[A_Dave]

I own a Pentax-M 50 f1.7 that gets frequent use on my K-5ii. I just picked up a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 55 f1.8 on my local Craigslist. From the pictures posted on its review, I think its the 1971 version.

Both lenses seem to be highly rated here, and since I do not currently own any other M42 lenses, is it worth buying a $50.00 adapter only to find that I like the 50 1.7 just as much?

Does anyone have a preference?

[johnyates]

Perhaps a $3 adapter from eBay would allow you to do some comparisons between the two. Remove the spring and leave it on the lens.

[A_Dave]

Are the cheap adapters okay to use? Perhaps the cases of them getting stuck are rare..

[ChristianRock]

I have the M 50 1.7, and the K 55 f2 (same exact optical formula as your Takumar, maybe even the exact same coatings, just mechanically limited to f2 instead of f1.8).

They're different lenses, the perspective on APS-C is also sufficiently different that they end up having different uses for me. The colors they reproduce are also slightly different - M 50 1.7 is richer, K 55 is more subdued. Both my copies are very sharp from wide open and contrast is ok, contrast going to very good levels with just a half a click down. You can't make me choose one. I think they're equally good, and different enough that I keep both. Right now I have my M 50 1.7 on my film P30T with Ektar, and will shoot some fall colors this week. The K 55 is in the K-r bag that is used for family pictures, for low DOF portraits.

If you buy a cheap adapter, as John said, you can just leave it on the lens. If you buy an expensive one, you can buy all sorts of M42 lenses and now use them on your DSLR. Either way, you win, I think.

[dms]

I would set the takumar aside, and later when you look at wider takumars (e.g., 28 or 35mm f/3.5) get the pentax M42 adapter. Others adapters are a bit risky unless you are knowledgeable, in which case you would not be posting this.
if you want to do the comparison now, again I only suggest the pentax adapter (Google the part number are make sure it is the real thing).

[johnyates]

Are the cheap adapters okay to use?

They are, in general. However, they are cheap and QC can vary. My strategy is to buy a few or more, each from a different eBay seller. If I buy 5, my chances of getting 4 good ones is pretty good. Removing the clip negates the getting stuck danger. The big difference between the eBay cheapies and the genuine ones is that the aperture scale is usually somewhere else besides center top. And, that's not a bad thing, as the 'nose' on the camera prevents you from seeing what you're doing when they are lined up center top. I have a bunch of M42 lenses and just leave the adapter attached.

[sergysergy]

I would not risk it by buying a cheap knock off. There are stories of them getting stuck, not focusing to infinity, etc.
Get the original one. It is an investment since it will serve you well not only for that Takumar but any.

[disconnekt]

I'd rather you save money & get the original. Why risk not only ruining the lens, but the camera also?

[esrandall]

I have both lenses -- they are fantastic. I like both of mine equally, so I have to say that I end up using the M lens most of the time. I use a cheap adapter with the 55, and it used to get stuck in the camera all of the time, so I ended up removing the little spring-loaded clip, and just screw the lens into it until I meet a bit of resistance. I'm good to go that way, but like I said, I run with the M 50 most of the time now.

[c.a.m]

I also have both lenses, and enjoy them equally. I think they both produce excellent results, and I would find it difficult to favour one over the other. They are both highly rated in the PF lens review section.

I usually use the Takumar along with several others when I'm on a 'Tak outing.'

- Craig

[dms]

I think the differences between lens character will be less important than handling.

At moment you only have the 50-55mm choices, and generally zone focusing is tougher/less convenient on a 50 ish mm FL lens, which favours a K mount lens, and using green button if it is a pre A lens (AV mode is not available--unless lens wide open).

At wider FL (about 28 mm for me) zone focusing and AV exposure mode favours a M42 lens over a K mount (anyway pre A K mount).

[Kiwipixter]

I own a K55 1.8 and used to own a A50 1.7. I ditched the latter because i find the K55 pictures more warmer, better bokeh, and at 55mm focal more suitable for portrait shots. Hope that helps.

[A_Dave]

Thanks for all the feedback, I'm glad this didn't turn into a debate about m42 adapters. I guess I'll bite the bullet and try a genuine adapter, and continue searching for wider-angle Takumar lenses over the M's. It has been less than a year and I've managed to find two in great condition, so it seems likely that more will come up.

I am still considering a new prime with autofocus... the limited's look real nice.

[Mr Bassie]

The genuine adapter often comes up in the classifieds here for $20-30. Don't pay $50, that is too much

[rrstuff]

I would go for the pre-set lens. I have the 55mm F1.8 and it is very good. I found it easier to have a pre-set lens than to use stop-down metering with M lenses. The 55mm F1.8 was underexposing a lot on my K-30 at large apertures, but that problem cleared out around F2.8. Regardless, I would get the adapter, because there are so many nice lenses for M42.