Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-20-2018, 03:20 AM   #1
Veteran Member
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,155
Is there room to revive the M42 Takumar brand?

With so many people adapting old lenses on all sorts of cameras, and with their M42 Takumar heritage, would it make sense for Ricoh/Pentax to revive the M42 mount, branding and form factor? The best of the current line-up (the FA Ltds & D-FA50/1.4), without the electronics and wrapped up in a retro Takumar barrel (similar to the DA20-40), the S-M-C Tak mount and A/M switch. Canon shooters are using the old lenses on their FF DSLRs, sometimes paying a premium over equivalent Canon EF lenses, so might there be a market for them as a high-end 'generic' lens line? I wouldn't mind an M42 version of my FA43 for my Spotmatics.

10-20-2018, 03:41 AM   #2
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,735
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
With so many people adapting old lenses on all sorts of cameras, and with their M42 Takumar heritage, would it make sense for Ricoh/Pentax to revive the M42 mount, branding and form factor? The best of the current line-up (the FA Ltds & D-FA50/1.4), without the electronics and wrapped up in a retro Takumar barrel (similar to the DA20-40), the S-M-C Tak mount and A/M switch. Canon shooters are using the old lenses on their FF DSLRs, sometimes paying a premium over equivalent Canon EF lenses, so might there be a market for them as a high-end 'generic' lens line? I wouldn't mind an M42 version of my FA43 for my Spotmatics.
Surely the M42 thread is not the driver here - what you are asking for is something like the K mount K 400 5.6. (and presumably others). That is a focus ring and manual aperture ring. Throw in modern coatings and you have a viable alternative for that wonderful old Takumar Glass without the need of an adapter. Describing Canon's heritage is not a good example as far as I can tell. Doesn't their compatibility go back only as far as 1987? K mount goes back to 1975.
10-20-2018, 04:16 AM - 1 Like   #3
amateur dirt farmer
Loyal Site Supporter
pepperberry farm's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: probably out in a field somewhere...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 41,257
you should really take a look at some of that old glass - it is quite viable today, so a remake isn't necessary...

just go buy an adapter and a couple of M42 lenses and enjoy....


diluting their marketshare by adding another lens mount, plus the hassle of supplying adapters, does not sound like a great plan for a niche player like Ricoh...
10-20-2018, 06:37 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 543
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Surely the M42 thread is not the driver here - what you are asking for is something like the K mount K 400 5.6. (and presumably others). That is a focus ring and manual aperture ring. Throw in modern coatings and you have a viable alternative for that wonderful old Takumar Glass without the need of an adapter. Describing Canon's heritage is not a good example as far as I can tell. Doesn't their compatibility go back only as far as 1987? K mount goes back to 1975.
I think you've misread the post.


The user is saying that Canon users often adapt Takumars and other M42 lenses onto their cameras which would create a decent market for the new M42 lenses.

My concern would be that Pentax would want people to use the lenses on Pentax bodies, and an open mount like M42 prevents that.


Last edited by HarisF1; 10-20-2018 at 02:32 PM.
10-20-2018, 06:42 AM   #5
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
would it make sense for Ricoh/Pentax to revive the M42 mount
One might ask Cosina-Voigtlander President, Hirobumi Kobayashi. He attempted an abortive "revival" of the mount with the release of the short-lived Bessaflex TM in 2003 and production of Voigtlander SL-series lenses in M42. Actually "revival" is a bit of a misnomer. The M42 mount never completely went away. One can still buy new Zeiss product as well as remaining stock of Meyer-Gorlitz in the mount.

The big question might be whether the niche for long flange depth lenses incapable of open-aperture metering* has sufficient market capacity to support a production initiative. Cosina's experience as well as that of Meyer-Gorlitz suggests not. As for for the popularity of vintage M42 glass with EOS and MILC owners, the same is true for K-mount and Nikon lenses. All three are widely adaptable to cameras with shorter flange distance, though perhaps not with full clearance for mirrors.


Steve

* Yes, there are several mount variants capable of open-aperture metering, but no modern body or adapter supports the feature.

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-20-2018 at 06:54 AM.
10-20-2018, 06:50 AM - 1 Like   #6
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Upstate, NY
Posts: 50
I'm not sure what would be gained... already M42 Takumars are fairly common and very reasonably priced. To reproduce a Takumar with even remotely similar quality standards would put it way above the price range of the old lenses. You can buy a pristine S-M-C Takumar 28mm f/3.5 with hood and case for around $70... less, if you are diligent. What would a reproduction of equal quality cost and would it really be any better? I'm not a digital camera user, but the only advantages of making modern M42 lenses would be 1: people might stop messing with the mounts of old lenses in an attempt to make them more digital friendly and 2: the prices of old M42 lenses might go back down a bit as more modern alternatives were available. Both of those thing are a win for users of Spotmatics (and related cameras), but the digital camera user probably wouldn't see any real improvement. Am I missing something?
10-20-2018, 06:50 AM   #7
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by HarisF1 Quote
The user is saying that Canon users often adapt Takumars and other M42 lenses onto their cameras which would create a decent market for the new M42 lenses.
My interpretation as well. The market is there, but is not mainstream.

