Is it any good

cupic · 05-15-2009, 01:00 AM

I won a bid for a

Pentax Takumar 35mm f/2.8 M42 ,and after a month I open it up and saw it to be a

Pentax Takumar 28mm f/3.5 M42,(I paid AU$90).Is it worth it ,did I get screwed

Advice ppl.

cheers

xjjohnno · 05-15-2009, 05:39 AM

You didn't get the listed item says you were screwed to me. It might be a decent lens and worth the price but goods not as described.

cupic · 05-15-2009, 05:51 AM

Even on the lenses holder its stamped Takumar 3.5/28 but didnt notice it,and when checkeing via feedback I notice it ,even on the photo on the auction you see its a 28mm f/3.5.Just wanted to know that if the lenses exists(Takumar 35mm f/2.8)was the worth)might get the difference back,long shot but might be worth it

Also another thing it that with a M42 adapter the lenses doesnt even sit on the contact,but still takes pictures

cheers

Bactman · 05-15-2009, 05:51 AM

Any chance the seller confused the aperature with the focal length?

The reviews of the Tak 28mm F3.5 appear to be positive (8.45/10 rating), so maybe it will work out. Still, I agree with the previous poster in that the lens you bought was not the one you received, so you did get screwed in that respect. Who knows, this Tak may be better than the one you intended to buy.

cupic · 05-15-2009, 06:04 AM

Only one way to go forward,mount it and they will come

cheers

wildlifephotog · 05-15-2009, 06:26 AM

The 28/3.5 is a good lens.
You said it won't touch the contacts. Does your adapter ring sit all the way in the body mount? If not, the lens will not focus to infinity.

cupic · 05-15-2009, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by wildlifephotog

The 28/3.5 is a good lens.
You said it won't touch the contacts. Does your adapter ring sit all the way in the body mount? If not, the lens will not focus to infinity.

Yes once I screw the lenses on adapter then onto the camera the contacts are in plain view

Also is there a Pentax Takumar 35mm f/2.8 M42

cheers

wildlifephotog · 05-15-2009, 06:53 AM

The 35mm came in four different max apertures, 2, 2.3, 3.5, and 4.

Have you used that adapter with other M42 lenses?

vanchaz2002 · 05-15-2009, 09:52 AM

If you actually got a takumar 35mm f2.8, you were screwed as there is no such thing.

xjjohnno · 05-15-2009, 08:43 PM

Seeing as the lens is going to be used in manual focus I wouldn't worry about whether or not it touches the contacts. A couple of my M42 lens have a diameter that is less then that of the contacts and no problems using them. It's all about if the lens will screw in fully into the adapter and I'll assume you are using the Pentax versus Ebay flanged adapter.

cupic · 05-15-2009, 09:44 PM

Emailed the seller to see if can arrange a part refund seeing that its worth on average $US42,one can only see

cheers

X Man · 05-15-2009, 09:53 PM

Yes, it's any good. Actually it's a great little lens. Where did you get it? ebay? I just saw a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f 3.5 get sold for good money as a K mount, and I bet it's a Nikon mount... One must pay attention and be well informed before they buy, imo.

You said something about a case... Is the little 28mm f3.5 Super Takumar nice and clean, with a case? If so, that's $68 US atm, and while that's a bit high for a US sale, it seems you Aussies pay more for this stuff.

Ask the seller for a $ 20 US partial refund/ you keep the lens and be happy either way.....

Regards,
Mike

res3567 · 05-15-2009, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by cupic

Even on the lenses holder its stamped Takumar 3.5/28 but didnt notice it,and when checkeing via feedback I notice it ,even on the photo on the auction you see its a 28mm f/3.5.Just wanted to know that if the lenses exists(Takumar 35mm f/2.8)was the worth)might get the difference back,long shot but might be worth it

Also another thing it that with a M42 adapter the lenses doesnt even sit on the contact,but still takes pictures

cheers

Is this your first Takumar?
BTW, I had a rough week at work.
A guy quit and I was asked to take his place in a different dept. from what I do.
I have completed a round of tests with that focusing screen with an autofocus lens I got at a Wolf store that is closing at a great deal.(Quanteray 70-300). I am now testing it with my newly aquired Takumar 50mm f/1.4.
Results are pending.

cupic · 05-15-2009, 10:00 PM

No I have another,I just didnt notice the gap

cheers

Mike Cash · 05-16-2009, 02:13 AM

A little net-searching caveat emptor would have clued you in to the fact that there is no such thing as a 35/2.8. Still, though, I would be tempted to go for a full or partial refund based on having paid roughly double the going rate for a 28/3.5 (which is a perfectly fine lens, by the way).

You don't indicate what flavor of Takumar the lens is; that also affects the value.

And for most Takumars having the lens contacts exposed is normal; the mount is smaller than a K-mount and lens contacts didn't exist back when Takumars came out anyway.

