Is a $60 lens worth it?

Outis · 03-18-2016, 05:07 PM

What a lovely lens. I'm so glad you found it! Enjoy!

**niceshot** · 03-18-2016, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

So does that mean the two images I just posted are considered "soft"? I'm confused... :P

M

no and no

you can see for yourself they are sharp. disregard this nonsense

mee · 03-18-2016, 05:50 PM

Were you hand holding the shot in the OP? It does not look amazingly sharp at full resolution. Actually it looks like there is some kind of minor blur on the whole image... either very slight shake or focus was slightly off the emblem. And there is a ton of CA which of course can be cleaned in post. But for 60 dollars, it is a nice find.

**boriscleto** · 03-18-2016, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

So does that mean the two images I just posted are considered "soft"? I'm confused... :P

M

No, a very undeserved reputation started by PopPhoto perpetuated because it has a simpler optical formula than other 135/2.5s & later 2.8s.

**MJSfoto1956** · 03-18-2016, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by mee

Were you hand holding the shot in the OP? It does not look amazingly sharp at full resolution.

Yes it was handheld. There was no claim that it was "amazingly sharp" -- but rather that the sharpness wide-open was surprising. I think that is an important point.

Michael

mee · 03-18-2016, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

Yes it was handheld. There was no claim that it was "amazingly sharp" -- but rather that the sharpness wide-open was surprising. I think that is an important point.

Well.. not attempting to rain on anyone's parade, but I was trying to be subtle/friendly that the emblem isn't quite in focus. Soooo.. uhm.. it isn't quite in focus. lol

Look at the pockmarks on the emblem itself. They are largely OOF. One can even see this in the 1024 sized image.

The sharpest spot appears to be below the top 'dip' on the left side of the W (above the first m in '135mm') . And, even at that spot, it is still pretty soft. That's partially due to the massive amount of CA shown (all the pockmarks in that area are completely red filled) though.

However, I bet that lens sharpens up really nicely stopped down to around f/4 and the CA probably cleans up a bit too. While I probably wouldn't use that lens wide open unless I had too, again, it's indeed a nice find for 60! And, for your uses, it appears to be a steal of a deal.

**niceshot** · 03-18-2016, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by mee

Well.. not attempting to rain on anyone's parade, but I was trying to be subtle/friendly that the emblem isn't quite in focus. Soooo.. uhm.. it isn't quite in focus. lol

Look at the pockmarks on the emblem itself. They are largely OOF. One can even see this in the 1024 sized image.

The sharpest spot appears to be below the top 'dip' on the left side of the W (above the first m in '135mm') . And, even at that spot, it is still pretty soft. That's partially due to the massive amount of CA shown (all the pockmarks in that area are completely red filled) though.

However, I bet that lens sharpens up really nicely stopped down to around f/4 and the CA probably cleans up a bit too. While I probably wouldn't use that lens wide open unless I had too, again, it's indeed a nice find for 60! And, for your uses, it appears to be a steal of a deal.

Guarantee the lens is sharp wide open, why dont you buy one and try it?

ohaya · 03-18-2016, 07:53 PM

It took forever to sell that lens (and I was tempted several times), but now fotograffiti will probably want it back if he sees the pics in this thread.... JUST KIDDING

!!

**PJ1** · 03-18-2016, 08:19 PM

The Takumar 135/f2.5 was all I had as a telephoto for years (in my film days). It is far better than its reputation, but I think its reputation has been made mostly by those who have never used it. Flare is not going to be well controlled, but I never had a problem. I used a few of my shots in magazine articles. Mine has a slow aperture now and I haven't got around to pulling it apart.

**todd** · 03-18-2016, 10:33 PM

I'm a fan of this lens too and have looked forward to using it on FF for a long time.

biz-engineer · 03-18-2016, 11:28 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

just trying this lens out to determine what it's good at. Here's a 2nd test I just did:

Thanks for posting. IMO sharpness is relative to the subject that is being photographed. The lens may be considered "soft" wide open when photographing a subject with a lot of small details and the same lens sharpness looks good when the subject does not contain a lot of detail but has smooth transitions instead.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-S2 - is the kit lens worth $60?	k22	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	19	05-06-2016 06:11 AM
Have 50/1.8, is it worth it to buy a 35/2.4?	keanex	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	02-28-2016 12:52 AM
Sigma C 18-200mm is optically stellar for a superzoom, but is it worth losing WR?	bwDraco	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	08-22-2015 12:30 PM
Should I buy this lens is it worth it	emetcalf	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	03-20-2011 06:58 PM
Incorrect Kit Lens - Is it worth spending time in exchanging it?	epidaetia	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	23	08-18-2010 03:11 PM

03-18-2016, 05:07 PM	#16
Outis Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 935	What a lovely lens. I'm so glad you found it! Enjoy!

