Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-06-2008, 10:22 PM   #1
Junior Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
takumar bayonet 135mm f2.8, tamron adaptall 105mm f2.5

found these lenses on ebay, wondering which of these would be the better buy. the takumar bayonet 135mm f2.5 cops a lot of flak from what i've researched, so im inclined to think that this 2.8 version might not be that great either, but of course if the price is right (eg cheap!) then i might go for it.

then there's this tamron 105mm f2.5
from the same seller which i can find very little on the internet, i believe its model ct-105, which was made in 1976.

any experience with these lenses?

im inclined to get the tamron because of the oh-so-slightly higher speed and shorter range for portraiture use.

Attached Images
10-06-2008, 10:23 PM   #2
Junior Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
Original Poster
oh and the tamron is multi-coated where the takumar bayonet is not, if i researched correctly.
10-07-2008, 02:54 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
First off, the received wisdom on K mount Takumars as being poor quality is a relative judgement, on the level of if it ain't the best it's crap. They ain't the best but they are far from crap.

That said, I would poach that there Tamron in a heartbeat. The one on ebay has a Nikon mount, but your pic seems to show a screw mount? Unless you already have a K adaptall mount, you'll have a bit of extra expense buying it. description:

* モデル名:CT-105 Model Name: CT-105
* マウント:アダプトール Mounting: ADAPUTORU
* 焦点距離:105mm Focal length: 105mm
* 開放F値:2.5 Open F value: 2.5
* レンズ構成:4群4枚 Lens construction: 4 of 4 pieces
* 最小絞り:22 Minimum aperture: 22
* 最短撮影距離:1.3m Minimum focusing distance: 1.3m
* フィルター径:52mm Filter size: 52mm
* 重さ:275g Weight: 275g
* 最大径X全長:64.5mmx52mm Maximum diameter X Length: 64.5mmx52mm
* 価格:\26,000 Price: \ 26,000
* 発売時期::1976 Release date:: 1976
* 製造終了:1979(推定) Manufacturing end: 1979 (estimated)

Note that the 105 is an ADAPTALL lens, not an ADAPTALL-2. I can't recall if an Adaptall-2 mount works with plain adaptall.

Anyhow, the 105 is one of the sleeper-gems in Tamron's line up. If I had the ready cash and lower ethics I'd have bought this from under you already, I've been looking for one for a few months now. Apart from the mount issue, which may or may not be an issue for you, I'd say run don't walk!
10-07-2008, 07:02 AM   #4
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,384
I own this exact Takumar bayonet (the much rarer f2,8 version) and even if I do not use it a lot, it's a really nice lens. Build quality is really, really impressive, the built-in hood is great, mine is quite sharp, does not vignette, and has limited CA. Wide open it's not perfect, of course, CA increases, contrast and sharpness decrease, but not that much.

The lack of multi-coatings mean that it can be more prone to flare and ghosting (I have not really noticed any, and the hood solves a lot of issues) and contrast can be lower than comparable SMC lenses. I have no real grounds for comparison, so I won't comment on this.

Depending on the price, it can be a really good deal, a fast tele is rarely wasted money. For me, it's just that I have a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3,5, so the 135 mm focal length is pretty well covered already.

10-07-2008, 07:35 AM   #5
filmamigo's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 765
I really like my Takumar (bayonet) 135/2.5. I think it has an undeserved bad rap. But I really like the Super-Taks too, so maybe I'm immune to needing SMC on every lens.

The construction quality is great, just like any M lens. The built in hood is so handy, there's no excuse to not use the hood on every shot. This negates most of those pesky flare issues!

If the price is right, I wouldn't think twice about that 2.8.
10-07-2008, 04:51 PM   #6
Junior Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
Original Poster
thanks for your help guys. the tamron is a pentax-k adaptall mount, i checked. nothing wrong with getting both i suppose :P
10-07-2008, 05:43 PM   #7
Veteran Member
maxwell1295's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,703
I had the 135mm version of that Tamron lens. The only reason I got rid of it was that it was too long for what I needed. I actually ended up replacing it with a Super Tak 135mm.

I'd keep the Tamron. The coatings on that lens are really good and the lens should be a good performer. The Tamron-F BBAR lenses were supposed to be Tamron's answer to Vivitar's Series 1 lenses.
10-07-2008, 09:15 PM   #8
Junior Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
Original Poster
looks like both lens have their own merits. ill just leave it down to price then. i use a k200d, so after crop factor 135 may be too long, though 105 isnt much shorter. right now im inclined more towards the tamron, but we'll just see how bidding goes. LBA is killing me man. haha.

10-07-2008, 09:38 PM   #9
Veteran Member
ve2vfd's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,432
I have the Takumar Bayonnet 135 2.8 and though it gets savaged in some reviews, I absolutely LOVE it...

Here is what it can do:

I got mine for cheap and honesly if you shoot it within it's limitations (It IS not SMC coated so you have to take that into consideration) it's a great lens.

10-07-2008, 10:40 PM   #10
Junior Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
Original Poster
wow those are pretty damn nice. now if only someone has the tamron to show. this is one of the reasons i love pentax. i could buy legacy lenses all day.
04-03-2010, 11:27 PM   #11
New Member

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 21
Sorry to resurrect this thread.

What kind of adapter do I need to fit the Takumar Bayonet on a Pentax (K mount)?

Is it a m42 as I soon often read about in other lenses?

From research it is a special Bayonet screw?
04-04-2010, 04:14 AM   #12
Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 115
I don't think you need an adapter. I think that the word "bayonet" refers to the original k mount.
04-04-2010, 08:39 AM   #13
Senior Member
older not wiser's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: East Yorkshire
Posts: 120
Any Takumar Bayonet will fit any Pentax camera with a bayonet fitting (such as the K10 or KX). You will only be able to use it in manual mode, just look in the instruction book it will tell you how its really easy.

  • 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!
105mm, 135mm, bayonet, f2.5, im, k-mount, lenses, pentax lens, slr lens, takumar, takumar bayonet 135mm, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: 50mm Macro Takumar, Rikenon 135mm, M42 accessories, Tamron Adaptall. (US/CAN) Clarkey Sold Items 8 10-11-2010 07:45 AM
Hood for Takumar Bayonet 135mm f/2.5? jatrax Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 07-06-2010 07:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: Takumar (Bayonet) 135mm f2.5 GrandVVazoo Sold Items 9 09-21-2009 03:17 PM
For Sale - Sold: Takumar bayonet 135mm f2.8 meszidik Sold Items 1 03-16-2009 07:26 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:32 PM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]