[photogem]

Currently I've got the SMC Pentax M 50mm F1.7 and I've been offered a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 55mm F1.8 for $35. Would there be any major differences other than focal length? Is it worth it to buy this lens also?

Edit: Forgot to mention that I adapt to the Sony a6000

Both are pretty similar but can be very different!

Why?

There can be more difference between one M50 1,7 to another M50 1,7 just due to age, use/misuse.
Same for the Takumar.

This is the problem reading (some) reviews. Some write reviews based on a bad sample and possibly downgrade a good lens out of sheer frustration.

You have to verify it and get a good sample.

Both are great lenses.

I prefer the Super Takumar version.

With a Pentax K body I prefer the Tv option which the Taks offer. Makes life that little bit easier.

The K55 / Tak 55 is also one of the best video lenses. Superior here to the M50 because of the longer (and smoother) focus throw.

---------- Post added 04-21-17 at 03:40 PM ----------

He did say "possibly" better. The SMC coatings have evolved/improved over time, thus the "possibility" of improved coatings over the Tak.

Yes, the SMC coatings have improved, Asahi said, that there was a difference between super multi coated and smc, if true, who knows.

About Super-Multi Coating (SMC)

[gofour3]

Yes, the SMC coatings have improved, Asahi said, that there was a difference between super multi coated and smc, if true, who knows.

The SMC coating on a SMC Takumar and a SMC K Series lens are the same. (Seven layer) The difference in the two lenses is the number of glass surfaces that were SMC coated, the K Series has more than the Takumar.

The SMC Takumars had some glass surfaces that were single coated and cemented lens elements had no coatings. When the K Series was launched in 1975 "most" glass surfaces were SMC coated, including cemented lens elements.

Phil.

[photogem]

The SMC coating on a SMC Takumar and a SMC K Series lens are the same. (Seven layer) The difference in the two lenses is the number of glass surfaces that were SMC coated, the K Series has more than the Takumar.

The SMC Takumars had some glass surfaces that were single coated and cemented lens elements had no coatings. When the K Series was launched in 1975 "most" glass surfaces were SMC coated, including cemented lens elements.

Phil.

Thanks, this is useful information.

Adding to this, Pentax later introduced the ghostless SMC coating on all FA Limiteds and all early (DA Limiteds)

and ... as far as I know on many standard DA lenses,
but for sure I only know:

FA35/2
DA35/2,4
FA20-35/4
FA28-105 AL/IF

and I have heard rumors that the FA24-90 and the DA 16-45 have it as well

would you know?

[gofour3]

and I have heard rumors that the FA24-90 and the DA 16-45 have it as well

would you know?

Check out this web site if you already haven't:

Pentax K-Mount Lenses and Lens Accessories

It shows the FA24-90 as having ghostless coatings but doesn't mention it on the DA16-45?

Phil.

[tromboads]

I had a bad case of the LBA. I had a set of Super Tak's, SMC Taks, M's, K's, a bunch of Pentacon's (50mm f1.8 greatly underrated lens by the way), and the Helios, Zennit's, etc etc etc etc! The manual focus collection has been rationalized and what has survived?

-Tair 3, 300mm f4.5
-Super Tak 50mm f1.4
-K 55mm f1.8
-M 35mm f2.8

There is just something special about the 55mm f1.8. Well I preferred it to the 50mm M f1.7 because it is just that little bit tighter really.

for $35 enjoy the LBA!