Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-22-2009, 10:00 AM   #1
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
M 50/1.4 vs smc 55/1.8 tak Worth

Is spending 90+ $ on a M 50/1.4 with fungus (wich is described to have stopped growing) worth it, as an alternative to fully converting good (glueing adaptor, grilling holde, sanding or removing with aceton base paint) Smc Tak 55/1.8 m42 to K wich costed approx 50$.

03-22-2009, 10:12 AM   #2
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,216
I paid like $70 for mine in mint. Keep hunting.
03-22-2009, 10:16 AM   #3
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
if you do that to a tak 55mm I will come after you...

I would say that $90 is overpriced for a fungus infected lens regardless of whether its stopped growing or not. it can etch the glass and cause permanent hazing even if properly cleaned. M 50 1.4's and 1.7's are very common. the 1.7 even more so. and the 1.7 is considered sharper anyway. I have an M 1.7 that I can sell you for 50 bucks or maybe even less if we can work out a deal. no fungus no oil on blades, or sticky aperture. good used cosmetic condition. you might want to clean the front element but the glass and coatings have no defect. seriously, do not canabilize a 55. why does everyone want to canablize Takumars? dont buy them if you dont want to go through the extra trouble of using them. just buy K to begin with. I find it odd that you would consider a fungus infected lens, I mean M 50s are about as common as it gets in the land of K mount Pentax.
03-22-2009, 10:19 AM   #4
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 52
I'd say the same, keep looking. I got my M 50/1.4 in a bundle with my ME Super with a M 35/2.8. Paid about 125 USD for the bundle, camera including both lenses in pretty much mint condition. No eBay auction or anything alike, a genuine refurb film camera store (which isn't quite known for its dirt-cheap prices) is where I purchased it.

03-22-2009, 10:25 AM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Is spending 90+ $ on a M 50/1.4 with fungus (wich is described to have stopped growing) worth it, as an alternative to fully converting good (glueing adaptor, grilling holde, sanding or removing with aceton base paint) Smc Tak 55/1.8 m42 to K wich costed approx 50$.
If you are patient and don't care about cosmetics you can get a M50/1.7 AND a S-M-C Tak 55/1.8, both with perfect glass, for $90.
03-22-2009, 10:30 AM   #6
Veteran Member
X Man's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 478
No kidding, huh? To the OP an M50 1.4 should be $90 shipped, mint. That fungus infected thing is worth $25 IMO.

Regards,
Mike
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
if you do that to a tak 55mm I will come after you...

..why does everyone want to canablize Takumars? dont buy them if you dont want to go through the extra trouble of using them.
03-22-2009, 10:30 AM   #7
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
Well the situation changes quite drasticly when not shipping within US.
And i was not able to find any K cheaper than the mentioned Tak, wich i guess is one of the most common and cheapest one ~50mm SMC.
Btw i was already able to glue in that exposure pin .

QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
...I have an M 1.7 that I can sell you for 50 bucks or maybe even less if we can work out a deal...
Is M 50/1.7 optically as good as F?

Btw. why this is in film slr forum? I remember posting it in slr lens forum.

Last edited by ytterbium; 03-22-2009 at 10:36 AM.
03-22-2009, 10:40 AM   #8
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Well the situation changes quite drasticly when not shipping within US.
And i was not able to find any K cheaper than the mentioned Tak, wich i guess is one of the most common and cheapest one ~50mm SMC.
Btw i was already able to glue in that exposure pin .


If you accept paypal and can send it to EU 50$ + reasonable shipping makes a deal.
Btw, is M 50/1.7 optically as good as F?
so you have already modified the Tak? that bothers me both because I have an unhealthy love affair with Takumars and because the 55mm is my favourite lens.

I do accept paypal, shipping price will depend on where in the EU I am shipping it. I will require insurance for my own safeguard but I cant imagine shipping will send the price above $90 USD if I sell for $50, so you should be golden if you are willing to pay that much for a fungus lens.

