Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-07-2008, 12:12 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
The hate of Super Takumar 150mm 1:4f

Whats up with the hate of this lens? People seem to dislike it everywhere, even a low score in the reviews here.

I got mine in the mail this morning and I am more then statisfied, was a bit scared when I bought it because of all the bad reviews of it.

Here are some testshots I took today with it.

Testphotos on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

All pictures in that set are straight from the camera, just converted to JPG, nothing else. The horse pic looks more then awesome when some unsharpmask have been applied. I don't get it, is it really that much worse then the 200mm and the 135?

Edit: since they are all uncropped etc, they should be viewed in atleast Large.


Last edited by Zewrak; 05-07-2008 at 12:37 PM.
05-07-2008, 12:42 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
the horse hair is quite clearly defined! i haven't heard much about this lens, but probably gets overshadowed by the 50 and 100 F4 macro taks which are nice lenses.

on the review database it scored 5 and 9 so it's not that bad ...
Pentax Lens Review Database - 150mm F4
05-07-2008, 12:49 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
the horse hair is quite clearly defined! i haven't heard much about this lens, but probably gets overshadowed by the 50 and 100 F4 macro taks which are nice lenses.

on the review database it scored 5 and 9 so it's not that bad ...
Pentax Lens Review Database - 150mm F4
Well I read a few other places that recommends the 135 and 200 over the 150 because of the bad CA etc. I don't think there is any CA problems at all. Am I just used to really bad lenses or what? .
05-07-2008, 01:04 PM   #4
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida gulf coast
Posts: 48
I bought one of these back in 1973 and still have it. I bought it because Pop Photo (or maybe Modern Photo back then), did tests on it and found it to be one of the sharpest telephotos they ever tested. I just pulled it out of my old Spotmatic kit and did some tests with it on my k10d. It resolved very nicely at all f-stops tested. I also have the 100 f/4 macro and the 150 did significantly better at f/4. The compressed file attached doesn't show enough detail, so if you want the large files of these tests let me know & I'll e-mail them to you.

Other lenses tested: 18-55 kit, 50-200 kit, 50/2.8 macro F, 50/1.4 FA, 24/3.5 M42, 55/1.8 M42, 80-200, 28-90, and Sigma 21-35.

Attached Images
 
05-07-2008, 01:12 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by YarPcola Quote
I bought one of these back in 1973 and still have it. I bought it because Pop Photo (or maybe Modern Photo back then), did tests on it and found it to be one of the sharpest telephotos they ever tested. I just pulled it out of my old Spotmatic kit and did some tests with it on my k10d. It resolved very nicely at all f-stops tested. I also have the 100 f/4 macro and the 150 did significantly better at f/4. The compressed file attached doesn't show enough detail, so if you want the large files of these tests let me know & I'll e-mail them to you.

Other lenses tested: 18-55 kit, 50-200 kit, 50/2.8 macro F, 50/1.4 FA, 24/3.5 M42, 55/1.8 M42, 80-200, 28-90, and Sigma 21-35.
So... once again.. Why the hate on it? I got mine for 13. My 200mm cost 55 and the 135/3.5 40 and the 135/2.8f 42. I don't get it at all.
05-07-2008, 01:25 PM   #6
Junior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: oregon
Posts: 28
More people have , or have had the 135 / 3.5 and other tak lenses in the 135 ranges. Consequently the 150 gets "overshadowed". My guess
05-07-2008, 03:44 PM   #7
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida gulf coast
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by spb37 Quote
More people have , or have had the 135 / 3.5 and other tak lenses in the 135 ranges. Consequently the 150 gets "overshadowed". My guess
This is very true. The 135 was the "standard" long lens. The most common kit was 35, 50, and 135mm. Later, the 28 seemed to give the 35 a run for the money, and the 100 had a share of followers, but the 135 reigned supreme among the long lenses.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, reviews, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Super Takumar 150mm f/4.0 (M42) (US/CAN) woof Sold Items 5 10-11-2010 05:16 PM
For Sale - Sold: Super-Takumar 150mm f/4 (US) deadwolfbones Sold Items 13 03-31-2010 12:21 PM
For Sale - Sold: Super-Takumar 150mm f4 (EUR) sposnjak Sold Items 0 03-25-2010 12:25 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:40 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