QuoteOriginally posted by HarisF1 Quote
My concern would be that Pentax would want people to use the lenses on Pentax bodies, and an open mount like M42 prevents that.
If Pentax were to offer a line of M42 lenses, the role would be as a boutique lens producer. As an indicator of market size, one might consider that Cosina-Voigtlander manages to employ only about 500 people in the production of higher-end manual focus lenses for mirrorless cameras.


Steve

10-20-2018, 08:38 AM - 1 Like   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,464
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
One might ask Cosina-Voigtlander President, Hirobumi Kobayashi. He attempted an abortive "revival" of the mount with the release of the short-lived Bessaflex TM in 2003 and production of Voigtlander SL-series lenses in M42. Actually "revival" is a bit of a misnomer. The M42 mount never completely went away. One can still buy new Zeiss product as well as remaining stock of Meyer-Gorlitz in the mount.

The big question might be whether the niche for long flange depth lenses incapable of open-aperture metering* has sufficient market capacity to support a production initiative. Cosina's experience as well as that of Meyer-Gorlitz suggests not. As for for the popularity of vintage M42 glass with EOS and MILC owners, the same is true for K-mount and Nikon lenses. All three are widely adaptable to cameras with shorter flange distance, though perhaps not with full clearance for mirrors.


Steve

* Yes, there are several mount variants capable of open-aperture metering, but no modern body or adapter supports the feature.
Cosina was 15 years or so too early...but who knows how long the film revival will last...Millenials have a short attention span...Squirrel!
10-20-2018, 08:47 AM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,685
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
Is there room to revive the M42 Takumar brand?
Not at Ricoh/Pentax. Pentax barely has the design/production capacity to support their current mounts (see any number of forum threads complaining about this). Redesigning current lenses into satisfactory manual-focus, manual-aperture designs and manufacturing them would require additional capacity that they simply do not have (or they would be using it).

If there was significant demand for good modern M42 glass, I think companies like Samyang would be pursuing it. It would be almost trivial for them to put a different mount plate on their existing K-mount designs. For that matter, if there was significant demand for M42 versions of just the FA Limiteds, someone like Leitax would have already filled it.
10-20-2018, 09:08 AM   #10
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,722
I also see a parallel between the current manual lenses made by Cosina/Voigtlander and what a modern Takumar would be. And it looks like a small niche, although they get good press for image and build quality.

QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Cosina was 15 years or so too early...but who knows how long the film revival will last...Millenials have a short attention span...Squirrel!
The main risk I see in this "revival" is when the stock of $50-100 used film cameras in nice condition will be exhausted, and it will not be in the price range of frivolous purchases. Speaking of Cosina, I understand their Bessa line was rather nice for the money, but even so at about $700 it did not survive against digital. I'm pretty happy with my attention span, but I wonder how many would spend this money on a brand new and good quality film camera; I doubt this is something some kickstarted vaporware can deliver, it's not easy to make a camera. I probably would buy one, after some consideration, but I'd expect the overall number of users to decrease.

Last edited by aaacb; 10-20-2018 at 09:14 AM.
10-20-2018, 09:46 AM   #11
Junior Member
chazthebiker's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 41
I'm a Canon DSLR user that adapts M42 mount lenses to my 5D Mark III. I have 41 M42 lenses. There are people that also adapt them to APS-C and Micro 4/3. That said, I don't think the market is as large as one might think. I spend many hours on Ebay cataloging the 50mm f/1.4 lenses I see and one would be surprised at how many do not sell and get relisted... over and over again. There are people that say they adapt these lenses to get that "film look" in their images. BS. Film and photographic paper gives the "film look", not the lens.

I love my M42 lenses, but I don't believe reviving the old Takumars would be economically viable. As far as paying a premium over modern Canon lenses? Maybe for a scant few lenses, but the reason those "valuable" lenses are priced in the thousands is because they are truly rare. A lot of sellers on Ebay put "rare" in their listings. Very very few lenses are rare.

People buy M42 lenses for a few reasons:
1. Nostalgia
2. They don't have a lot of money and get them instead of the modern lenses.
3. They bought into the idea they give a "film look". What they really mean is that they get horrible flare, slightly out of focus (operator error), images.
4. They like to post their latest thrift store find. "I got this today for $5." So the popularity is because they can be found dirt cheap. Try to sell them now in brand new condition and you are talking big $. I have seen NIB Takumars. They cost thousands. It would not be cheap to make a lens to the build quality of the old Takumars (Think modern Zeiss).
5. They are obsessive compulsive collectors.That's me. I know of more than a few people that have literally hundreds of these old lenses. They scour Ebay for lenses that are under $20 and buy them. It doesn't even matter what the lens is. They just buy it. They even buy them when there's a fungus farm in the lens. They will tell you that they have only used most once (flower pics mostly) or have not used most at all.
6. They also like having a couple dozen adapters.

