Nature Critters, by smc Takumar 300/4

Critters, by smc Takumar 300/4 · **2 Likes**

Funny thing about the Tak 300/4, the first few months after I acquired it I just couldn't seem to make friends with it... then at some point we just clicked.

**jpzk** · 08-07-2015, 12:05 PM

Those a some great images !

I was actually surprised to see that they were taken with a K-01 and an "old" Tak !

JP

**luftfluss** · 08-07-2015, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

Those a some great images !

I was actually surprised to see that they were taken with a K-01 and an "old" Tak !

JP

Never doubt the amazing capabilities of the K-01 and Taks!

CreationBear · 08-07-2015, 02:31 PM

Very nice--I've always been a little leery of long "legacy" glass, but when it's right, it's right. (FWIW, when I was at PSU I had a woodchuck "bluff charge" me when I ran up on him with my mountain bike. Not quite as feral as the famous Rabbit of Caerbannog, of course, but disconcerting nonetheless.

)

**joip** · 08-07-2015, 04:26 PM

Love the balance & composition on the last one.

**luftfluss** · 08-07-2015, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by CreationBear

Very nice--I've always been a little leery of long "legacy" glass, but when it's right, it's right.

Welp, my main usage of long legacy glass has been 3x 200mm Taks - f/3.5, f/4, f/5.6, and the 300/4. I think one's satisfaction with those lenses is, in part, based on expectations. As I purchased each lens, I expected them to be superior to the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness*, and I have not been disappointed. I've owned 2 copies of the 55-300, and the Taks all out-resolve it. Naturally, there are trade-offs - more (and more difficult to deal with) CA with the Taks, and the Taks are more susceptible to flare and loss of contrast. Lots of pixel-peeping has me convinced that the Taks 200/3.5 & f/4 are equivalent to the Tamron 70-200/2.8 when all are at f/5.6. The Taks all have nicer bokeh (IMO) than the Pentax 55-300, and I'd put the 200/3.5 up against any lens of comparable focal length. I also prefer the color and overall rendering of the Taks. Modern lenses do a much nicer job in close-focusing.

* The 55-300 is sharper than the Tak 200/5.6 when both are shot wide-open, but the Tak catches up @ f/8.

Quote:

(FWIW, when I was at PSU I had a woodchuck "bluff charge" me when I ran up on him with my mountain bike. Not quite as feral as the famous Rabbit of Caerbannog, of course, but disconcerting nonetheless.

)

I haven't yet encountered a woodchuck who's demonstrated any sort of belligerence against me, but I know they have a reputation for being rather ornery at times.

Originally posted by joip

Love the balance & composition on the last one.

Thanks! I'm proud to say that I shot that with this exact composition in mind.

GeoJerry · 08-07-2015, 09:21 PM

All very sharp crisp shots! Looks like a nice lens, I haven't heard much about it.

**luftfluss** · 08-08-2015, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by GeoJerry

All very sharp crisp shots! Looks like a nice lens, I haven't heard much about it.

Thanks! It's a lovely lens, a true bargain at ~ $100.

CreationBear · 08-08-2015, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

long legacy glass

Thanks for the run-down--my K135/2.5 can get a little wild-and-wooly at times, PF-wise, but your Taks might be more domesticated. Definitely worth exploring if I can remember not to shoot into the light.

**luftfluss** · 08-08-2015, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by CreationBear

Thanks for the run-down--my K135/2.5 can get a little wild-and-wooly at times, PF-wise, but your Taks might be more domesticated. Definitely worth exploring if I can remember not to shoot into the light.

Don't shoot into the light, Carol Anne! - Takina

(sorry, couldn't help myself with the Poltergeist reference!)

CreationBear · 08-09-2015, 05:49 AM - **1 Like**

You Tube

charliezap · 08-09-2015, 07:00 AM

A very nice series with that combination.

--charliezap

**luftfluss** · 08-09-2015, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by charliezap

A very nice series with that combination.

--charliezap

Thanks!

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

08-07-2015, 02:31 PM	#4
CreationBear Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 2,415	Very nice--I've always been a little leery of long "legacy" glass, but when it's right, it's right. (FWIW, when I was at PSU I had a woodchuck "bluff charge" me when I ran up on him with my mountain bike. Not quite as feral as the famous Rabbit of Caerbannog, of course, but disconcerting nonetheless.)

