Where is pentax 135 mm fixed lens?

mauricio · 04-23-2008, 04:03 AM

Originally posted by Miserere

Sure, we have a fast(ish) 77mm prime, but at $700 it's out of my reach (and I'm not alone)

Yes...but you have a 70mm that it's cheaper and still an amazing lens. Ok, it's not so fast...but you can't have it all. It's all about options...and while you have plenty of options below 100mm, you have none between 100 and 200mm...let alone above 300mm...but that's another story

Miserere · 04-27-2008, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by mauricio

Yes...but you have a 70mm that it's cheaper and still an amazing lens. Ok, it's not so fast...but you can't have it all. It's all about options...and while you have plenty of options below 100mm, you have none between 100 and 200mm...let alone above 300mm...but that's another story

I have a Tokina zoom that's f/2.8 at 70mm and performs quite well. The reasons I wish to buy primes are:

Better IQ than a zoom
Faster speed than a zoom
Compactness and lightness

The increased IQ isn't a matter of design expertise per se, a good prime that is optically better than a good zoom is easy to build. It's also easier to make a prime faster. I'm not going to spend money on a prime if I'm not gaining both IQ and speed over a zoom. I would also expect it to be cheaper. I'm ready to bet that the profit margin on the 77 Ltd is much higher than that of the DA* 50-135mm, despite similar price tags. And I would love for somebody to test these two at f/2.8 to see exactly how much IQ we gain from shooting the Ltd...if any.

It's not hard to build an 85mm f/2, so please Pentax, get us a DA 85mm f/2 for no more than $400, will ya?

mauricio · 04-28-2008, 02:56 AM

I agree with your points but I would add "quality of construction" as number 2. That's why I like the limited lenses so much. They have the IQ, they have the compactness and lightness and yes, they could be a bit faster...but personally I rather have a metal lens and a bit slower than a plastic lens a bit faster...but that's just me

To make the 70 faster or create an 85mm with the same quality of thr 70mm and faster, it would certainly mean that it would cost the price of the 31mm limited.

Miserere · 04-28-2008, 03:33 AM

Originally posted by mauricio

I agree with your points but I would add "quality of construction" as number 2. That's why I like the limited lenses so much. They have the IQ, they have the compactness and lightness and yes, they could be a bit faster...but personally I rather have a metal lens and a bit slower than a plastic lens a bit faster...but that's just me

To make the 70 faster or create an 85mm with the same quality of thr 70mm and faster, it would certainly mean that it would cost the price of the 31mm limited.

Some people will sacrifice speed for size, but I'm not one of them. Primes under 100mm are compact enough for me, so I would rather have the speed.

Maybe Pentax cannot justify the production costs of having parallel lines of lenses: The elite, pricey, compact Ltds on one hand; and the standard-size, more economic, fast DAs on the other.

mauricio · 04-28-2008, 04:50 AM

That's probably it. One of the things that bothers me with Pentax bet on the DA lenses is a future full frame Pentax body.

fastfood · 04-29-2008, 03:17 AM

i've bought a super - multi - coated takumar 135 f2.5 screw mount with the series number : 6616723, how i can know it version? some body told me version 1 is the best. how about this version 2? thank !!!

anomaly · 05-24-2008, 03:12 PM

I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay.

Last edited by anomaly; 05-24-2008 at 03:18 PM.

danielchtong · 05-24-2008, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by anomaly

I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay.

Well . I can manage using film to shoot DA200mm to get the FoV of a 135mm. Nah. That reminds me to use my FA135mm more instead.
We have been dealing with it (shortage of some key FL). 70-200mm being the most acute one as there is a premium of $200-300 to get a used Sigma lens.

Daniel

dancheng · 05-24-2008, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by anomaly

I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay.

I read from somewhere that one should avoid the K-mount Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm f2.5. This is because its has no or single coating and hence suffers from flares. This lens has "Takumar (Bayonet)" marking on the lens barrel, instead of the usual marking on the lens rim.

The better choice would be Super Takumar M42 mount 135mm/f3.5.

Good luck!

frank · 05-24-2008, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by fastfood

i've bought a super - multi - coated takumar 135 f2.5 screw mount with the series number : 6616723, how i can know it version? some body told me version 1 is the best. how about this version 2? thank !!!

Actually there are three version of Takumar 135/2.5 lens in M42 mount. The first version is the Super Takumar 135/2.5 which doesn't have Super Multi Coating (but some reported the later product batch might have too), the second version is Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 with a production code of 43802 (it's at the bottom of the lens, marked on the A/M or Auto/Manu switch). The third version is also Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 w/ a production code of 43812. The second version has a 4 elements in 4 groups optical design while the third one has a 6 elements in 6 groups design.

All these three versions are excellent, the third one (6 elements in 6 groups) is reported to be the best among all three.

The later SMC K 135/2.5 (also 6 elements in 6 groups) is reported to have the same optical design as the last S-M-C Takumar 135/2.5.

