SMC Takumar 17mm fisheye VS Minolta Rokkor 16mm fisheye lens

kmcsmart · 10-15-2021, 11:00 AM

Hello,
I am looking for a fisheye lens and I am considering the SMC Takumar 17mm f4 vs the Minolta Rokkor 16mm f2.8 lens.
I have searched the web but I can't seem to find a comparison between the two lenses. There is not as much info on the Minolta Rocker 16mm lens either. There are a few reviews that say it's a nice lens but no references to other lenses.

If anyone here has some experience with the two lenses I would love to hear from you.
Thanks
Karen

**Bob 256** · 10-15-2021, 11:22 AM - **1 Like**

Here are a couple of reviews that might help.

S-M-C/Super Fish-Eye-Takumar 17mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Extreme Wide-Angle Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

https://casualphotophile.com/2014/08/10/minolta-rokkor-16mm-fish-eye-lens/

**MossyRocks** · 10-15-2021, 11:23 AM - **1 Like**

I only have the SMC 17/4 Takumar. On full frame the Tak is a fun lens once you have it figured out. On APS-C it is harder to use as it basically becomes a wide with a lot of distortion but can still be fun once you figure that out. One of my favorite shots I took with it was of Devil's Tower where I was standing at the base of it looking up, if you thought it was tall before the picture make it look like it reaches to space. At f/4 the Tak is pretty soft and has lots of CA issues on modern cameras but I find it gets good around f/8 to f/11 and then it is perfectly fine. I did try it for astro shooting and the lesson I learned there is don't bother, It is slow and nothing but problems. Old ultrawides were not a solved problem and while you can paper over some of their issues there are cases where you really can't.

As far as making a decision I would suggest looking up shots that people have taken with both that fit your shooting style and from there pick the one that gives the rendering you like.

Not a Number · 10-15-2021, 03:14 PM - **1 Like**

You would need an SR/MD to K-mount adapter for the Minolta lens which will have an optical element for infinity focus. You can buy adapters without the optical element but then you are adding a ~10mm extension tube to the lens so there is no infinity focus. The furthest focus would probably be in the 1-2 foot range.

What body would you be using these on? A mirrorless body with the proper adapters would give you focus to infinity on either.

Most of the Minolta reviews sites are long gone.

**UncleVanya** · 10-15-2021, 07:37 PM - **2 Likes**

https://transienteye.com/2018/06/12/review-the-minolta-md-16mm-f2-8-fish-eye/

The Rokkor Files - Minolta 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye Review

md fisheye rokkor-x 16mm f2.8 photos on Flickr | Flickr

MINOLTA 16mm & 18mm LENSES

And more…

kmcsmart · 10-15-2021, 07:45 PM

That’s all great info. The Minolta review was packed full of info. I will have a look at flicker too.
I have several Takumar lenses but no Pentax cameras. I will be using the fisheye lens on mirrorless cameras - an Olympus EM1 Mark iii but mostly on a full frame Leica SL.

The Minolta fisheye could be my first Minolta lens. I like the fact that it is a little faster and wider than the Takumar and the Minoltas were also made for Leica R so it seems appropriate for an SL as a nod to the historical relationship. The Minolta is a heavy lens I guess that is the only downside according to the review.

If I do get the lens I will post some pictures here, if that’s appropriate. It would be fun to do a side by side comparison with the Takumar if I ever get my hands on one.
Karen

**UncleVanya** · 10-15-2021, 07:49 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kmcsmart

That’s all great info. The Minolta review was packed full of info. I will have a look at flicker too.
I have several Takumar lenses but no Pentax cameras. I will be using the fisheye lens on mirrorless cameras - an Olympus EM1 Mark iii but mostly on a full frame Leica SL.

The Minolta fisheye could be my first Minolta lens. I like the fact that it is a little faster and wider than the Takumar and the Minoltas were also made for Leica R so it seems appropriate for an SL as a nod to the historical relationship. The Minolta is a heavy lens I guess that is the only downside according to the review.

If I do get the lens I will post some pictures here, if that’s appropriate. It would be fun to do a side by side comparison with the Takumar if I ever get my hands on one.
Karen

That’s sounds like a great plan.

grainy · 10-25-2021, 01:12 AM

The Minolta 16 has less distortion in my opinion, but the 17 wins in definition. I have only used analog (SRT-101, Spotmatic).

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-25-2021, 04:26 AM - **1 Like**

Have you considered the zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye. They are available new for a reasonable price, both in k mount and M43. K mount is about a 10% premium on price.

