Opinions on Super Takumar 200/f4

zx-m · 06-16-2008, 07:46 AM

Hello, all,

I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version?

Thanks,
Glen

Zewrak · 06-16-2008, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by zx-m

Hello, all,

I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version?

Thanks,
Glen

Well, I don't have the 200mm myself. I did have a SMC-M 200mm f/4 and I do have the 150mm Super Takumar and the S-M-C 300mm. All of them are super. I can't believe that the Super Takumar 200 would be worse then the SMC-M either. Of all S-M-C, SMC and Super takumar I have had at the same focals, they have pretty much all been the same.

Some pictures with my SMC-M 200mm f/4 can be found here, unedited straight from camera in raw (no sharpening etc). 6160215 - a set on Flickr

Mechan1k · 06-16-2008, 08:54 AM

I just received mine ... I haven't really put it through it's paces yet ... only took indoor evening shots (not easy) ... and with average lighting it came out better than I expected handheld.

I was lucky though ... the forum member I purchased my Super Tak 200/4 off added in a Vivitar x2 M42 Teleconverter with it ... could be interesting.

Zewrak · 06-16-2008, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Mechan1k

I was lucky though ... the forum member I purchased my Super Tak 200/4 off added in a Vivitar x2 M42 Teleconverter with it ... could be interesting.

He added that for free, because thats whats its worth, qualitywise.

Mechan1k · 06-16-2008, 09:20 AM

It may be ... I havent tried it yet.

It's like the Pentax FAJ 75-300mm ... after reading from EVERYONE that it is only as good as a paperweight I was disappointed that I had one on order ... I still received it anyway .. and it took some really nice images.

So after having that sort of experience ... I am open-minded about all types of equipment ... I'll see how it goes and will post up later what it is like.

jsherman999 · 06-16-2008, 09:39 AM

.

I had a regular Super Takumar version (not S-M-C) that was stuck wide open at f/4 - even stuck wide open, it produced nice sharp shots. I liked it so much that I got a S-M-C version that was not broken

Here are some shots taken with it - I think the first one was wide open (f4):

zx-m · 06-16-2008, 09:47 AM

I thank all of you for the comments.

I, too, try to keep an open mind...and such is why I have posted this thread.

Any other views?

Thanks,
Glen

Mike Cash · 06-16-2008, 01:35 PM

Wide open on extension tubes on ESII:

On SV:

On K100D

morfic · 06-16-2008, 02:09 PM

I should ban jsherman in some fashion, so i don't see images he posts, i kind of like those S-M-C 200/4 shots.....

Blue · 06-16-2008, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by zx-m

Hello, all,

I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version?

Thanks,
Glen

Why not look for a smc A 200mm F4?

Mike Cash · 06-17-2008, 04:30 AM

Originally posted by Blue

Why not look for a smc A 200mm F4?

Ooh! Ooh! Teacher! Call on me! My hand was up first!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Mechan1k · 06-17-2008, 04:31 AM

What's the difference with the A-version in IQ????
Or is it just the fact you can use auto aperture on the body???? with the extra cost.

Blue · 06-17-2008, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by Mike Cash

Ooh! Ooh! Teacher! Call on me! My hand was up first!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I know where one is for $165 and it is in excellent shape. I have been contemplating getting it myself but I have the smc A 400 f5.6 and I not sure how much I would use it. I currently use a 135mm f2.8 with a 2x for that range. I also know where 3 of the 200 m f4 are rated at E, for $69, 79 and 89.

Blue · 06-17-2008, 07:25 AM

Originally posted by Mechan1k

What's the difference with the A-version in IQ????
Or is it just the fact you can use auto aperture on the body???? with the extra cost.

The prices I've seen for the Super Tak's usually are more than the smc M 200 f4. I suspect that the only difference in the M and the A would be the auto aperture but I couldn't say between the Super Tak and A.

The K has 5 elements in 5 groups and weighs 537 g and is 137mm long, the M has 6 elements in 5, the 6 in 6 and the A and M both weigh 405 grams and come in at 111mm in length. Go here to check out the 5 200mm lenses Pentax Telephoto Prime Lenses

Now, the SMC A* 200 f2.8 ed or SMC A* 200 f4 with macro are another story regarding price and would like to get my hands on the macro one!

Edit: I guess I overlooked the K 200 f2.5. The 3 FA* and DA* lenses are on that list also.

zx-m · 06-17-2008, 08:33 AM

I went with the Super Takumar version for three reasons:

1. I was able to get an EX+ example from KEH for $89--with caps and hood.
2. I have heard that the Super Takumar's IQ is a tad better than that of later versions.
3. I have no real need for the "A" setting.

