Explain the interest in the Takumars to me?

walliswizard · 02-09-2015, 12:59 PM

Just curious.

I have both the SMC 50mm 1.4M and 1.7A lenses. A colleague says these are technically superior to the Takumars, as the Tak's have an earlier variant of the multi-coating.

There does seem quite a lot of interest in the Super-Taks though so is there much difference? (other than they make Geiger-Counters go a bit crazy apparently

)

Scintilla · 02-09-2015, 01:09 PM

Don't know about the other Super-Taks, but since you mentioned the 50/1.4 in particular:

This particular lens was manufactured first as an 8-element design, then as a 7-element design. The 8-element version has a reputation as a "Planar killer", but it seems Asahi Pentax lost money on each one sold due to a quirk of the design driving up the manufacturing cost; so they silently replaced it with the 7-element version that is said to be not as good.

Super-Takumar 50mm F1.4 (Early 8-Element Variant) Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC/S-M-C/Super Takumar 50mm F1.4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

**jatrax** · 02-09-2015, 01:10 PM - **1 Like**

Just go here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/31601-takumar-club.html and read through. I am sure your question will be answered.

manntax · 02-09-2015, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Just go here: Takumar club and read through. I am sure you question will be answered.

Exactly what he said. It is beyond me to understand the need to create a new thread like this asking what's so special about Takumars, if there are 885 PAGES of Takumar club X)

**wtlwdwgn** · 02-09-2015, 01:13 PM

Some of the Takumar love is because a lot of us older 'togs started out with them. They're renowned for their build quality, sharpness, and color rendering. In my experience on a DSLR I get more CA and less contrast with the older coatings on the Super Taks compared to the S-M-C and SMC versions. Just my $0.02.

walliswizard · 02-09-2015, 01:13 PM

I have this, which I guess is a lowly 7 element lens by the looks of it.

SMC Pentax-M 50mm F1.4 Reviews - M Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

indy · 02-09-2015, 01:14 PM

To my eye the image is every bit as good as my M and K glass, but I prefer the supertak build quality. I also prefer the use of the auto manual switch to the green button stop down metering method.

walliswizard · 02-09-2015, 01:15 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by manntax

Exactly what he said. It is beyond me to understand the need to create a new thread like this asking what's so special about Takumars, if there are 885 PAGES of Takumar club X)

I'm new here

Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide

manntax · 02-09-2015, 01:19 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by walliswizard

I'm new here Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide

No worries .... but 885 PAGES!! imagine how enlightened you might become after you go through all of them

semaca · 02-09-2015, 01:20 PM

Using a Takumar gives you super human photo powers!

walliswizard · 02-09-2015, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by manntax

No worries .... but 885 PAGES!! imagine how enlightened you might become after you go through all of them

I'm on page 1..... please send food parcels when I get to about page 200!!

Didn't know about the Takumar Club, I've probably lost my life for a bit now. Cheers all for the head's up

**jatrax** · 02-09-2015, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by walliswizard

Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide

Your question is good. However, the reference thread for it has been written extensively. Go have a look, seriously there is nothing that can be asked about Takumars that has not been discussed in that thread. And it is worth the look to see the images created with those lenses.

The older glass, Takumars especially, were built to last. And they have, I have some made in the late 1950's. But the rendering is different. Perhaps because the lenses were made to provide good images not pass a clinical test.

But your friend is at least partially correct, the newer coatings will technically be better than older ones. Whether they produce better results is another question. Depends on the look you want.

manntax · 02-09-2015, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by walliswizard

I'm on page 1..... please send food parcels when I get to about page 200!!

Yep you might need some.. I remember going through the whole 540+ PAGES of https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/26-mini-challenges-games-photo-stories/43...eet-style.html

Took me somewhere n the region of 4-5 DAYS to go through all of them... well worth it though !

Docrwm · 02-09-2015, 01:29 PM - **1 Like**

Super-Taks represent truth in advertizing, which is so rare that people flock to them. Seriously, build quality + rendering = very nice MF experience.

Pioneer · 02-09-2015, 02:04 PM - **5 Likes**

They are lenses, that's all. They are not better than newer lenses, they are just different.

Like many older manual focus lenses they are built to a higher standard of quality, much like the cameras they were attached to. This of course does not mean they produce better photographs than newer lenses, just that they will feel better while you are taking pictures. As mentioned, they focus manually. Unfortunately not many Pentax digital cameras are easy to focus manually. The viewfinders are very bright but that doesn't help with focusing. The older ground glass focus screens were less bright but it was fairly easy to see the lens come into focus. You will probably want to buy and install a new focus screen with focus aids like the Katzeye brand.

