Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

kh1234567890 · 04-29-2015, 12:49 PM - **1 Like**

$50 for the M135/3.5 is a bit of a rip off. They usually go for £10-20 on eBay UK. A cracking little lens.

Wide open on a K-7 :

**hjoseph7** · 04-30-2015, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

$50 for the M135/3.5 is a bit of a rip off. They usually go for £10-20 on eBay UK. A cracking little lens.

Wide open on a K-7 :

How long is the focal length with the m42 adapter ?

Stavri · 04-30-2015, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by hjoseph7

How long is the focal length with the m42 adapter ?

M42 mount has the same registration distance to the Pentax PK mount. All m42 lenses are full frame, multiply their existing focal length by 1.5 to get the APS-C equivalent:

135mm x 1.5 = 202mm

**boriscleto** · 04-30-2015, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by hjoseph7

The 135mm f3.5 is not as sharp as the Takumar f2.5, or the SMC A f2.8 according to Pentax reviews, but its the same 4 lens 4 group design ?

I'm strongly leaning towards the Pentax SMC-A f2.8 only because I don't have to fiddle with any adapters, but it would be nice to have a legendary Takumar.
.

The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design.

The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5.

The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well.

**hjoseph7** · 04-30-2015, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design.

The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5.

The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well.

"The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups."

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8

I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper.

**hjoseph7** · 04-30-2015, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design.

The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5.

The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well.

"The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups."

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8

I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper.

**boriscleto** · 04-30-2015, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by hjoseph7

"The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups."

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8

I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper.

The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens. The K-mount Takumars were released as a low cost brand, they do not have SMC coating and some have a different optical formula. The fact that the Takumar Bayonet formula was used for the A 135 was one of the reasons it wasn't made for very long. It received bad reviews early on and Asahi stopped making it because zooms were more popular by the early 80s.

I got my A 135/2.8 with a Super Program along with an A 28/2.8 & A 50/1.7 that must have been purchased in 1983.

Jorgario · 04-30-2015, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens.

Just to show how nice this lens can be for portraits, old lady at the street:

**hjoseph7** · 04-30-2015, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens. The K-mount Takumars were released as a low cost brand, they do not have SMC coating and some have a different optical formula. The fact that the Takumar Bayonet formula was used for the A 135 was one of the reasons it wasn't made for very long. It received bad reviews early on and Asahi stopped making it because zooms were more popular by the early 80s.

I got my A 135/2.8 with a Super Program along with an A 28/2.8 & A 50/1.7 that must have been purchased in 1983.

Cheaper version ? I'll test it and if I don't like it I will return it...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: 3rd Pty M42, Helios-44, 35/3.5, 200/3.5, 60-135mm F3.5, M42-49mm, Ext. Tubes, Bellows	MightyMike	Sold Items	139	12-28-2015 11:53 AM
Pentax 135mm 3.5 vs Focal 135mm 2.8	SammyLeopold	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	01-02-2015 09:17 PM
Pentax-F 135mm f2.8 vs. DA* 135mm f2.8	Mirton	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	07-29-2014 07:08 PM
For Sale - Sold: Soligor 25mm F2.8, 135mm F3.5, 180mm F3.5, Telesar 135mm F3.5, T-mount adapters	MightyMike	Sold Items	16	12-18-2013 03:22 PM
Pentax-A 35-105mm F3.5 vs AF 50-135mm F2.8?	lbam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	05-31-2008 07:13 AM

04-29-2015, 12:49 PM - 1 Like	#16
kh1234567890 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,653	$50 for the M135/3.5 is a bit of a rip off. They usually go for £10-20 on eBay UK. A cracking little lens. Wide open on a K-7 :

04-30-2015, 08:11 AM	#17
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,051 Original Poster	Originally posted by kh1234567890 $50 for the M135/3.5 is a bit of a rip off. They usually go for £10-20 on eBay UK. A cracking little lens. Wide open on a K-7 : How long is the focal length with the m42 adapter ?

04-30-2015, 08:22 AM	#18
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	Originally posted by hjoseph7 How long is the focal length with the m42 adapter ? M42 mount has the same registration distance to the Pentax PK mount. All m42 lenses are full frame, multiply their existing focal length by 1.5 to get the APS-C equivalent: 135mm x 1.5 = 202mm

04-30-2015, 08:57 AM	#19
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by hjoseph7 The 135mm f3.5 is not as sharp as the Takumar f2.5, or the SMC A f2.8 according to Pentax reviews, but its the same 4 lens 4 group design ? I'm strongly leaning towards the Pentax SMC-A f2.8 only because I don't have to fiddle with any adapters, but it would be nice to have a legendary Takumar. . The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design. The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5. The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well.

04-30-2015, 09:41 AM	#20
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,051 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design. The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5. The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well. "The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups." Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8 I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper.

04-30-2015, 09:44 AM	#21
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,051 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto The M 135/3.5 is a 5 element in 5 groups design. The Super/SMC Takumar 135/2.5 had several different optical formulas. The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups. The second S-M-C had 6 elements in 6 groups. That formula carried over to the SMC K 135/2.5. The F/FA 135/2.8 had an entirely new formula 8 elements in 7 groups. The FA is IF as well. "The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups." Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8 I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper.

04-30-2015, 09:59 AM	#22
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by hjoseph7 "The Super and first S-M-C had 5 elements in 4 groups." Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/294239-pent...#ixzz3YoMmUwq8 I just plunked for the K-mount 135mm 2.5 in Excellent condition from KEH. I could not find the A-mount 135mm f2.8 anywhere and I didn't want to deal with an adapter for the Takumar(bayonet). I could have gotten the 135 f3.5 M-mount like I originally planed since it was the cheapest, but I think the 2.5 is a little bit sharper. The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens. The K-mount Takumars were released as a low cost brand, they do not have SMC coating and some have a different optical formula. The fact that the Takumar Bayonet formula was used for the A 135 was one of the reasons it wasn't made for very long. It received bad reviews early on and Asahi stopped making it because zooms were more popular by the early 80s. I got my A 135/2.8 with a Super Program along with an A 28/2.8 & A 50/1.7 that must have been purchased in 1983.

04-30-2015, 10:24 AM	#23
Jorgario Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: San José Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,769	Originally posted by boriscleto The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens. Just to show how nice this lens can be for portraits, old lady at the street:

04-30-2015, 12:22 PM	#24
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,051 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto The Takumar Bayonet does not need an adapter. It is a K-mount lens. The K-mount Takumars were released as a low cost brand, they do not have SMC coating and some have a different optical formula. The fact that the Takumar Bayonet formula was used for the A 135 was one of the reasons it wasn't made for very long. It received bad reviews early on and Asahi stopped making it because zooms were more popular by the early 80s. I got my A 135/2.8 with a Super Program along with an A 28/2.8 & A 50/1.7 that must have been purchased in 1983. Cheaper version ? I'll test it and if I don't like it I will return it...

Pentax 135mm f2.8 vs. Pentax 135mm f3.5

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!