The M Club!

Patajac · 05-29-2012, 04:04 AM - **1 Like**

M 1.7

RubyT · 06-01-2012, 10:57 AM

I only have the M85 f/2 and the M50 f/1.7, but I love them both.

The M85 at f/2:

And the M50, probably at f/2.8. That's a basic-training haircut, not some skinhead thing.

theunartist · 06-03-2012, 08:57 AM

K10D + Pentax M 75-150/4.0

**Pepe Guitarra** · 06-03-2012, 05:20 PM

Nice to see your stuff over here. Good shots.

Originally posted by RubyT

I only have the M85 f/2 and the M50 f/1.7, but I love them both.

The M85 at f/2:

And the M50, probably at f/2.8. That's a basic-training haircut, not some skinhead thing.

RubyT · 06-03-2012, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra

Nice to see your stuff over here. Good shots.

Thank you! Army. He is in England now, just got Battalion Soldier of the Year.

Cinders · 06-12-2012, 01:50 PM

Anybody try the 50mm f1.7 with a TC? I'm thinking maybe that would be cheaper than buying a separate lens for a bit more tele length. I could also use it on my third party 400mm and get crazy far. XD

eddie1960 · 06-12-2012, 03:11 PM

One from a wedding I shot (under protest) for another Pentaxian last week

M 100 2.8 - both Pentaxians

disco_owner · 06-12-2012, 04:49 PM

Very nice shot Eddie , love the Bokeh !!! you have really captured the moment.

el baroda · 06-15-2012, 10:04 AM

Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards.

eddie1960 · 06-15-2012, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by el baroda

Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards.

In General Primes are always better than super zooms for IQ. some exceptions of course exist
There are a couple of Tak 135 2.5. the SMC tak M42 (a true takumar) is well regarded and should in all cases beat the tamron on iq (and of course will shoot at a much faster aperture
reviews of the 3 variants of this one
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Super-Multi-Coated-TAKUMAR-Super-Tak...35mm-F2.5.html

the non SMC Takumar bayonett (ie k mount) is not as good. that being said it will be faster than the tamron by at least 1 stop. and will have better OOF area just by vitue of being faster
reviews
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-135mm-F2.5-Bayonet-Lens.html

The K 135 2.5 is a stellar (but getting pricey) lens same optical formula as the last verion of the SMC tak but K mount rather than m42
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-135mm-F2.5-Bayonet-Lens.html

the K was replaced by the A* 135 1.8 - very expensive but top notch (hard to find as well)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-A-Star-135mm-F1.8-Lens.html

the only one that won't necessarily be better than the tamron is the non SMC takumar bayonet - but if you need speed at that length it is a good value

el baroda · 06-15-2012, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by eddie1960

the only one that won't necessarily be better than the tamron is the non SMC takumar bayonet - but if you need speed at that length it is a good value

Hi Eddie. Thanks a lot for taking the time to give me this detailed reply. No, I don't really need speed since my K5 takes care of that (ie, ISO). There's a lot of the non-SMC Takumar 135mm on THAT site, but they are not really cheap. Thanks again and best regards.

abacus07 · 06-16-2012, 04:04 AM

Originally posted by el baroda

Hi Eddie. Thanks a lot for taking the time to give me this detailed reply. No, I don't really need speed since my K5 takes care of that (ie, ISO). There's a lot of the non-SMC Takumar 135mm on THAT site, but they are not really cheap. Thanks again and best regards.

Iso can take care of speed but if you don't have a big enough aperture then you might not be able to get the OOF (or bokeh) that you want for shots. having a fast lens opens up an entirely different area of photography. Your Tamron lens is probably f5.6 at 135mm. The Takumar will be 2+ stops bigger and that is a huge difference in OOF. This is one of the knocks against the otherwise excellent DA40 when compared to the fast fifties. If I'm taking portraits (torso/body) then 1+ stop makes a huge difference. I always take my M/A 50f1.7 if there's a chance that I'll be taking portraits. The primes will also have better IQ.

