Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-11-2009, 12:13 PM   #16
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
Oh, the focus ring spun round without any effect on the lens, the aperture rings were hanging so loosely that they could be gently pulled about 3-4mm apart, giving view to the interior of the lens; and they would not turn at all to open or close the diaphragm. Plus the glass was dirty as heck, as one might expect. I worked at it a little, though, and it seemed function could be restored, so I dropped it off at my local camera repair place. They said another $70 to clean and repair, so not such a bargain but hopefully still a good lens out the other end. No response from the seller, of course. :-(

03-11-2009, 12:17 PM   #17
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
Oh, the focus ring spun round without any effect on the lens, the aperture rings were hanging so loosely that they could be gently pulled about 3-4mm apart, giving view to the interior of the lens; and they would not turn at all to open or close the diaphragm. Plus the glass was dirty as heck, as one might expect. I worked at it a little, though, and it seemed function could be restored, so I dropped it off at my local camera repair place. They said another $70 to clean and repair, so not such a bargain but hopefully still a good lens out the other end. No response from the seller, of course. :-(
Reward the seller with a negative feedback.
03-11-2009, 12:35 PM   #18
Veteran Member
arpaagent's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 777
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
Oh, the focus ring spun round without any effect on the lens, the aperture rings were hanging so loosely that they could be gently pulled about 3-4mm apart, giving view to the interior of the lens; and they would not turn at all to open or close the diaphragm. Plus the glass was dirty as heck, as one might expect. I worked at it a little, though, and it seemed function could be restored, so I dropped it off at my local camera repair place. They said another $70 to clean and repair, so not such a bargain but hopefully still a good lens out the other end. No response from the seller, of course. :-(
Wow that sucks. I empathize with you, and how you must have felt when you opened the box . I received one package with some decent gear (M40, M135, M50), but only to realize they were all heavily infested with fungi. Luckily in that case, the seller was very understanding and allowed me to return the items. Hopefully you will be able to do that in this case, as it sounds to be pretty rough.

Good luck resolving this issue,
-Jim
03-11-2009, 12:49 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
Tried to tighten the screws on the focus ring? Also screw out the the filterring. Its a long conical one that loosen quite easily, under it there are 4 small screws if i remember correctly that probably needs tightening.

03-11-2009, 01:00 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 19
Is the SMC (M42) version as good as the original non-SMC? Also, does it have the same aperture shape at f8?

Cheers
Rowan

(First post, Woot!)

Ahh had i done my research first i would have known the SMC version doesn't go to 1:1 and doesnt have the 8-elements that the original has, nevermind, keep looking i guess.

Last edited by rowan57; 03-11-2009 at 01:08 PM. Reason: Not research enough!
03-11-2009, 01:17 PM   #21
Veteran Member
X Man's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 478
No, no, no, no no. There's a system in place at ebay and Paypal that is for just such occasions. The item is obviously unusable and sounds like rubbish. It's not up to you to spend an extra $70 to hopefully, repair it. Furthermore, dropping it off for repair may hinder returning it or getting reimbursed for it.

Still, you should do what you should have done immediately when unable to contact the seller, file a dispute with paypal via ebay for "item significantly not as described". Wait about 3 days for a response from seller. Escalate to a Paypal "Claim". Wait another week and if seller doesn't respond you automatically get all your money back. If contact is made you'll need to provide PP with some more evidence. They'll tell you what you need.

The whole process will take under 30 days. That's what the system is in place for, use it.

Oh, and leave negative feedback.

Regards,
Mike
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
... They said another $70 to clean and repair, so not such a bargain but hopefully still a good lens out the other end. No response from the seller, of course. :-(
03-11-2009, 01:33 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,859
QuoteOriginally posted by rowan57 Quote
Is the SMC (M42) version as good as the original non-SMC? Also, does it have the same aperture shape at f8?

Cheers
Rowan

(First post, Woot!)

Ahh had i done my research first i would have known the SMC version doesn't go to 1:1 and doesnt have the 8-elements that the original has, nevermind, keep looking i guess.
Also these lenses have the front element recessed so far, it's effectively always using a hood. That helps reduce the need for flare-resistant coatings.
03-11-2009, 02:41 PM   #23
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Reward the seller with a negative feedback.
It is surprising to me that someone would be willing to get bad feedback for a measly $70, but so it goes. I wasn't that upset, I mean I had already done the math: Out-of-focus picture + minimal description + a random "lens sold as is" just underneath where it says "7 day return period" with "money back" = possibly a scam. But she had a lot of good feedback. I suppose I could do something with PayPal to get my money back, but it seems the lens will prove salvageable. Here's hoping!

