[Komainu]

Hi everyone,

I just received my fixed SPF but I can't get used to the 55mm F1.8. I guess I got comfortable with the FOV of my 23mm in a mirrorless Fuji, so I would like to find a sharp 35mm for my film camera.

Should I go for the SMC f3.5 or the f2? Is the difference on price worth it?

I also got Helios 44-2, so I am more or less used to the stop-down metering and I could consider any non-SMC 35mm M42 lens...

Thank you,

[pepperberry farm]

CZJ Flektogon 35/2.4. - my copy just arrived today and it lives up to its reviews...

[parinya-ekparinya]

It depends on your shooting style and subject. In my case, the SMC Takumar 35mm f/3.5 works well for me on Spotmatic. In comparison to the f/2 version, the f/3.5 is small and lightweight. If you have to shoot in low light, however, f/2 may be a better choice.

[monochrome]

The S-M-C / SMC Takumar is sublime. Pentax seems to have a special magic designing 35mm lenses, especially the 3.5’s.

I own or have owned:
Auto-Tak, SuperTak, S-M-C Tak and K 35/3.5
SuperTak, K and FA 35/2.

Both aperture designs are really good but I’m just partial to the 3.5’s. I like the vibrant reds of 3.5’s and the razor sharpness.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 11-02-2019 at 05:55 PM.

[ChatMechant]

I recently bought a takumar 35/2, so far used only on the K1 but plan to use it on the spotmatic eventually.
Havent tried the f3.5 version but im really liking the f2.

[TwoUptons]

I love my f2...
It’s like a normal that’s slightly wider, so I don’t have to give up the speed to shoot wide.

With 400 speed film, I can shoot with it nearly anywhere.

-Eric

[Komainu]

It depends on your shooting style and subject. In my case, the SMC Takumar 35mm f/3.5 works well for me on Spotmatic. In comparison to the f/2 version, the f/3.5 is small and lightweight. If you have to shoot in low light, however, f/2 may be a better choice.

That is exactly my main worry, I guess in low light situations I could always change it for the 55mm or the Helios.

[Komainu]

The Flektogon f2.4 is indeed gorgeous, yet expensive. I might consider it in the future.

[Snapppy]

I just received my fixed SPF but I can't get used to the 55mm F1.8. I guess I got comfortable with the FOV of my 23mm in a mirrorless Fuji, so I would like to find a sharp 35mm for my film camera.

I'm with you, I prefer 35mm as a really good everything documenting lens, like taking pictures of the family, which is most of my photography these days.

I just sold/traded my takumar 35mm f2, here's my list of what I liked and why I sold it.
-Compact, at least my version was, I'm not sure about the larger filter version. A lot smaller than my other 35mm lenses.
-Pretty fast for when you need it.
-Awesome build, of course.
-Pretty easy to focus.
-Really nice image quality with that nice takumar touch.

Why I sold it?
-Too many lenses in that focal range, and it was getting used the least, because of the following:
-My other larger, heavy, less portable 35mm could open to 1.4 and was sharper at that aperture than the tak at f2. This was important to me at this time in my life because I shoot a lot of my kid indoors, so I need the extra light help and sharpness wide open. This wasn't a m42 mount, but I decided to move to my K mount film cameras with this lens and just have one lens.

So, I can't help with the question about the 3.5 or 2 versions, but those were my thoughts. I really liked the lens, just felt bad having it sit around rarely used.

I have some shots from my Spotmatic with this lens, actually. I used cheap expired film so that part isn't so good because there's some mushiness because of that, but maybe it helps still.

[parinya-ekparinya]

That is exactly my main worry, I guess in low light situations I could always change it for the 55mm or the Helios.

If you have to shoot in low light, I would suggest you go with f/2 version. Sometimes, changing the focal length is not an option.
Rather than using a film camera, I would rather use a digital camera in low light.

[Komainu]

Snapppy, Thank you for such a detailed answer. These kind of photos are exactly what I am looking forward with the SP.

Sometimes, changing the focal length is not an option.

Agreed, I'm not the best at being prepared all the time...

[sergysergy]

The 35 f2 is very good but the 35 2.3 is the most fun!

[Komainu]

The 35 f2 is very good but the 35 2.3 is the most fun!

I bet it is, it will be a tough decision to make. Hope I can find one at a reasonable price.

[pathdoc]

To my eyes, putting anything other than an SMC-series Takumar on the Spotmatic F defeats the purpose. In that context, how much do you need the extra stop-and-a-half?

[EssJayEff]

I'm trying to learn my Pentax history, so my reply is in that context and is just for fun. Searching old newspapers online, I found that the Spotmatic F became available in the United States in November 1973. (Sorry I don't have access to Japanese newspapers in written in English!)

A February 1973 advertisement citing several SMC Takumars has the f/2.0 list price of $229.50 ($1,327 adjusted for inflation in 2019 USD) on sale for $163 ($942), and the f/3.5 at list price of $119.50 ($691) on sale for $84.44 ($488). The f/2.0 lens was quite a bit more expensive than the f/3.5 and was kinda pricey back then! By comparison, today's SMCP-FA 35mm f/2.0, introduced in February of this year at $399, has a regular price of $347 but can be bought on sale today for $290.