You could get a M135f3.5 ($50ish) or M100f2.8 ($100ish) instead. It's not quite as fast but still about 1.5 stops faster than your Tamron. Here is a shot with my M135f3.5 wide open (reposted).

theunartist · 06-16-2012, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by el baroda

Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards.

I think the answer will hinge on what you personally consider "better IQ". Would a bayonet mount Takumar 135 be better than your 18-200 Tamron zoom at 135 with both using the same aperture, probably a tossup

As far as zooms v. primes, I have been slowly leaning towards zooms. I feel I have 3 dependable zooms, the Pentax A 35-105, Pentax M 75-150 and Pentax F 70-210, I would have no problem using any of these over primes. Although I think they are all superbly sharp, at this point I am no longer looking just for the sharpest possible lens I can use, but more about colors, contrast and "overall" sharpness it can produce. Since Out Of Focus/Bokeh is not only controlled by aperture used but also determined on distance/magnification of subject to camera, using a zoom should not hinder too much and in some cases will help.

Pentax M 75-150 most likely been posted but decent examples

*With that said, if I know I will need a 135mm prime for something (really really) special, I will reach for that lens and use it everytime...

fuent104 · 06-16-2012, 11:52 PM

One of the first shots with from my new M50 f1.4

**Pepe Guitarra** · 06-17-2012, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by eddie1960

One from a wedding I shot (under protest) for another Pentaxian last week

M 100 2.8 - both Pentaxians

I can see you are working on that promotion (or, is it demotion?)

06-03-2012, 05:20 PM	#3424
Pepe Guitarra Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,223	Marine or Army? Nice to see your stuff over here. Good shots. Originally posted by RubyT I only have the M85 f/2 and the M50 f/1.7, but I love them both. The M85 at f/2: And the M50, probably at f/2.8. That's a basic-training haircut, not some skinhead thing.

06-15-2012, 10:04 AM	#3429
el baroda Inactive Account Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 217	Pentax prime lens vs zoom lens at same f stop Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards.

06-15-2012, 10:16 AM	#3430
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by el baroda Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards. In General Primes are always better than super zooms for IQ. some exceptions of course exist There are a couple of Tak 135 2.5. the SMC tak M42 (a true takumar) is well regarded and should in all cases beat the tamron on iq (and of course will shoot at a much faster aperture reviews of the 3 variants of this one https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Super-Multi-Coated-TAKUMAR-Super-Tak...35mm-F2.5.html the non SMC Takumar bayonett (ie k mount) is not as good. that being said it will be faster than the tamron by at least 1 stop. and will have better OOF area just by vitue of being faster reviews https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-135mm-F2.5-Bayonet-Lens.html The K 135 2.5 is a stellar (but getting pricey) lens same optical formula as the last verion of the SMC tak but K mount rather than m42 https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-135mm-F2.5-Bayonet-Lens.html the K was replaced by the A* 135 1.8 - very expensive but top notch (hard to find as well) https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-A-Star-135mm-F1.8-Lens.html the only one that won't necessarily be better than the tamron is the non SMC takumar bayonet - but if you need speed at that length it is a good value Last edited by eddie1960; 06-15-2012 at 10:27 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The F Club!	jsherman999	Lens Clubs	1237	3 Days Ago 04:04 PM
D-FA WR Club	Rico	Lens Clubs	671	03-10-2024 03:17 AM
The A Club	jake.astig	Lens Clubs	3996	02-15-2024 11:51 AM
Ltd club, here I come	axl	Lens Clubs	21	12-12-2010 03:06 AM
In the club again	metroeloise	Post Your Photos!	4	10-20-2008 08:59 AM

05-29-2012, 04:04 AM - 1 Like	#3421
Patajac Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 241	M 1.7

06-01-2012, 10:57 AM	#3422
RubyT Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: TN Photos: Gallery Posts: 621	I only have the M85 f/2 and the M50 f/1.7, but I love them both. The M85 at f/2: And the M50, probably at f/2.8. That's a basic-training haircut, not some skinhead thing.