Even though the lens coatings were very good in their day, they do not really compete well with today's coatings. You will see higher chromatic aberrations as well as lower contrast than what even the lowly Pentax DA 18-55 kit lens is capable of. They also tend to be a bit more subject to flare than newer Pentax lenses are so you should always have a hood on the lens and be extra careful if you are shooting into the sun. Additionally these lenses were designed for film so they may not work as well on digital sensors.

Even the newest of the Takumar lenses are getting quite old by now and a lot of them have had a very rough life. Things that often pop up are hazy and scratched lens elements, fungus, damaged filter threads, bent helical tubes, and other assorted ills. Some of these can be fixed, some not so well. At a minimum you should consider having them serviced by a competent technicians.

Another problem that is related to their age, as well as to general properties of anything that is manufactured within a range of tolerances, is the fact that you can own a cosmetically nice looking Super Tak 50/1.4 that performs very poorly while your friend can own the very same lens that performs like it was built by elves to photograph fairies.

To summarize, Super Taks are not the magic bullet that some people seem to think they are. They are very old lenses that were designed to compete with other lenses being built in their same time period, not to compete against modern lenses. The honest truth is that the Pentax kit zoom will almost always kick their butt.

However, if your camera is properly set up to focus these manual focus lenses, then they can provide you with a different rendering in your photographs that you may like. It will be a more vintage, lower contrast, more painterly type of rendering than what you will get from the Pentax kit zoom. You may like, some people do. But don't be surprised if it doesn't turn out perfectly at first, or maybe even at all.

BTW, although it may not sound like it I love these lenses myself and shoot them quite regularly with my Spottie and SV. But I also recognize their faults and limitations and am prepared to work with those. Like I said, no magic bullets, just interesting photography with limitations.

02-09-2015, 12:59 PM	#1
walliswizard New Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 24	Explain the interest in the Takumars to me? Just curious. I have both the SMC 50mm 1.4M and 1.7A lenses. A colleague says these are technically superior to the Takumars, as the Tak's have an earlier variant of the multi-coating. There does seem quite a lot of interest in the Super-Taks though so is there much difference? (other than they make Geiger-Counters go a bit crazy apparently )

02-09-2015, 01:10 PM - 1 Like	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Just go here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/31601-takumar-club.html and read through. I am sure your question will be answered. Last edited by jatrax; 02-09-2015 at 01:17 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
LX Interest in the Forum?	Presidente	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	22	11-18-2013 09:52 PM
Can someone explain the 1.5 multiple to me?	ratm4484	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	03-25-2011 08:13 AM
Someone explain to me whats going in the states... :)	Gooshin	General Talk	37	11-06-2010 11:16 AM
Does DxO explain the F2.4 in the new DA L 35mm?	illdefined	Photographic Technique	16	11-04-2010 05:39 PM
Can someone please explain the 10-17 to me?	SupremeMoFo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	04-19-2007 12:23 PM

02-09-2015, 01:09 PM	#2
Scintilla Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 347	Don't know about the other Super-Taks, but since you mentioned the 50/1.4 in particular: This particular lens was manufactured first as an 8-element design, then as a 7-element design. The 8-element version has a reputation as a "Planar killer", but it seems Asahi Pentax lost money on each one sold due to a quirk of the design driving up the manufacturing cost; so they silently replaced it with the 7-element version that is said to be not as good. Super-Takumar 50mm F1.4 (Early 8-Element Variant) Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database SMC/S-M-C/Super Takumar 50mm F1.4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

02-09-2015, 01:12 PM	#4
manntax Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by jatrax Just go here: Takumar club and read through. I am sure you question will be answered. Exactly what he said. It is beyond me to understand the need to create a new thread like this asking what's so special about Takumars, if there are 885 PAGES of Takumar club X)

02-09-2015, 01:13 PM	#5
wtlwdwgn Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Billings, MT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,838	Some of the Takumar love is because a lot of us older 'togs started out with them. They're renowned for their build quality, sharpness, and color rendering. In my experience on a DSLR I get more CA and less contrast with the older coatings on the Super Taks compared to the S-M-C and SMC versions. Just my $0.02.

02-09-2015, 01:14 PM	#7
indy Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 274	To my eye the image is every bit as good as my M and K glass, but I prefer the supertak build quality. I also prefer the use of the auto manual switch to the green button stop down metering method.