Regards,
Glen

06-16-2008, 07:46 AM	#1
zx-m Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia Posts: 376	Opinions on Super Takumar 200/f4 Hello, all, I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version? Thanks, Glen

06-17-2008, 07:25 AM	#14
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Mechan1k What's the difference with the A-version in IQ???? Or is it just the fact you can use auto aperture on the body???? with the extra cost. The prices I've seen for the Super Tak's usually are more than the smc M 200 f4. I suspect that the only difference in the M and the A would be the auto aperture but I couldn't say between the Super Tak and A. The K has 5 elements in 5 groups and weighs 537 g and is 137mm long, the M has 6 elements in 5, the 6 in 6 and the A and M both weigh 405 grams and come in at 111mm in length. Go here to check out the 5 200mm lenses Pentax Telephoto Prime Lenses Now, the SMC A* 200 f2.8 ed or SMC A* 200 f4 with macro are another story regarding price and would like to get my hands on the macro one! Edit: I guess I overlooked the K 200 f2.5. The 3 FA* and DA* lenses are on that list also. Last edited by Blue; 06-17-2008 at 07:37 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Spotmatic F and Super Takumar 55mm F2: Opinions? (And mild excitement hence posting!)	Jetsam1	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	2	09-20-2010 03:48 PM
Super-Takumar 1:4/200	mysterick	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	01-04-2010 03:38 PM
super takumar 200	revinhood	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	06-01-2008 12:17 AM
For Sale - Sold: M 50/f1.4, Takumar 135/f2.5, Super Tak 28/f3.5, Tokina 80-200/f2.8, M 80-200/f	loudbay	Sold Items	11	03-07-2008 04:53 PM

06-16-2008, 08:49 AM	#2
Zewrak Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Nowhere, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 654	Originally posted by zx-m Hello, all, I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version? Thanks, Glen Well, I don't have the 200mm myself. I did have a SMC-M 200mm f/4 and I do have the 150mm Super Takumar and the S-M-C 300mm. All of them are super. I can't believe that the Super Takumar 200 would be worse then the SMC-M either. Of all S-M-C, SMC and Super takumar I have had at the same focals, they have pretty much all been the same. Some pictures with my SMC-M 200mm f/4 can be found here, unedited straight from camera in raw (no sharpening etc). 6160215 - a set on Flickr

06-16-2008, 08:54 AM	#3
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	I just received mine ... I haven't really put it through it's paces yet ... only took indoor evening shots (not easy) ... and with average lighting it came out better than I expected handheld. I was lucky though ... the forum member I purchased my Super Tak 200/4 off added in a Vivitar x2 M42 Teleconverter with it ... could be interesting.

06-16-2008, 08:57 AM	#4
Zewrak Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Nowhere, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 654	Originally posted by Mechan1k I was lucky though ... the forum member I purchased my Super Tak 200/4 off added in a Vivitar x2 M42 Teleconverter with it ... could be interesting. He added that for free, because thats whats its worth, qualitywise.

06-16-2008, 09:20 AM	#5
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	It may be ... I havent tried it yet. It's like the Pentax FAJ 75-300mm ... after reading from EVERYONE that it is only as good as a paperweight I was disappointed that I had one on order ... I still received it anyway .. and it took some really nice images. So after having that sort of experience ... I am open-minded about all types of equipment ... I'll see how it goes and will post up later what it is like.

06-16-2008, 09:39 AM	#6
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	. I had a regular Super Takumar version (not S-M-C) that was stuck wide open at f/4 - even stuck wide open, it produced nice sharp shots. I liked it so much that I got a S-M-C version that was not broken Here are some shots taken with it - I think the first one was wide open (f4):

06-16-2008, 09:47 AM	#7
zx-m Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia Posts: 376 Original Poster	I thank all of you for the comments. I, too, try to keep an open mind...and such is why I have posted this thread. Any other views? Thanks, Glen

06-16-2008, 01:35 PM	#8
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	Wide open on extension tubes on ESII: On SV: On K100D

06-16-2008, 02:09 PM	#9
morfic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 428	I should ban jsherman in some fashion, so i don't see images he posts, i kind of like those S-M-C 200/4 shots.....

06-16-2008, 08:12 PM	#10
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by zx-m Hello, all, I am considering looking for a Super Takumar 200/f4. I see there are two positive reviews in the database for the SMC/Super Takumar 200/f4. Are there any other opinions out there--especially in regard to the Super Takumar version? Thanks, Glen Why not look for a smc A 200mm F4?

06-17-2008, 04:30 AM	#11
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	Originally posted by Blue Why not look for a smc A 200mm F4? Ooh! Ooh! Teacher! Call on me! My hand was up first! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

06-17-2008, 04:31 AM	#12
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	What's the difference with the A-version in IQ???? Or is it just the fact you can use auto aperture on the body???? with the extra cost.

06-17-2008, 07:18 AM	#13
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Mike Cash Ooh! Ooh! Teacher! Call on me! My hand was up first! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ I know where one is for $165 and it is in excellent shape. I have been contemplating getting it myself but I have the smc A 400 f5.6 and I not sure how much I would use it. I currently use a 135mm f2.8 with a 2x for that range. I also know where 3 of the 200 m f4 are rated at E, for $69, 79 and 89.

06-17-2008, 08:33 AM	#15
zx-m Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia Posts: 376 Original Poster	I went with the Super Takumar version for three reasons: 1. I was able to get an EX+ example from KEH for $89--with caps and hood. 2. I have heard that the Super Takumar's IQ is a tad better than that of later versions. 3. I have no real need for the "A" setting. Regards, Glen