06-03-2012, 08:57 AM	#3423
theunartist Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542	K10D + Pentax M 75-150/4.0

06-03-2012, 05:46 PM	#3425
RubyT Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: TN Photos: Gallery Posts: 621	Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra Nice to see your stuff over here. Good shots. Thank you! Army. He is in England now, just got Battalion Soldier of the Year.

06-12-2012, 01:50 PM	#3426
Cinders Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Florida Posts: 118	Anybody try the 50mm f1.7 with a TC? I'm thinking maybe that would be cheaper than buying a separate lens for a bit more tele length. I could also use it on my third party 400mm and get crazy far. XD

06-12-2012, 03:11 PM	#3427
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	One from a wedding I shot (under protest) for another Pentaxian last week M 100 2.8 - both Pentaxians

06-12-2012, 04:49 PM	#3428
disco_owner Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,629	Very nice shot Eddie , love the Bokeh !!! you have really captured the moment.

06-15-2012, 11:05 AM	#3431
el baroda Inactive Account Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 217	Originally posted by eddie1960 the only one that won't necessarily be better than the tamron is the non SMC takumar bayonet - but if you need speed at that length it is a good value Hi Eddie. Thanks a lot for taking the time to give me this detailed reply. No, I don't really need speed since my K5 takes care of that (ie, ISO). There's a lot of the non-SMC Takumar 135mm on THAT site, but they are not really cheap. Thanks again and best regards.

06-16-2012, 04:04 AM	#3432
abacus07 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Taiwan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,075	Originally posted by el baroda Hi Eddie. Thanks a lot for taking the time to give me this detailed reply. No, I don't really need speed since my K5 takes care of that (ie, ISO). There's a lot of the non-SMC Takumar 135mm on THAT site, but they are not really cheap. Thanks again and best regards. Iso can take care of speed but if you don't have a big enough aperture then you might not be able to get the OOF (or bokeh) that you want for shots. having a fast lens opens up an entirely different area of photography. Your Tamron lens is probably f5.6 at 135mm. The Takumar will be 2+ stops bigger and that is a huge difference in OOF. This is one of the knocks against the otherwise excellent DA40 when compared to the fast fifties. If I'm taking portraits (torso/body) then 1+ stop makes a huge difference. I always take my M/A 50f1.7 if there's a chance that I'll be taking portraits. The primes will also have better IQ. You could get a M135f3.5 ($50ish) or M100f2.8 ($100ish) instead. It's not quite as fast but still about 1.5 stops faster than your Tamron. Here is a shot with my M135f3.5 wide open (reposted).

06-16-2012, 08:57 PM	#3433
theunartist Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542	Originally posted by el baroda Hi. I am seriously thinking of getting an old Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens but am not sure if it is a good move since I already own a modern Tamron 18-200mm lens. Can someone tell me if there is a noticeable difference in IQ between the two lenses if the latter is set at 135mm, assuming that available lighting is adequate? Should the former, being a prime lens, be better? Comments and suggestions will be much appreciated. Thanks and regards. I think the answer will hinge on what you personally consider "better IQ". Would a bayonet mount Takumar 135 be better than your 18-200 Tamron zoom at 135 with both using the same aperture, probably a tossup As far as zooms v. primes, I have been slowly leaning towards zooms. I feel I have 3 dependable zooms, the Pentax A 35-105, Pentax M 75-150 and Pentax F 70-210, I would have no problem using any of these over primes. Although I think they are all superbly sharp, at this point I am no longer looking just for the sharpest possible lens I can use, but more about colors, contrast and "overall" sharpness it can produce. Since Out Of Focus/Bokeh is not only controlled by aperture used but also determined on distance/magnification of subject to camera, using a zoom should not hinder too much and in some cases will help. Pentax M 75-150 most likely been posted but decent examples *With that said, if I know I will need a 135mm prime for something (really really) special, I will reach for that lens and use it everytime...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-16-2012, 11:52 PM	#3434
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	One of the first shots with from my new M50 f1.4

06-17-2012, 10:51 AM	#3435
Pepe Guitarra Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,223	Originally posted by eddie1960 One from a wedding I shot (under protest) for another Pentaxian last week M 100 2.8 - both Pentaxians I can see you are working on that promotion (or, is it demotion?)