Misc Testing Takumar 400/5.6 at the river. Please Comment :)

Testing Takumar 400/5.6 at the river. Please Comment :) · 10:25 PM

After only a days use I am very pleased with this old lens. I love old glass! Any comments would be appreciated, this is my first long lens any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

First photo is A28/2.8 to show "normal" view(42mm equiv) then the takumar(F8 and set to hyperfocal mark) then 100% crop. Thanks for looking

A bridge

100% crop girl in the river

Old Barn

A few other shots with this lens. A couple x posted

On the way back I saw the girl in the river out on the island. I missed the focus a hair, not sure how I feel about taking the shot sorta felt clandestine.

My dog

Edit: I should add first one is shot f7.1, the other 2 are wide open, horrible composition with the brighter background sorry it was just a test

TenZ.NL · 08-31-2013, 03:41 AM

It doesn`t seem to be a bad lens, allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy. Some pics look a bit soft but I guess this is more a matter of a learningcurve than real softness.
I like your fist dogshot best btw, the other 2 are a bit underexposed and a little too warm.

Na Horuk · 08-31-2013, 03:59 AM

Now that is tele! Clandestine.. well, that is always a problem with photography, even more so with tele lenses. But the way you took those photos is perfectly tasteful and it doesnt reveal anything the person might want to keep private.
Are you using a tripod for these?

p38arover · 08-31-2013, 04:06 AM

I'm quite impressed - especially by the pic of the barn.

I'll have to drag my 400mm Tokina out of the cupboard and try it again. I don't think it's nearly as good.

ToyTank · 08-31-2013, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by TenZ.NL

It doesn`t seem to be a bad lens, allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy. Some pics look a bit soft but I guess this is more a matter of a learningcurve than real softness.
I like your fist dogshot best btw, the other 2 are a bit underexposed and a little too warm.

Thanks Tenz., Yeah I had a limited number of interesting things to shoot.

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Now that is tele! Clandestine.. well, that is always a problem with photography, even more so with tele lenses. But the way you took those photos is perfectly tasteful and it doesnt reveal anything the person might want to keep private.
Are you using a tripod for these?

Thanks I was using a tripod except for the last 2 dog shots, and the last photo of the girl.

ToyTank · 08-31-2013, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by p38arover

I'm quite impressed - especially by the pic of the barn.

I'll have to drag my 400mm Tokina out of the cupboard and try it again. I don't think it's nearly as good.

Thanks I probably came closest to nailing the focus on the barn. It is tough to get focus right on this beast, @ f8 hyperfocal is 4000' with DOF 2000'(~670m) out to infinity,or up close(8 m) DOF is about 10 CM or 4"

The focus confirm beep helps(though it is far from perfect) and it has a long focus throw. I just need practice.

ToyTank · 08-31-2013, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by TenZ.NL

allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy

I assumed due to the age it had 6 straight blades, but I liked the brushstroke sort of effect it has and decided to look, and it has 10 rounded blades, almost perfect circle down to about F22. This must have been a premium lens in the 60s, I wonder what MSRP was

Johndav · 08-31-2013, 11:52 AM

Interesting set, I used a 300mm lens of the same vintage years ago and felt it was quite flat contrast-wise (probably a common experience given you often shoot things over great distances and therefore with the possibilities of airborne dust between you and the subject).
But certainly the results you have achieved were better than mine, the first shot of the dog is a corker.

ToyTank · 08-31-2013, 11:59 AM

Thanks Johndav. I've adjusted the others a bit, like TenZ NL pointed out they needed it.

That first one he was walking very lucky I hit that shallow DOF.

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 09-01-2013, 11:30 AM

Very nice and sharp for a 400mm.

daacon · 09-01-2013, 12:40 PM

Not a bad lens at all should serve you well.

ToyTank · 09-01-2013, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by daacon

Not a bad lens at all should serve you well.

Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden

Very nice and sharp for a 400mm.

Thanks, certainly sharper than 50-200 with teleconverter. I think at long ranges particles and refractive property of air becomes an issue. Yesterday I was shooting some RR tracks, and I could see the ripples from the heat in the viewfinder. With 135 though I could not see the waves.
I'll post some pics latter.

It was a gamble at $140, but I feel it was a pretty good buy as a modern equivalent is not in my budget.

Wide open PF was pretty bad but easy to fix. F8 it's gone, I did no CA or PF correction on the barn or bridge. Last 2 dog shots are wide open, PF on his nose was horrid.

ToyTank · 09-03-2013, 11:44 PM

I went out yesterday and today with this lens. Shots are mostly wide open(5.6) and handheld except for the skateboarder. I really like this lens, but I don't think I can fit it in with my EDC camera gear. There is definetely CA if you go looking for it but not as much as I feared. All comments welcome and thanks for looking!

