135mm comparison : Samyang 135/2, Takumar 135/2.5, Sigma 135/1.8

CarbonR · 03-30-2021, 10:02 PM - **2 Likes**

The Takumar 135/2.5 V2 stands up well for a near-50-years old lens, and also has a bokeh similar to the Samyang.
The Sigma is just for the fun of the big gront lens. It is a stop faster than the Takumar but at the cost of the sharpness.
I almost see no difference between f/2.8 and f/4 on the Samyang, this is quite incredible.

Lhorn · 03-30-2021, 10:25 PM

Thanks for posting. I agree that the Tak holds up well. I’d be interested to see how the Pentax M 135 compares. Anyone know if the M version is optically different than the Takumar lens?

CarbonR · 03-30-2021, 10:28 PM

If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO).

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-31-2021, 03:58 AM

When I look at the images, it appears that it was either windy or the testing was done over several hours(days?) because the hair on the troll is different between lenses and some times within shots. This puts a question of control into play.

Also, it appears that the focus is missed on the Samyang and sigma lenses, sharper off centre than center. The tak nailed focus spot on in the center

**GUB** · 03-31-2021, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by CarbonR

If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO).

My results put the Tak Bayonet at the top of the heap. But notice my M42 Takumar 135 2.5 is version one.
Every time I put my M series up against anything it fails dismally. But could well be sample variation.
The poor old much maligned Takumar Bayonet group. - PentaxForums.com

**UncleVanya** · 03-31-2021, 06:48 AM

My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens.

CarbonR · 03-31-2021, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

When I look at the images, it appears that it was either windy or the testing was done over several hours(days?) because the hair on the troll is different between lenses and some times within shots. This puts a question of control into play.

Also, it appears that the focus is missed on the Samyang and sigma lenses, sharper off centre than center. The tak nailed focus spot on in the center

It was a bit windy. But the big advantage of the hait is that even with a slight different focus, there is always some hait in focus

Originally posted by UncleVanya

My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens.

Same here (I had one Takumar bayonet). Not that bad about sharpness, but full of CA and glow.

**MossyRocks** · 03-31-2021, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens.

I should probably sell mine off. There isn't anything wrong with it but I already have 2 other 135mm lenses that I like better. One I like better for daytime shooting and the other for astro shooting so the bayonet Takumar never gets used. I got the 135/2.5 Bayonet Takumar at a stole it price and just wanted to see how it did for astro shooting but shortly after that I got the really good for astro Samyang/Rokinon 135/2 UMC which is a phenomenal astro lens.

ZombieArmy · 03-31-2021, 07:37 PM

Originally posted by CarbonR

If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO).

The Tak bayonet is a more modern 4 element design and it is extremely sharp. The lens really isn't usable at 2.5 though, it's likely a 2.8 lens cheated to be 2.5.

---------- Post added 03-31-21 at 10:39 PM ----------

Originally posted by UncleVanya

My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens.

I don't share the same experience. CA is relatively well controlled but is susceptible to veiled flare causing lower contrast.

03-30-2021, 10:02 PM - 2 Likes	#1
CarbonR Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France Posts: 363	135mm comparison : Samyang 135/2, Takumar 135/2.5, Sigma 135/1.8 The Takumar 135/2.5 V2 stands up well for a near-50-years old lens, and also has a bokeh similar to the Samyang. The Sigma is just for the fun of the big gront lens. It is a stop faster than the Takumar but at the cost of the sharpness. I almost see no difference between f/2.8 and f/4 on the Samyang, this is quite incredible.

03-31-2021, 02:54 PM	#8
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	Originally posted by UncleVanya My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens. I should probably sell mine off. There isn't anything wrong with it but I already have 2 other 135mm lenses that I like better. One I like better for daytime shooting and the other for astro shooting so the bayonet Takumar never gets used. I got the 135/2.5 Bayonet Takumar at a stole it price and just wanted to see how it did for astro shooting but shortly after that I got the really good for astro Samyang/Rokinon 135/2 UMC which is a phenomenal astro lens. Last edited by MossyRocks; 04-01-2021 at 10:03 AM. Reason: correcting typos

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Coating and Lens formula comparison in Takumar 135mm 3.5 models.	GUB	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	12-18-2018 01:36 AM
FA 135 2.8, K 135 2.5 or Samyang 135 F2?	ZombieArmy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	05-24-2018 12:35 PM
Samyang 14 2.8 vs Samyang 24 1.4 for Astrophotography	reivax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	09-15-2017 01:50 PM
Rokinon (Bower/Samyang) 8mm Fisheye, DA 10-17 Fisheye, and Sigma 10-20 comparison	mgvh	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	01-06-2016 07:55 PM
Which 135mm Takumar is Better, the 135mm/2.5 or the 135mm/3.5?	zx-m	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	23	08-23-2010 05:59 PM

03-30-2021, 10:25 PM	#2
Lhorn Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2019 Posts: 554	Thanks for posting. I agree that the Tak holds up well. I’d be interested to see how the Pentax M 135 compares. Anyone know if the M version is optically different than the Takumar lens?

03-30-2021, 10:28 PM	#3
CarbonR Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France Posts: 363 Original Poster	If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO).

03-31-2021, 03:58 AM	#4
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	When I look at the images, it appears that it was either windy or the testing was done over several hours(days?) because the hair on the troll is different between lenses and some times within shots. This puts a question of control into play. Also, it appears that the focus is missed on the Samyang and sigma lenses, sharper off centre than center. The tak nailed focus spot on in the center

03-31-2021, 04:10 AM	#5
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Originally posted by CarbonR If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO). My results put the Tak Bayonet at the top of the heap. But notice my M42 Takumar 135 2.5 is version one. Every time I put my M series up against anything it fails dismally. But could well be sample variation. The poor old much maligned Takumar Bayonet group. - PentaxForums.com

03-31-2021, 06:48 AM	#6
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens.

03-31-2021, 12:51 PM	#7
CarbonR Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France Posts: 363 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge When I look at the images, it appears that it was either windy or the testing was done over several hours(days?) because the hair on the troll is different between lenses and some times within shots. This puts a question of control into play. Also, it appears that the focus is missed on the Samyang and sigma lenses, sharper off centre than center. The tak nailed focus spot on in the center It was a bit windy. But the big advantage of the hait is that even with a slight different focus, there is always some hait in focus Originally posted by UncleVanya My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens. Same here (I had one Takumar bayonet). Not that bad about sharpness, but full of CA and glow.

03-31-2021, 07:37 PM	#9
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210	Originally posted by CarbonR If I am right, the K 135/2.5 is the same optical formula. The Takumar bayonet is another one, far beyond (even worst than the Takumar 135/2.5 V1 IMO). The Tak bayonet is a more modern 4 element design and it is extremely sharp. The lens really isn't usable at 2.5 though, it's likely a 2.8 lens cheated to be 2.5. ---------- Post added 03-31-21 at 10:39 PM ---------- Originally posted by UncleVanya My tak bayonet 135 f2.5 has serious ca in some situations and I’ve seen (I think) sensor flare from reflected light. Otherwise it’s a nice lens. I don't share the same experience. CA is relatively well controlled but is susceptible to veiled flare causing lower contrast.