03-18-2016, 05:24 PM	#17
niceshot Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,564	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 So does that mean the two images I just posted are considered "soft"? I'm confused... :P M no and no you can see for yourself they are sharp. disregard this nonsense

03-18-2016, 05:50 PM	#18
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Were you hand holding the shot in the OP? It does not look amazingly sharp at full resolution. Actually it looks like there is some kind of minor blur on the whole image... either very slight shake or focus was slightly off the emblem. And there is a ton of CA which of course can be cleaned in post. But for 60 dollars, it is a nice find.

03-18-2016, 06:13 PM	#19
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 So does that mean the two images I just posted are considered "soft"? I'm confused... :P M No, a very undeserved reputation started by PopPhoto perpetuated because it has a simpler optical formula than other 135/2.5s & later 2.8s.

03-18-2016, 06:15 PM	#20
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305 Original Poster	Originally posted by mee Were you hand holding the shot in the OP? It does not look amazingly sharp at full resolution. Yes it was handheld. There was no claim that it was "amazingly sharp" -- but rather that the sharpness wide-open was surprising. I think that is an important point. Michael

03-18-2016, 07:12 PM	#21
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 Yes it was handheld. There was no claim that it was "amazingly sharp" -- but rather that the sharpness wide-open was surprising. I think that is an important point. Well.. not attempting to rain on anyone's parade, but I was trying to be subtle/friendly that the emblem isn't quite in focus. Soooo.. uhm.. it isn't quite in focus. lol Look at the pockmarks on the emblem itself. They are largely OOF. One can even see this in the 1024 sized image. The sharpest spot appears to be below the top 'dip' on the left side of the W (above the first m in '135mm') . And, even at that spot, it is still pretty soft. That's partially due to the massive amount of CA shown (all the pockmarks in that area are completely red filled) though. However, I bet that lens sharpens up really nicely stopped down to around f/4 and the CA probably cleans up a bit too. While I probably wouldn't use that lens wide open unless I had too, again, it's indeed a nice find for 60! And, for your uses, it appears to be a steal of a deal.

03-18-2016, 07:22 PM	#22
niceshot Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,564	Originally posted by mee Well.. not attempting to rain on anyone's parade, but I was trying to be subtle/friendly that the emblem isn't quite in focus. Soooo.. uhm.. it isn't quite in focus. lol Look at the pockmarks on the emblem itself. They are largely OOF. One can even see this in the 1024 sized image. The sharpest spot appears to be below the top 'dip' on the left side of the W (above the first m in '135mm') . And, even at that spot, it is still pretty soft. That's partially due to the massive amount of CA shown (all the pockmarks in that area are completely red filled) though. However, I bet that lens sharpens up really nicely stopped down to around f/4 and the CA probably cleans up a bit too. While I probably wouldn't use that lens wide open unless I had too, again, it's indeed a nice find for 60! And, for your uses, it appears to be a steal of a deal. Guarantee the lens is sharp wide open, why dont you buy one and try it?

03-18-2016, 07:53 PM	#23
ohaya Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 242	It took forever to sell that lens (and I was tempted several times), but now fotograffiti will probably want it back if he sees the pics in this thread.... JUST KIDDING !!

03-18-2016, 08:19 PM	#24
PJ1 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toowoomba, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,484	The Takumar 135/f2.5 was all I had as a telephoto for years (in my film days). It is far better than its reputation, but I think its reputation has been made mostly by those who have never used it. Flare is not going to be well controlled, but I never had a problem. I used a few of my shots in magazine articles. Mine has a slow aperture now and I haven't got around to pulling it apart.

03-18-2016, 10:33 PM	#25
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791	I'm a fan of this lens too and have looked forward to using it on FF for a long time.

03-18-2016, 11:28 PM	#26
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 just trying this lens out to determine what it's good at. Here's a 2nd test I just did: Thanks for posting. IMO sharpness is relative to the subject that is being photographed. The lens may be considered "soft" wide open when photographing a subject with a lot of small details and the same lens sharpness looks good when the subject does not contain a lot of detail but has smooth transitions instead.