I got mine about 10 years ago from kremlin optics for less than 200 cdn

stevebrot · 10-25-2021, 09:35 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Have you considered the zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye. They are available new for a reasonable price, both in k mount and M43. K mount is about a 10% premium on price.

I got mine about 10 years ago from kremlin optics for less than 200 cdn

I am exceedingly fond of mine. If adapting to Leica SL, one can be purchased new in Canon EF, Nikon F, or M42 from multiple sources.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1555695-REG/zenit_5473_16mm_f_2_8_fis...981&

Steve

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-25-2021, 10:41 AM - **1 Like**

Wow, look at current prices on the Zenitar fisheye! I feel like my dad - "$3500 for a new car, that's outrageous!"

kmcsmart · 10-26-2021, 05:28 AM

Originally posted by grainy

The Minolta 16 has less distortion in my opinion, but the 17 wins in definition. I have only used analog (SRT-101, Spotmatic).

Thanks for the info. I was hoping to hear from someone who had used both lenses. By definition do you mean it is sharper edge to edge?

kypfer · 10-26-2021, 11:51 AM - **1 Like**

Not used either of the quoted lenses, mostly 'cos I'm still happy with the screw-mount Fujinon 16mm f/2.8 fisheye I bought back in the '80's

**gofour3** · 10-26-2021, 12:20 PM - **1 Like**

The Pentax A16/2.8 Fish-eye is a great lens and it has the "A" aperture setting, if you are wanting to use it on a digital camera.

For use on an old film camera, it has built-in filters and of course an aperture ring.

It's on the pricey side though.

Phil.

grainy · 10-26-2021, 07:44 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kmcsmart

Thanks for the info. I was hoping to hear from someone who had used both lenses. By definition do you mean it is sharper edge to edge?

Yes, compared to 16 it shows right from the start.

10-15-2021, 11:00 AM	#1
kmcsmart Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2021 Location: Ottawa, Ontario Posts: 36	SMC Takumar 17mm fisheye VS Minolta Rokkor 16mm fisheye lens Hello, I am looking for a fisheye lens and I am considering the SMC Takumar 17mm f4 vs the Minolta Rokkor 16mm f2.8 lens. I have searched the web but I can't seem to find a comparison between the two lenses. There is not as much info on the Minolta Rocker 16mm lens either. There are a few reviews that say it's a nice lens but no references to other lenses. If anyone here has some experience with the two lenses I would love to hear from you. Thanks Karen

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f2 (Minolta MD-mount)	pepperberry farm	Lens Sample Photo Archive	17	4 Days Ago 03:43 AM
Abstract An oldie I found using the Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f2	Louis_Lal	Post Your Photos!	6	12-17-2021 02:48 AM
For Sale - Sold: Minolta Autocord w/ Rokkor 78mm lens	Dewman	Sold Items	2	02-01-2020 09:21 PM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM

10-15-2021, 11:22 AM - 1 Like	#2
Bob 256 Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Idaho Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,378	Here are a couple of reviews that might help. S-M-C/Super Fish-Eye-Takumar 17mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Extreme Wide-Angle Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database https://casualphotophile.com/2014/08/10/minolta-rokkor-16mm-fish-eye-lens/

10-15-2021, 11:23 AM - 1 Like	#3
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	I only have the SMC 17/4 Takumar. On full frame the Tak is a fun lens once you have it figured out. On APS-C it is harder to use as it basically becomes a wide with a lot of distortion but can still be fun once you figure that out. One of my favorite shots I took with it was of Devil's Tower where I was standing at the base of it looking up, if you thought it was tall before the picture make it look like it reaches to space. At f/4 the Tak is pretty soft and has lots of CA issues on modern cameras but I find it gets good around f/8 to f/11 and then it is perfectly fine. I did try it for astro shooting and the lesson I learned there is don't bother, It is slow and nothing but problems. Old ultrawides were not a solved problem and while you can paper over some of their issues there are cases where you really can't. As far as making a decision I would suggest looking up shots that people have taken with both that fit your shooting style and from there pick the one that gives the rendering you like.

10-15-2021, 03:14 PM - 1 Like	#4
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,526	You would need an SR/MD to K-mount adapter for the Minolta lens which will have an optical element for infinity focus. You can buy adapters without the optical element but then you are adding a ~10mm extension tube to the lens so there is no infinity focus. The furthest focus would probably be in the 1-2 foot range. What body would you be using these on? A mirrorless body with the proper adapters would give you focus to infinity on either. Most of the Minolta reviews sites are long gone.

