[AbadPhotography]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Hello again friends. I have found a couple of very well kept M42 lenses at a local camera shop. Just need some advice as to whether these are priced fairly and how they perform optically. Holding them in hand everything feels perfect. ocus rings are well dampened. Aperture rings are snappy. Now what's you all's opinion about these beauty's?

First the 300mm F4 prime. It's priced at 300$ and comes with original case

Next is the shorter one. The 100mm Macro F4 priced at 200$ and comes with original lense hood

Attached Images

           

[Docrwm]

You don't want the original case - the old leather ones harbor mold and lots of fuzz that gets into the lenses. The price is about 2x what I'd consider reasonable for the 300/4. Here is what I consider a fairly typical link on eBay for that lens:
Asahi Super Takumar 300mm F4 Telephoto Lens M42 Pentax Screw Very Good 06 C27 | eBay

[cxdoo]

I have that 300mm lens and find it hard to use without a tripod. Contrast is not particularly good but colors are very pleasing.
Frankly, having Tamron 70-200/2.8 I don't see a reason to use it.

[vonBaloney]

Those are typical retail dealer prices -- not really worth it except for rare finds. You can get either without much trouble from ebay for less...

[manntax]

I'd say the 300mm lens seems to be overpriced a bit - if that was the much rarer (and reportedly better) Auto Takumar with multitude aperture blades they I would say not too bad for a mint copy. About 100mm macro I am not sure if this is a bad price - I would say if lens is mint condition as it appears to be - the price is actually fairly reasonable considering all accessories included and no shipping added. But I am hardened by UK prices so...take it all with a grain of salt ;-)

[btnapa]

Hello again friends. I have found a couple of very well kept M42 lenses at a local camera shop. Just need some advice as to whether these are priced fairly and how they perform optically. Holding them in hand everything feels perfect. ocus rings are well dampened. Aperture rings are snappy. Now what's you all's opinion about these beauty's?

First the 300mm F4 prime. It's priced at 300$ and comes with original case

Next is the shorter one. The 100mm Macro F4 priced at 200$ and comes with original lense hood

I do not know about the 300 f4 but I have a 200mm f3.5 M42 which I shot against the Pentax 70-210 F4 zoom. It is sharper than the zoom and it almost matches my 200mm F4 from the 645 line.

The lenses you posted seem like they are in a good shape but IMO they are overpriced. It is hard to get good deals these days. Everyone has access to eBay and the internet and can do a quick price check. I went to a pawn shop in California a few weeks ago searching for a rare find. The guy had a bunch of junk and wanted premium prices for them!

If a 200mm will do my Takumar 200 is up for sale. Send me a PM if interested.

[tvdtvdtvd]

Have you looked here:
S-M-C/Super Takumar 300mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

and here:
Super-Multi-Coated MACRO-TAKUMAR 100mm F4 Macro Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Prices seem high on both lenses. I purchased a SMC-A 100mm Macro f/4 for $137 earlier this year.

[lukulele]

I paid $50 for the 300 12/2013 from a longtime camera dealer and he was happy to get rid of it. I use it with the Q and it can be handheld but sorely needs a tripod mount in that application as mentioned above.

[Docrwm]

I paid $50 for the 300 12/2013 from a longtime camera dealer and he was happy to get rid of it. I use it with the Q and it can be handheld but sorely needs a tripod mount in that application as mentioned above.

I bought my K300 for the same time reasons but paid a bit more. Now that I have a 150-500 for my K5iis and the 06 for the Q it doesn't get used much anymore.

[boriscleto]

Even KEH sells the 300/4 for about half that price. The 100/4 is closer to what KEH charges but still high.

[Pioneer]

I have the 300/4 and I enjoy working with it. Low contrast but there is not a thing wrong with that. Adding in some contrast is one of the easiest things to do in Photoshop or Lightroom.

It is a big lens and can be difficult to handhold so a tripod is certainly recommended. But to be truthful, that is about the only thing I can find wrong with it. I do recommend that you practice with it before you rely on it for critical photographs. But that is really true of most any long lens.

[osv]

both of those lenses are way overpriced.

[jbondo]

Both lenses are priced too high.
If you want a S-M-C 300/4 in good working condition, I'll be happy to sell you one for a fraction of that non-SMC one. PM me if you're interested in this or a 100/4 at a reasonable price. Examples from the exact S-M-C 300/4 in the first posting in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/130-lens-sample-photo-archive/276737-s-m-...4-300-m42.html

[Not a Number]

You can always dicker over the prices. Price tags on used equipment usually don't mean much unless it is "collectibles" and even then you can bargain.

[AbadPhotography]

Thank you all for your input. It's been very helpful.