So while internet forum and Facebook forum groups would give the impression these old lenses could be a new market for new lenses they aren't. They certainly are not wildly popular enough to build new assembly lines, R&D, and hire people to build them. There just are not enough people looking to spend into the high hundreds or thousands for a modern manual focus lens. I'm frankly shocked at what Zeiss gets for their line, but Zeiss is a very old name and serves a very niche market. Somebody is going to say Zeiss is the best there is. Not true. There are modern popular brands that have lenses that beat Zeiss. Zeiss is the equivalent of the middle aged guy that buys a Porsche... because he can. There really is not something extraordinary in a photo taken with a Zeiss lens. You can't look at a photo and tell what lens the photo was taken with. I could take the same photo with 5 different lenses. You would not be able to tell me which one is the Zeiss photo and why it is. You might get lucky, but luck is all it is. [COLOR="Silver"]

---------- Post added 10-20-18 at 09:58 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Surely the M42 thread is not the driver here - what you are asking for is something like the K mount K 400 5.6. (and presumably others). That is a focus ring and manual aperture ring. Throw in modern coatings and you have a viable alternative for that wonderful old Takumar Glass without the need of an adapter. Describing Canon's heritage is not a good example as far as I can tell. Doesn't their compatibility go back only as far as 1987? K mount goes back to 1975.
There are adapters for M42 to Canon FD. There are adapters for almost everything. Some even have focus confirmation chips.

Last edited by chazthebiker; 10-20-2018 at 09:56 AM.
10-20-2018, 10:24 AM   #12
Veteran Member
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,155
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by HarisF1 Quote
I think you've misread the post.The user is saying that Canon users often adapt Takumars and other M42 lenses onto their cameras which would create a decent market for the new M42 lenses.
Yes, that would be the idea, the Takumar mount has the advantage of the stop-down switch for those bodies that can't meter open-aperture.

QuoteOriginally posted by THoog Quote
If there was significant demand for good modern M42 glass, I think companies like Samyang would be pursuing it. It would be almost trivial for them to put a different mount plate on their existing K-mount designs. For that matter, if there was significant demand for M42 versions of just the FA Limiteds, someone like Leitax would have already filled it.
If it would be trivial for Samyang, why would it require a huge effort from Pentax to do likewise with the FA Ltds?

Both Ricoh & Pentax have made limited production runs of lenses for Leica LTM, expensive yes but extremely sought after. If limited production runs in the past have been successful, there might be scope for more in greater volumes.

Yes, there's lots of old glass out there and new lenses would be more expensive, but they'd be in different focal lengths, delivering the pixie dust we know and love from the Ltds.
10-20-2018, 11:00 AM - 1 Like   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
StiffLegged's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,560
i should be delighted to see a new line of M42 lenses – I had a brace back then – and would put them to good use documenting the rebuilt horse-drawn Zeppelins...
10-20-2018, 01:37 PM   #14
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 51,584
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
With so many people adapting old lenses on all sorts of cameras, and with their M42 Takumar heritage, would it make sense for Ricoh/Pentax to revive the M42 mount, branding and form factor? The best of the current line-up (the FA Ltds & D-FA50/1.4), without the electronics and wrapped up in a retro Takumar barrel (similar to the DA20-40), the S-M-C Tak mount and A/M switch. Canon shooters are using the old lenses on their FF DSLRs, sometimes paying a premium over equivalent Canon EF lenses, so might there be a market for them as a high-end 'generic' lens line? I wouldn't mind an M42 version of my FA43 for my Spotmatics.
This is basically what Samyang is doing (in the K and other bayonet mounts). I don't think first-party brands would be able to compete, though a limited edition run or something like that would certainly be cool.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:
10-20-2018, 01:42 PM - 1 Like   #15
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,735
QuoteOriginally posted by HarisF1 Quote
I think you've misread the post.

The user is saying that Canon users often adapt Takumars and other M42 lenses onto their cameras which would create a decent market for the new M42 lenses.

My concern would be that Pentax would want people to use the lenses on Pentax bodies, and an open mount like M42 prevents that.
Ahaa missed that.
But isn't the up and coming mirrorless likely to have a shorter registration distance making lens adaption even easier i9ncluding the K mount. Surely the most important aspect of the old lenses to recreate is the presence of an aperture and focus ring.
QuoteOriginally posted by johnha Quote
Yes, that would be the idea, the Takumar mount has the advantage of the stop-down switch for those bodies that can't meter open-aperture.
Hate those evil little stopdown switches that sneak into auto when you are not looking. And jammed against the body where you can't get at them! Go the whole-hog and do preset rings.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
adapters, build, canon, focus, k-mount, lens, lenses, m42, m42 takumar, pentax lens, people, photo, slr lens, takumar, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will Pentax revive its A* lenes? wed7 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 02-18-2017 10:51 AM
New purpose for the K-01? -revive dead SDM?? pinholecam Pentax K-01 5 07-03-2012 05:38 PM
Help revive "Post a pic" thread smf Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 2 12-11-2009 04:30 AM
Did I revive these, or are they a total loss? m8o Photo Critique 11 02-01-2008 04:31 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:01 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top