05-15-2009, 01:00 AM	#1
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824	Is it any good I won a bid for a Pentax Takumar 35mm f/2.8 M42 ,and after a month I open it up and saw it to be a Pentax Takumar 28mm f/3.5 M42,(I paid AU$90).Is it worth it ,did I get screwed Advice ppl. cheers

05-15-2009, 09:56 PM	#13
res3567 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Houston Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,876	Originally posted by cupic Even on the lenses holder its stamped Takumar 3.5/28 but didnt notice it,and when checkeing via feedback I notice it ,even on the photo on the auction you see its a 28mm f/3.5.Just wanted to know that if the lenses exists(Takumar 35mm f/2.8)was the worth)might get the difference back,long shot but might be worth it Also another thing it that with a M42 adapter the lenses doesnt even sit on the contact,but still takes pictures cheers Is this your first Takumar? BTW, I had a rough week at work. A guy quit and I was asked to take his place in a different dept. from what I do. I have completed a round of tests with that focusing screen with an autofocus lens I got at a Wolf store that is closing at a great deal.(Quanteray 70-300). I am now testing it with my newly aquired Takumar 50mm f/1.4. Results are pending. Last edited by res3567; 05-15-2009 at 10:02 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Please recommend a good multifunction ADF printer with good scanning quality	raider	General Talk	0	01-02-2010 07:03 PM
K-x has GOOD COLOURS, LOW NOISE and GOOD RESOLUTION	ogl	Pentax DSLR Discussion	79	11-27-2009 01:19 AM
Very High ISO - the good, the great, the not so good	laissezfaire	Post Your Photos!	7	09-01-2009 08:13 PM
What you care more on shopping digital camera, good quality or or good looking?	emilyy	General Talk	19	12-12-2008 07:35 PM
Proof that crappy lens + good light = good photos	Finn	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	11-02-2007 11:19 PM

05-15-2009, 05:39 AM	#2
xjjohnno Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,115	You didn't get the listed item says you were screwed to me. It might be a decent lens and worth the price but goods not as described.

05-15-2009, 05:51 AM	#3
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824 Original Poster	Even on the lenses holder its stamped Takumar 3.5/28 but didnt notice it,and when checkeing via feedback I notice it ,even on the photo on the auction you see its a 28mm f/3.5.Just wanted to know that if the lenses exists(Takumar 35mm f/2.8)was the worth)might get the difference back,long shot but might be worth it Also another thing it that with a M42 adapter the lenses doesnt even sit on the contact,but still takes pictures cheers

05-15-2009, 05:51 AM	#4
Bactman Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 237	Any chance the seller confused the aperature with the focal length? The reviews of the Tak 28mm F3.5 appear to be positive (8.45/10 rating), so maybe it will work out. Still, I agree with the previous poster in that the lens you bought was not the one you received, so you did get screwed in that respect. Who knows, this Tak may be better than the one you intended to buy.

05-15-2009, 06:04 AM	#5
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824 Original Poster	Only one way to go forward,mount it and they will come cheers

05-15-2009, 06:26 AM	#6
wildlifephotog Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: USA Posts: 924	The 28/3.5 is a good lens. You said it won't touch the contacts. Does your adapter ring sit all the way in the body mount? If not, the lens will not focus to infinity.

05-15-2009, 06:37 AM	#7
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824 Original Poster	Originally posted by wildlifephotog The 28/3.5 is a good lens. You said it won't touch the contacts. Does your adapter ring sit all the way in the body mount? If not, the lens will not focus to infinity. Yes once I screw the lenses on adapter then onto the camera the contacts are in plain view Also is there a Pentax Takumar 35mm f/2.8 M42 cheers

05-15-2009, 06:53 AM	#8
wildlifephotog Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: USA Posts: 924	The 35mm came in four different max apertures, 2, 2.3, 3.5, and 4. Have you used that adapter with other M42 lenses?

05-15-2009, 09:52 AM	#9
vanchaz2002 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 215	If you actually got a takumar 35mm f2.8, you were screwed as there is no such thing.

05-15-2009, 08:43 PM	#10
xjjohnno Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,115	Seeing as the lens is going to be used in manual focus I wouldn't worry about whether or not it touches the contacts. A couple of my M42 lens have a diameter that is less then that of the contacts and no problems using them. It's all about if the lens will screw in fully into the adapter and I'll assume you are using the Pentax versus Ebay flanged adapter.

05-15-2009, 09:44 PM	#11
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824 Original Poster	Emailed the seller to see if can arrange a part refund seeing that its worth on average $US42,one can only see cheers

05-15-2009, 09:53 PM	#12
X Man Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 478	Yes, it's any good. Actually it's a great little lens. Where did you get it? ebay? I just saw a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f 3.5 get sold for good money as a K mount, and I bet it's a Nikon mount... One must pay attention and be well informed before they buy, imo. You said something about a case... Is the little 28mm f3.5 Super Takumar nice and clean, with a case? If so, that's $68 US atm, and while that's a bit high for a US sale, it seems you Aussies pay more for this stuff. Ask the seller for a $ 20 US partial refund/ you keep the lens and be happy either way..... Regards, Mike

05-15-2009, 10:00 PM	#14
cupic Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Australia-NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,824 Original Poster	No I have another,I just didnt notice the gap cheers

05-16-2009, 02:13 AM	#15
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	A little net-searching caveat emptor would have clued you in to the fact that there is no such thing as a 35/2.8. Still, though, I would be tempted to go for a full or partial refund based on having paid roughly double the going rate for a 28/3.5 (which is a perfectly fine lens, by the way). You don't indicate what flavor of Takumar the lens is; that also affects the value. And for most Takumars having the lens contacts exposed is normal; the mount is smaller than a K-mount and lens contacts didn't exist back when Takumars came out anyway.