I bought a Super Takumar 135/3.5 from pbo and just receive the k-mount adapter for it. Not the best adapter, I have a hard time having the lens to lock into the camera's mount but it works good enough for me to take pictures.

So tonight it was my first try at taking pictures with it. If all Takumar are like that I know how I'm going to spend some money next time! All the pictures are with very very little PP.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.

[mischivo]

May I ask why you didn't purchase a more modern lens? Is it because a) there are modern alternatives with that focal length/aperture combination, b) alternatives exist but are pricier, or c) Super Takumars are superior in quality?

I've seen shots taken with my friend's Super Takumars and haven't been impressed by any of their optical characteristics, except for the price. Then again, a '94 Honda Civic is also very affordable.

About the photos:
Good framing on the first. Underexposed.
Bad framing on the second. Too much "head-space". I would've framed lower, reducing the foreheadage she's showing. I'm on the fence about the exposure.
Good head-space on the third. Exposed fine. Not sure what the bar cutting across his chin is. It looks like he's about to bite it.
Horses in the fourth are underexposed.
Basket in the fifth is also underexposed.

I'm not certain why you're underexposing many of these, or whether it's consciously done, but I have a feeling it has something to do with this Super Duper Takumar. Perhaps you should consider procuring a lightmeter to avoid in-camera metering from fowling up potentially golden moments. If you heed my suggestion and buy an external meter, remember to rate the meter's ISO about 1/3 or 1/2 lower than the ISO being used, as all lenses transmit less light than the indicated F-stop suggests. How I wish lenses indicated T-stops...

[YJD]

I haven't purchase a more modern lens because of the price and I heard their quality was good. Though it is funny because I do own a Honda Civic from 94!

The underexposition that you see might be due to the fact my camera was set at -0.3 from my previous day of shooting and I forgot to change that. I just wanted to give it a shot before the kids went to bed. Also I wanted to do very little PP, I will definitively work of the first picture since I like it, the other one are testing the sharpness of the lens without any other goals.

Thanks for looking and your comments.

[knochelbiter]

Although they seem to meter perfectly wide-open, all of my Takumars need to be at EV+1 to EV+1.5 when stopped down. If I forget to do this when shooting I can post-process, adding extra contrast to compensate for the underexposure.

These quibbles aside, I've been extremely happy with my Taks, and I suspect you will be as well! Ignoring their image quality, they're just plain fun to use.

[knochelbiter]

I believe number 1 is my favorite, by the way. Good framing, as Mischivo said.

[YJD]

Thanks! I guess I was like a kid on Christmas.

I really love this Tak and will buy more. Thanks for the advice about the EV, I'll have to try that. My wife will be happy you like her photo, I'll have to do some PP on it tonight I guess.

One funny thing and it is the first time I see this using. With the Tak, when changing the aperture, my image through teh view finder gets either darker or lighter which I like a lot! It makes it easy to adjust the shutter speed according to what you see. Is it just this Tak or Taks who are like that?

[knochelbiter]

Thanks! I guess I was like a kid on Christmas.

I really love this Tak and will buy more. Thanks for the advice about the EV, I'll have to try that. My wife will be happy you like her photo, I'll have to do some PP on it tonight I guess.

One funny thing and it is the first time I see this using. With the Tak, when changing the aperture, my image through teh view finder gets either darker or lighter which I like a lot! It makes it easy to adjust the shutter speed according to what you see. Is it just this Tak or Taks who are like that?

I believe - and if I am wrong someone please correct me - that this is because the aperture on the Taks is fully manual. The aperture on the K- and M- series is manual too, but the aperture is held wide-open until the shot is taken. The super primitive nature of the takumars means that you can set the camera to Av mode, focus wide open, then stop down the lens just before shooting and get a (relatively) accurate exposure.

Side note: If you short out the contacts on the body of your camera (by taping a piece of aluminum foil over them, or wire - see other threads for how-to) you won't need to compensate with eV anymore - the exposure should be pretty dang accurate.

[YJD]

Thanks for your side note, I'll try to find a link for that!

[pbo]

There's an auto-manual switch on the side of the lens. If it's set in auto, it will only stop down after pin on the base of the lens is pressed - that's for older m42-mount cameras that had a plate specially for pressing that pin. In manual mode, the lens will stay at whatever aperture you tell it to.

Bo.

[YJD]

I always shut in RAW so I did fix the EV problem. I don't think EV feature on the camera when shooting RAW does change something, if someone could confirm?
Anyway, there first one I change EV to +1.3. The second if just a try, I think the eyes look good but the leeps are too pink and the skin too 'soft'. What do you think?

[Mike Cash]

May I ask why you didn't purchase a more modern lens? Is it because a) there are modern alternatives with that focal length/aperture combination, b) alternatives exist but are pricier, or c) Super Takumars are superior in quality?

I use Takumar lenses extensively on a daily basis and they account for well over 90% of my photos.

The Takumars are of pretty much uniformly excellent quality (although I don't care for the 135/3.5 very much), they still work just fine, and they are widely available for a song. They are admittedly an acquired taste and require a bit more thought and effort than more modern lenses, and I will be the first to admit that they are not for everybody. Those of us who love them love them dearly. There is a certain satisfaction derived from their use, and from getting great photos from "cheap" and "obsolete" lenses that some choose to look down their nose at.

I personally feel that they don't have to take a back seat to modern glass and they have nothing whatsoever to apologize for.

I am tickled pink to get images such as these from a "kit" lens acquired for the paltry sum of $10.

Perhaps you might find it enlightening to take a stroll through The Takumar Club thread in the Lens section. It is by far the most active thread of its kind on Pentax Forums. Who knows? You yourself might find yourself picking up a $10~30 lens and marvelling at the folks who pay well over 10 times that much for the new stuff. Unless I'm in a situation which demands auto-focus and/or zoom, I never use anything but Takumars.

Thanks! I guess I was like a kid on Christmas.

I really love this Tak and will buy more. Thanks for the advice about the EV, I'll have to try that. My wife will be happy you like her photo, I'll have to do some PP on it tonight I guess.

One funny thing and it is the first time I see this using. With the Tak, when changing the aperture, my image through teh view finder gets either darker or lighter which I like a lot! It makes it easy to adjust the shutter speed according to what you see. Is it just this Tak or Taks who are like that?

All Takumars are like that when used on K-mount bodies. You have to manually close down the aperture to your shooting aperture prior to going mashy-mashy on the shutter button. Get yourself a Spotmatic (or other M42 mount film body) and the camera is capable of stopping down the aperture for you just as K-mount bodies do with K-mount lenses. The phenomenon is a result of their being no mechanical connection between the K-mount bodies and the M42 lenses.