I don't own any AF lenses but as far as I know, all of the 1.7's from M series to FA series are optically identical. http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/normal/index.html

03-23-2009, 04:32 AM   #9
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 19
Just for reference, i paid $60 for a slightly yellowed 50 1.4 Tak & $8 shipping to the UK from the US. Arrived in about a week or so.

Cheers
Rowan
03-23-2009, 07:20 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England
Posts: 309
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Is spending 90+ $ on a M 50/1.4 with fungus (wich is described to have stopped growing) worth it
It's not as if the M50/1,4 is a rare lens, there are plenty about, so you should be able to get one for a reasonable price without fungus. I paid £50 for mine (used condition with some slight rubbing off of the paintwork in places but optically perfect) in the UK. That's about your $90 yet the UK is rather expensive.

QuoteQuote:
as an alternative to fully converting good (glueing adaptor, grilling holde, sanding or removing with aceton base paint) Smc Tak 55/1.8 m42 to K wich costed approx 50$.
Why defile the Takumar? Seriously, if you use a genuine Pentax adapter then the lens will fit fine in the camera and won't need a locking hole. Even if you keep an adapter on the lens all the time you do not need to glue it on because you had screw it on tight enough so that it won't unscrew (use one of the K lens caps that twist on, rather than push on, to tighten the adapter) but allow you to remove it later. As to the sanding, well, there may be a need for that if you want to use focus trap or use the lens in Av mode. I always use mine in M and use the green button and get good exposure readings. For the few times I use focus trap I put a thin metal shim over the contacts. (If you take apart some types of security tags you'll find suitable shims. Note however, that the corners are sharp: I got a nasty cut on my thumb when the edge caught it when I was focusing.)

Takumars deserve to be treated with respect

Richard
03-23-2009, 07:23 AM   #11
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteQuote:
Takumars deserve to be treated with respect
Thank you.
03-23-2009, 07:40 AM   #12
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
I just sold my beautiful M 50 1.4--wish I had gotten $90 for it--pics here:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/sold-items/53447-sold-pentax-50mm-m-f-1-4-a.html
03-23-2009, 09:10 AM   #13
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
Hmm.
What do you consider a worse lens treating. Collecting dust on a shelf and never seeing daylight or being very useful by little modification.
To calm you, the Tak stays safe and gets a little usage on modified (K->m42) film body. And i must admit when holding that masterpiece of a glass a taught of crippling it makes you feel sad. That's why i asked your opinion before .

Last edited by ytterbium; 03-23-2009 at 09:50 AM.
03-23-2009, 09:44 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 258
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Is spending 90+ $ on a M 50/1.4 with fungus
You can spend much less on a better condition 50mm f1.4 with no fungus. also there is a K mount Pentax 55mm f1.8 lens, but a little hard to find. 55m f1.8 is sharper than 50mm f1.4, but the bokeh is not as good as f1.4

Last edited by winglik; 03-23-2009 at 03:15 PM.
03-23-2009, 09:48 AM   #15
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
what pray tell is bruke?
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, smc, tak, vs smc, wich
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Early Super Tak worth $145? armor843 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 10-21-2010 10:47 PM
For Sale - Sold: K 24mm 2.8, M 28mm 3.8, SMC Tak 135mm 2.5, SMC Tak 135mm 3.5 jsherman999 Sold Items 19 12-14-2009 02:20 PM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Tak 150mm/4, SMC Tak 135mm/3.5, Super Tak 55mm/2 and extras pdxbmw Sold Items 8 09-10-2009 10:54 AM
Ultimate Frisbee Tournament Photos (SMC Tak 135/2.5 & SMC Tak 20/4.5) arpaagent Post Your Photos! 5 12-07-2008 07:15 PM
Super Tak lens...worth repairing? edl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 03-27-2008 09:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:07 PM. | 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