Last night, I had to bump ISO up to 1600 +

ToyTank
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by ToyTank
	Find threads started by ToyTank
	Find threads in which ToyTank has posted

09-01-2013, 01:14 PM	#12
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	Originally posted by daacon Not a bad lens at all should serve you well. Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Very nice and sharp for a 400mm. Thanks, certainly sharper than 50-200 with teleconverter. I think at long ranges particles and refractive property of air becomes an issue. Yesterday I was shooting some RR tracks, and I could see the ripples from the heat in the viewfinder. With 135 though I could not see the waves. I'll post some pics latter. It was a gamble at $140, but I feel it was a pretty good buy as a modern equivalent is not in my budget. Wide open PF was pretty bad but easy to fix. F8 it's gone, I did no CA or PF correction on the barn or bridge. Last 2 dog shots are wide open, PF on his nose was horrid. Last edited by ToyTank; 09-01-2013 at 01:21 PM. Reason: I'm dumb

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Birding with the M 400/5.6	8540tomg	Post Your Photos!	3	04-13-2009 10:21 AM
What views on the Sigma APO 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 DG HSM OS?	Aditya Panda	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	02-15-2009 09:26 PM
Superia X-tra ISO 400, $5.97 for 6 rolls at costco	southy	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	4	01-18-2009 08:06 AM
Another bird at home, M 400/5.6	Canada_Rockies	Post Your Photos!	3	09-04-2008 06:38 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax-F 28/2.8; Takumar 400/5.6; Takumar 500/4.5 - pics	thePiRaTE!!	Sold Items	5	03-06-2008 09:47 AM

08-31-2013, 03:41 AM	#2
TenZ.NL Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Below sealevel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,100	It doesn`t seem to be a bad lens, allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy. Some pics look a bit soft but I guess this is more a matter of a learningcurve than real softness. I like your fist dogshot best btw, the other 2 are a bit underexposed and a little too warm.

08-31-2013, 03:59 AM	#3
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Now that is tele! Clandestine.. well, that is always a problem with photography, even more so with tele lenses. But the way you took those photos is perfectly tasteful and it doesnt reveal anything the person might want to keep private. Are you using a tripod for these?

08-31-2013, 04:06 AM	#4
p38arover Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Western Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,084	I'm quite impressed - especially by the pic of the barn. I'll have to drag my 400mm Tokina out of the cupboard and try it again. I don't think it's nearly as good.

08-31-2013, 05:59 AM	#5
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	Originally posted by TenZ.NL It doesn`t seem to be a bad lens, allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy. Some pics look a bit soft but I guess this is more a matter of a learningcurve than real softness. I like your fist dogshot best btw, the other 2 are a bit underexposed and a little too warm. Thanks Tenz., Yeah I had a limited number of interesting things to shoot. Originally posted by Na Horuk Now that is tele! Clandestine.. well, that is always a problem with photography, even more so with tele lenses. But the way you took those photos is perfectly tasteful and it doesnt reveal anything the person might want to keep private. Are you using a tripod for these? Thanks I was using a tripod except for the last 2 dog shots, and the last photo of the girl.

08-31-2013, 08:22 AM	#6
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	Originally posted by p38arover I'm quite impressed - especially by the pic of the barn. I'll have to drag my 400mm Tokina out of the cupboard and try it again. I don't think it's nearly as good. Thanks I probably came closest to nailing the focus on the barn. It is tough to get focus right on this beast, @ f8 hyperfocal is 4000' with DOF 2000'(~670m) out to infinity,or up close(8 m) DOF is about 10 CM or 4" The focus confirm beep helps(though it is far from perfect) and it has a long focus throw. I just need practice.

08-31-2013, 10:14 AM	#7
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	Originally posted by TenZ.NL allthough the bokeh is somewhat busy I assumed due to the age it had 6 straight blades, but I liked the brushstroke sort of effect it has and decided to look, and it has 10 rounded blades, almost perfect circle down to about F22. This must have been a premium lens in the 60s, I wonder what MSRP was

08-31-2013, 11:52 AM	#8
Johndav Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Sunny Dun(ny)fermline, Fife Posts: 405	Interesting set, I used a 300mm lens of the same vintage years ago and felt it was quite flat contrast-wise (probably a common experience given you often shoot things over great distances and therefore with the possibilities of airborne dust between you and the subject). But certainly the results you have achieved were better than mine, the first shot of the dog is a corker.

08-31-2013, 11:59 AM	#9
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	Thanks Johndav. I've adjusted the others a bit, like TenZ NL pointed out they needed it. That first one he was walking very lucky I hit that shallow DOF.

09-01-2013, 11:30 AM	#10
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	Very nice and sharp for a 400mm.

09-01-2013, 12:40 PM	#11
daacon Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alberta,Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 20,914	Not a bad lens at all should serve you well.

09-03-2013, 11:44 PM	#13
ToyTank Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 675 Original Poster	I went out yesterday and today with this lens. Shots are mostly wide open(5.6) and handheld except for the skateboarder. I really like this lens, but I don't think I can fit it in with my EDC camera gear. There is definetely CA if you go looking for it but not as much as I feared. All comments welcome and thanks for looking! Last night, I had to bump ISO up to 1600 +