02-09-2015, 01:15 PM - 1 Like	#8
walliswizard New Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 24 Original Poster	Originally posted by manntax Exactly what he said. It is beyond me to understand the need to create a new thread like this asking what's so special about Takumars, if there are 885 PAGES of Takumar club X) I'm new here Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide

02-09-2015, 01:19 PM - 2 Likes	#9
manntax Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by walliswizard I'm new here Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide No worries .... but 885 PAGES!! imagine how enlightened you might become after you go through all of them

02-09-2015, 01:20 PM	#10
semaca Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: RO Posts: 143	Using a Takumar gives you super human photo powers!

02-09-2015, 01:23 PM	#11
walliswizard New Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 24 Original Poster	Originally posted by manntax No worries .... but 885 PAGES!! imagine how enlightened you might become after you go through all of them I'm on page 1..... please send food parcels when I get to about page 200!! Didn't know about the Takumar Club, I've probably lost my life for a bit now. Cheers all for the head's up

02-09-2015, 01:23 PM	#12
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by walliswizard Anyway, if all the questions are answered for everything, which I suspect they are, you might as well shut this forum down and leave it as a reference guide Your question is good. However, the reference thread for it has been written extensively. Go have a look, seriously there is nothing that can be asked about Takumars that has not been discussed in that thread. And it is worth the look to see the images created with those lenses. The older glass, Takumars especially, were built to last. And they have, I have some made in the late 1950's. But the rendering is different. Perhaps because the lenses were made to provide good images not pass a clinical test. But your friend is at least partially correct, the newer coatings will technically be better than older ones. Whether they produce better results is another question. Depends on the look you want.

02-09-2015, 01:27 PM	#13
manntax Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by walliswizard I'm on page 1..... please send food parcels when I get to about page 200!! Yep you might need some.. I remember going through the whole 540+ PAGES of https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/26-mini-challenges-games-photo-stories/43...eet-style.html Took me somewhere n the region of 4-5 DAYS to go through all of them... well worth it though !

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-09-2015, 01:29 PM - 1 Like	#14
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Super-Taks represent truth in advertizing, which is so rare that people flock to them. Seriously, build quality + rendering = very nice MF experience.

02-09-2015, 02:04 PM - 5 Likes	#15
Pioneer Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Wandering the Streets Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,411	They are lenses, that's all. They are not better than newer lenses, they are just different. Like many older manual focus lenses they are built to a higher standard of quality, much like the cameras they were attached to. This of course does not mean they produce better photographs than newer lenses, just that they will feel better while you are taking pictures. As mentioned, they focus manually. Unfortunately not many Pentax digital cameras are easy to focus manually. The viewfinders are very bright but that doesn't help with focusing. The older ground glass focus screens were less bright but it was fairly easy to see the lens come into focus. You will probably want to buy and install a new focus screen with focus aids like the Katzeye brand. Even though the lens coatings were very good in their day, they do not really compete well with today's coatings. You will see higher chromatic aberrations as well as lower contrast than what even the lowly Pentax DA 18-55 kit lens is capable of. They also tend to be a bit more subject to flare than newer Pentax lenses are so you should always have a hood on the lens and be extra careful if you are shooting into the sun. Additionally these lenses were designed for film so they may not work as well on digital sensors. Even the newest of the Takumar lenses are getting quite old by now and a lot of them have had a very rough life. Things that often pop up are hazy and scratched lens elements, fungus, damaged filter threads, bent helical tubes, and other assorted ills. Some of these can be fixed, some not so well. At a minimum you should consider having them serviced by a competent technicians. Another problem that is related to their age, as well as to general properties of anything that is manufactured within a range of tolerances, is the fact that you can own a cosmetically nice looking Super Tak 50/1.4 that performs very poorly while your friend can own the very same lens that performs like it was built by elves to photograph fairies. To summarize, Super Taks are not the magic bullet that some people seem to think they are. They are very old lenses that were designed to compete with other lenses being built in their same time period, not to compete against modern lenses. The honest truth is that the Pentax kit zoom will almost always kick their butt. However, if your camera is properly set up to focus these manual focus lenses, then they can provide you with a different rendering in your photographs that you may like. It will be a more vintage, lower contrast, more painterly type of rendering than what you will get from the Pentax kit zoom. You may like, some people do. But don't be surprised if it doesn't turn out perfectly at first, or maybe even at all. BTW, although it may not sound like it I love these lenses myself and shoot them quite regularly with my Spottie and SV. But I also recognize their faults and limitations and am prepared to work with those. Like I said, no magic bullets, just interesting photography with limitations.