You can see more Takumar lens types here:
View all Takumar lens types

04-27-2008, 06:29 PM	#47
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,993	Originally posted by mauricio Yes...but you have a 70mm that it's cheaper and still an amazing lens. Ok, it's not so fast...but you can't have it all. It's all about options...and while you have plenty of options below 100mm, you have none between 100 and 200mm...let alone above 300mm...but that's another story I have a Tokina zoom that's f/2.8 at 70mm and performs quite well. The reasons I wish to buy primes are: Better IQ than a zoom Faster speed than a zoom Compactness and lightness The increased IQ isn't a matter of design expertise per se, a good prime that is optically better than a good zoom is easy to build. It's also easier to make a prime faster. I'm not going to spend money on a prime if I'm not gaining both IQ and speed over a zoom. I would also expect it to be cheaper. I'm ready to bet that the profit margin on the 77 Ltd is much higher than that of the DA* 50-135mm, despite similar price tags. And I would love for somebody to test these two at f/2.8 to see exactly how much IQ we gain from shooting the Ltd...if any. It's not hard to build an 85mm f/2, so please Pentax, get us a DA 85mm f/2 for no more than $400, will ya?

04-29-2008, 03:17 AM	#51
fastfood Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: ho chi minh city - vietnam Posts: 1	takumar 135 f2.5 .... i've bought a super - multi - coated takumar 135 f2.5 screw mount with the series number : 6616723, how i can know it version? some body told me version 1 is the best. how about this version 2? thank !!!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fixed aperture manual lens help	Joe	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	09-01-2010 10:38 PM
Looking for a general-purpose, bright, fixed f lens	Fallingwater	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	03-04-2010 09:40 PM
Freebee lens fixed!	ismaelg	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-26-2009 07:20 AM
A Pentax fixed/calibrated DA* 16-50mm lens?	nicedog	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	08-17-2008 11:17 PM
1 everyday fixed lens: advice requested	arthur pappas	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	01-24-2008 05:12 PM

04-23-2008, 04:03 AM	#46
mauricio New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Viseu, Portugal Posts: 20	Originally posted by Miserere Sure, we have a fast(ish) 77mm prime, but at $700 it's out of my reach (and I'm not alone) Yes...but you have a 70mm that it's cheaper and still an amazing lens. Ok, it's not so fast...but you can't have it all. It's all about options...and while you have plenty of options below 100mm, you have none between 100 and 200mm...let alone above 300mm...but that's another story

04-28-2008, 02:56 AM	#48
mauricio New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Viseu, Portugal Posts: 20	I agree with your points but I would add "quality of construction" as number 2. That's why I like the limited lenses so much. They have the IQ, they have the compactness and lightness and yes, they could be a bit faster...but personally I rather have a metal lens and a bit slower than a plastic lens a bit faster...but that's just me To make the 70 faster or create an 85mm with the same quality of thr 70mm and faster, it would certainly mean that it would cost the price of the 31mm limited.

04-28-2008, 03:33 AM	#49
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,993	Originally posted by mauricio I agree with your points but I would add "quality of construction" as number 2. That's why I like the limited lenses so much. They have the IQ, they have the compactness and lightness and yes, they could be a bit faster...but personally I rather have a metal lens and a bit slower than a plastic lens a bit faster...but that's just me To make the 70 faster or create an 85mm with the same quality of thr 70mm and faster, it would certainly mean that it would cost the price of the 31mm limited. Some people will sacrifice speed for size, but I'm not one of them. Primes under 100mm are compact enough for me, so I would rather have the speed. Maybe Pentax cannot justify the production costs of having parallel lines of lenses: The elite, pricey, compact Ltds on one hand; and the standard-size, more economic, fast DAs on the other.

04-28-2008, 04:50 AM	#50
mauricio New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Viseu, Portugal Posts: 20	That's probably it. One of the things that bothers me with Pentax bet on the DA lenses is a future full frame Pentax body.

05-24-2008, 03:12 PM	#52
anomaly Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Barbados Photos: Gallery Posts: 264	I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay. Last edited by anomaly; 05-24-2008 at 03:18 PM.

05-24-2008, 04:06 PM	#53
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by anomaly I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay. Well . I can manage using film to shoot DA200mm to get the FoV of a 135mm. Nah. That reminds me to use my FA135mm more instead. We have been dealing with it (shortage of some key FL). 70-200mm being the most acute one as there is a premium of $200-300 to get a used Sigma lens. Daniel

05-24-2008, 09:59 PM	#54
dancheng Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 68	Originally posted by anomaly I just bid 31 dollars on a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 on ebay. I read from somewhere that one should avoid the K-mount Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm f2.5. This is because its has no or single coating and hence suffers from flares. This lens has "Takumar (Bayonet)" marking on the lens barrel, instead of the usual marking on the lens rim. The better choice would be Super Takumar M42 mount 135mm/f3.5. Good luck!

05-24-2008, 10:26 PM	#55
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	Originally posted by fastfood i've bought a super - multi - coated takumar 135 f2.5 screw mount with the series number : 6616723, how i can know it version? some body told me version 1 is the best. how about this version 2? thank !!! Actually there are three version of Takumar 135/2.5 lens in M42 mount. The first version is the Super Takumar 135/2.5 which doesn't have Super Multi Coating (but some reported the later product batch might have too), the second version is Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 with a production code of 43802 (it's at the bottom of the lens, marked on the A/M or Auto/Manu switch). The third version is also Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5 w/ a production code of 43812. The second version has a 4 elements in 4 groups optical design while the third one has a 6 elements in 6 groups design. All these three versions are excellent, the third one (6 elements in 6 groups) is reported to be the best among all three. The later SMC K 135/2.5 (also 6 elements in 6 groups) is reported to have the same optical design as the last S-M-C Takumar 135/2.5. You can see more Takumar lens types here: View all Takumar lens types