08-07-2015, 07:58 PM	#6
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619 Original Poster	Originally posted by CreationBear Very nice--I've always been a little leery of long "legacy" glass, but when it's right, it's right. Welp, my main usage of long legacy glass has been 3x 200mm Taks - f/3.5, f/4, f/5.6, and the 300/4. I think one's satisfaction with those lenses is, in part, based on expectations. As I purchased each lens, I expected them to be superior to the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness, and I have not been disappointed. I've owned 2 copies of the 55-300, and the Taks all out-resolve it. Naturally, there are trade-offs - more (and more difficult to deal with) CA with the Taks, and the Taks are more susceptible to flare and loss of contrast. Lots of pixel-peeping has me convinced that the Taks 200/3.5 & f/4 are equivalent to the Tamron 70-200/2.8 when all are at f/5.6. The Taks all have nicer bokeh (IMO) than the Pentax 55-300, and I'd put the 200/3.5 up against any lens of comparable focal length. I also prefer the color and overall rendering of the Taks. Modern lenses do a much nicer job in close-focusing. The 55-300 is sharper than the Tak 200/5.6 when both are shot wide-open, but the Tak catches up @ f/8. Quote: (FWIW, when I was at PSU I had a woodchuck "bluff charge" me when I ran up on him with my mountain bike. Not quite as feral as the famous Rabbit of Caerbannog, of course, but disconcerting nonetheless.) I haven't yet encountered a woodchuck who's demonstrated any sort of belligerence against me, but I know they have a reputation for being rather ornery at times. Originally posted by joip Love the balance & composition on the last one. Thanks! I'm proud to say that I shot that with this exact composition in mind.

08-09-2015, 07:00 AM	#12
charliezap Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: saugus ma Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,686	A very nice series with that combination.--charliezap

08-09-2015, 08:35 AM	#13
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619 Original Poster	Originally posted by charliezap A very nice series with that combination.--charliezap Thanks!

08-07-2015, 12:05 PM	#2
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Those a some great images ! I was actually surprised to see that they were taken with a K-01 and an "old" Tak ! JP

08-07-2015, 02:00 PM	#3
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619 Original Poster	Originally posted by jpzk Those a some great images ! I was actually surprised to see that they were taken with a K-01 and an "old" Tak ! JP Never doubt the amazing capabilities of the K-01 and Taks!

08-07-2015, 04:26 PM	#5
joip Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 1,793	Love the balance & composition on the last one.

08-07-2015, 09:21 PM	#7
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158	All very sharp crisp shots! Looks like a nice lens, I haven't heard much about it.

08-08-2015, 10:18 AM	#8
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619 Original Poster	Originally posted by GeoJerry All very sharp crisp shots! Looks like a nice lens, I haven't heard much about it. Thanks! It's a lovely lens, a true bargain at ~ $100.

08-08-2015, 12:00 PM	#9
CreationBear Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 2,415	Originally posted by luftfluss long legacy glass Thanks for the run-down--my K135/2.5 can get a little wild-and-wooly at times, PF-wise, but your Taks might be more domesticated. Definitely worth exploring if I can remember not to shoot into the light.

08-08-2015, 09:25 PM	#10
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619 Original Poster	Originally posted by CreationBear Thanks for the run-down--my K135/2.5 can get a little wild-and-wooly at times, PF-wise, but your Taks might be more domesticated. Definitely worth exploring if I can remember not to shoot into the light. Don't shoot into the light, Carol Anne! - Takina (sorry, couldn't help myself with the Poltergeist reference!)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: SMC takumar 50 1.4, SMC/Super takumar 55 1.8 and original M42 to K adapter	pentakxian	Sold Items	2	10-13-2013 07:26 AM
SMC-K 300/4 vs Super Takumar 300/4 -- Tripod Mounts, image quality?	tendim	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	03-20-2010 09:25 AM
Pentax K-7 and Old-Good SMC 6x7 Takumar 300/4 movie of sunset	therion	Video Recording and Processing	2	09-12-2009 07:08 AM
300/4 SMC Takumar test shots	d.bradley	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	06-17-2007 11:02 AM