kh1234567890's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,406
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
For less money, the Pentax-M 135mm f/3.5 is supposed to be quite good.
It is. And it is tiny. Perfectly usable wide open though.
10-01-2013, 06:15 PM   #14
Senior Member
Oldhand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mid North Coast NSW Australia
Posts: 176
Original Poster
Thanks everyone for your thoughts.
I'll keep looking.
I am getting the impression that the 135/3.5 Takumars should not be under rated
OH
10-01-2013, 08:08 PM   #15
Pentaxian
mgvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 855
I have that Tak bayonet 135 f2.5, and it does have its use. Here's a theater shot (always tough lighting) from about 60' away.

I think that's pretty remarkable detail and nice color/contrast.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Am I reading this riight ? The Pentax 18-135 WR is sharper than Tamron 17-50 F2.8 ? photoleet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 09-05-2014 08:53 PM
Which version is this? hobkyl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 06-14-2013 03:59 PM
Which lens mount is this? vignetto Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 09-26-2012 03:25 PM
Is this stain? Please help. el baroda Pentax K-5 4 05-30-2012 08:20 AM
Takumar 135 2.5 vs Super Tak 135 3.5, both bayonet mount, which is better? chongmic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 04-09-2011 11:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:17 AM. | 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