10-15-2021, 07:37 PM - 2 Likes	#5
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,454	https://transienteye.com/2018/06/12/review-the-minolta-md-16mm-f2-8-fish-eye/ The Rokkor Files - Minolta 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye Review md fisheye rokkor-x 16mm f2.8 photos on Flickr \| Flickr MINOLTA 16mm & 18mm LENSES And more…

10-15-2021, 07:45 PM	#6
kmcsmart Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2021 Location: Ottawa, Ontario Posts: 36 Original Poster	That’s all great info. The Minolta review was packed full of info. I will have a look at flicker too. I have several Takumar lenses but no Pentax cameras. I will be using the fisheye lens on mirrorless cameras - an Olympus EM1 Mark iii but mostly on a full frame Leica SL. The Minolta fisheye could be my first Minolta lens. I like the fact that it is a little faster and wider than the Takumar and the Minoltas were also made for Leica R so it seems appropriate for an SL as a nod to the historical relationship. The Minolta is a heavy lens I guess that is the only downside according to the review. If I do get the lens I will post some pictures here, if that’s appropriate. It would be fun to do a side by side comparison with the Takumar if I ever get my hands on one. Karen

10-15-2021, 07:49 PM - 1 Like	#7
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,454	Originally posted by kmcsmart That’s all great info. The Minolta review was packed full of info. I will have a look at flicker too. I have several Takumar lenses but no Pentax cameras. I will be using the fisheye lens on mirrorless cameras - an Olympus EM1 Mark iii but mostly on a full frame Leica SL. The Minolta fisheye could be my first Minolta lens. I like the fact that it is a little faster and wider than the Takumar and the Minoltas were also made for Leica R so it seems appropriate for an SL as a nod to the historical relationship. The Minolta is a heavy lens I guess that is the only downside according to the review. If I do get the lens I will post some pictures here, if that’s appropriate. It would be fun to do a side by side comparison with the Takumar if I ever get my hands on one. Karen That’s sounds like a great plan.

10-25-2021, 01:12 AM	#8
grainy New Member Join Date: Oct 2021 Posts: 6	The Minolta 16 has less distortion in my opinion, but the 17 wins in definition. I have only used analog (SRT-101, Spotmatic).

10-25-2021, 04:26 AM - 1 Like	#9
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	Have you considered the zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye. They are available new for a reasonable price, both in k mount and M43. K mount is about a 10% premium on price. I got mine about 10 years ago from kremlin optics for less than 200 cdn

10-25-2021, 09:35 AM - 1 Like	#10
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Have you considered the zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye. They are available new for a reasonable price, both in k mount and M43. K mount is about a 10% premium on price. I got mine about 10 years ago from kremlin optics for less than 200 cdn I am exceedingly fond of mine. If adapting to Leica SL, one can be purchased new in Canon EF, Nikon F, or M42 from multiple sources. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1555695-REG/zenit_5473_16mm_f_2_8_fis...981& Steve

10-25-2021, 10:41 AM - 1 Like	#11
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Wow, look at current prices on the Zenitar fisheye! I feel like my dad - "$3500 for a new car, that's outrageous!"

10-26-2021, 05:28 AM	#12
kmcsmart Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2021 Location: Ottawa, Ontario Posts: 36 Original Poster	Originally posted by grainy The Minolta 16 has less distortion in my opinion, but the 17 wins in definition. I have only used analog (SRT-101, Spotmatic). Thanks for the info. I was hoping to hear from someone who had used both lenses. By definition do you mean it is sharper edge to edge?

10-26-2021, 11:51 AM - 1 Like	#13
kypfer Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2018 Location: Jersey C.I. Posts: 3,596	Not used either of the quoted lenses, mostly 'cos I'm still happy with the screw-mount Fujinon 16mm f/2.8 fisheye I bought back in the '80's

10-26-2021, 12:20 PM - 1 Like	#14
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,092	The Pentax A16/2.8 Fish-eye is a great lens and it has the "A" aperture setting, if you are wanting to use it on a digital camera. For use on an old film camera, it has built-in filters and of course an aperture ring. It's on the pricey side though. Phil.

10-26-2021, 07:44 PM - 1 Like	#15
grainy New Member Join Date: Oct 2021 Posts: 6	Originally posted by kmcsmart Thanks for the info. I was hoping to hear from someone who had used both lenses. By definition do you mean it is sharper edge to edge? Yes, compared to 16 it shows right from the start.