03-12-2009, 10:12 AM   #24
Veteran Member
troyz's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 389
QuoteOriginally posted by rowan57 Quote
Is the SMC (M42) version as good as the original non-SMC? Also, does it have the same aperture shape at f8?

Cheers
Rowan

(First post, Woot!)

Ahh had i done my research first i would have known the SMC version doesn't go to 1:1 and doesnt have the 8-elements that the original has, nevermind, keep looking i guess.
Welcome to the forum!

Actually, all the Pentax 50mm/f4 macro lenses have a similar (Tessar-type) optical design, and differ primarily in coatings and mechanical details.

Die Cast Pro - Macro-Takumar 50mm f/4.0 1:1

That being said, IMHO the preset screwmount version is damn good looking.

Someone really ought to start a "Tessar-type" club to get all the Pentax 50 macro/Volna/Industar/Tessar people together!

Sorry to hear about Nick's bad e-bay experience. I think X-man's policy is good (except that I wouldn't enter any e-bay feedback while still trying to negotiate a return with the seller; the e-bay feedback is the only leverage you've got).
03-12-2009, 10:26 AM   #25
Veteran Member
X Man's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 478
Thanks, but I'd leave the negative after warning the seller I was planning on doing so, in order to give them one last shot at resolution. Otherwise, you'd only attempt further contact with the seller to bolster the PayPal dispute/claim. Leaving a well deserved negative shouldn't have any unwanted effect on the Paypal case and it actually might help prove that you're serious.

Regards,
Mike
QuoteOriginally posted by troyz Quote
I think X-man's policy is good (except that I wouldn't enter any e-bay feedback while still trying to negotiate a return with the seller; the e-bay feedback is the only leverage you've got).
03-12-2009, 12:03 PM   #26
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 19
Hmmm i might look into one of the 50/4's then, i want a new macro, gotta love M42 though!
03-12-2009, 07:20 PM   #27
Site Supporter
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,152
As an update, late today they wrote with an address to where I could return it. The reply comes over 72 hours after I first wrote them, but it lessens my bad feeling about their operation. They didn't make any guarantee of condition, just of return. I may just give a neutral feedback, after all.

And the repair people were quite optimistic it could be restored to good condition. So here's hoping!

rowan57, I will strongly recommend any of the Super-Macro-Takumar 50mm f/4, the SMC M macro 50mm f/4, or the Sears/Soligor m42 55mm f/2.8 macro. I think someone is selling one of the latter on the marketplace right now. And yes, I have a LBA problem. :-)
03-13-2009, 08:34 AM   #28
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 19
Cheers Nick, im definitely looking more at the M42 mount Tak's, i love the M42, its such a solid sensible mount!
03-23-2009, 10:15 AM   #29
emr
Guest




As I'm still waiting for mine to arrive, I'd like to ask whether this lens is OK wide open? Or does the picture quality demand usually stepping down a stop or two?
03-23-2009, 11:40 AM   #30
Veteran Member
arpaagent's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 777
Original Poster
From what I've shot with it, the lens is quite sharp wide open (as a lot of macros are). I did some macro shots this weekend (some with this lens) that I hope to get up here pretty soon. I didn't do a lot of wide open shots b/c the DOF is tiny for macro at only f/4, but I think I have a few that I could share...or could take a few this afternoon if I get home before it gets dark.

-Jim
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!
50mm, extension, f4, k-mount, lens, macro-takumar, macro-takumar 50mm f4, magnification, pentax lens, shape, shots, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Macro Takumar f/4 50mm Asudef Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 02-17-2012 07:45 AM
[macro] Computing magnification? miks Photographic Technique 7 10-25-2010 05:42 AM
For Sale - Sold: Macro-Takumar 50mm f4 (native 1:1 magnification) arpaagent Sold Items 2 04-12-2009 08:24 PM
For Sale - Sold: Super Macro Takumar 50mm, Super Takumar 200mm, F 35-80mm Lenses Nick Siebers Sold Items 4 02-01-2009 08:56 PM
Macro Magnification ccallana Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 04-20-2007 03:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 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