[yeatzee]

well guys, if all goes to plan I should have an SMC takumar 300mm F/4 (the one with many blades ) and an auto-takumar 55mm F/1.8 soon

I got an opportunity to shoot both today, and I am in love

The takumar 55mm F/1.8 is just special Its not very sharp, its bokeh can get funky, but I still fell hard for the tiny little lens

The Takumar 300mm F/4 is a MONSTER It weighs a metric ton, and is quite large BUT it was a pleasant surprise optically Plus, its faster than the DA 55-300mm which is exactly what I need. PLUS, I got a free bogen tripod which is heavy duty making this lens usable


im going through the photos right now, and might post a couple even though they were just test shots in a suburb backyard.

[jaieger]

well guys, if all goes to plan I should have an SMC takumar 300mm F/4 (the one with many blades ) and an auto-takumar 55mm F/1.8 soon

I got an opportunity to shoot both today, and I am in love

The takumar 55mm F/1.8 is just special Its not very sharp, its bokeh can get funky, but I still fell hard for the tiny little lens

The Takumar 300mm F/4 is a MONSTER It weighs a metric ton, and is quite large BUT it was a pleasant surprise optically Plus, its faster than the DA 55-300mm which is exactly what I need. PLUS, I got a free bogen tripod which is heavy duty making this lens usable


im going through the photos right now, and might post a couple even though they were just test shots in a suburb backyard.

Sounds good, looking to see those shots!

Also, the lens database puts the 300/4 at just under a kilogram. Sometimes I wonder if all this "compact" stuff we keep swooning for isn't making us all weak compared to our cannon-carrying canon peers

And, yeatzee, you'll need to up the ante now on your macros - time to start reversing on your 300mm!

[yeatzee]

Sounds good, looking to see those shots!

Also, the lens database puts the 300/4 at just under a kilogram. Sometimes I wonder if all this "compact" stuff we keep swooning for isn't making us all weak compared to our cannon-carrying canon peers

And, yeatzee, you'll need to up the ante now on your macros - time to start reversing on your 300mm!

Its the other 300mm F/4 (the one with the horrible rating in the database), which actually weighs 1.5 kg Like I said, its a monster

Oh yes, Im already planning ultra mega stacking setups

---------- Post added 03-16-11 at 11:10 PM ----------

ok some test images of the 300mm F/4

F/4


F/5.6


F/8

all slightly cropped, and converted from RAW to Jpeg using the same settings in LR 3.

Crops:

F/4


F/5.6


F/8


with a little USM, this sucker is perfectly sharp Bokeh is wonderful as well

[Mike Cash]

Pentax K20D
S-M-C Takumar 35/2

[0Man]

Nice!!! #2, 3 and 4 are dynamite...

Thanks

[ducdao]

Moments...

[ducdao]

Another flower shot...

[yeatzee]

Test shot with the auto takumar 55mm f/1.8 I talked about 1 page back. I do love this lens, and I have no idea why






Wideopen at 1.8

[ducdao]

Test shot with the auto takumar 55mm f/1.8 I talked about 1 page back. I do love this lens, and I have no idea why

Wideopen at 1.8

Why? Cuz it rocks and dirt cheap. Picture says it all.

[Ira]

The Takumar 300mm F/4 is a MONSTER It weighs a metric ton, and is quite large BUT it was a pleasant surprise optically Plus, its faster than the DA 55-300mm which is exactly what I need. PLUS, I got a free bogen tripod which is heavy duty making this lens usable

Don't forget that Saturday night, the moon is going to be the closest to the earth than it's been in 18 years--and it's going to be FULL!!!

[yeatzee]

Why? Cuz it rocks and dirt cheap. Picture says it all.

Well not exactly. The M 50mm F/1.7 @ F/1.7 is sharper than the tak wideopen and the same is true at F/2 (as far as I went). The bokeh can be a bit.... well bad at times depending on the subject (im pretty sure the M has better bokeh usually). Also, its not really cheap* unless you get lucky. M 50mm F/1.7's seem cheaper to get in the end. BUT, they don't feel as special as the takumar. I love my M 50's, they are my workhorse lenses for macro, but the tak was a pleasent surprise as long as you don't pixel peep.



* I consider cheap for a lens like this to be $40 or under (what I got my m 50mm's at)

Don't forget that Saturday night, the moon is going to be the closest to the earth than it's been in 18 years--and it's going to be FULL!!!

I doubt I'll have the lens by than Maybe I can negotiate me being able to borrow it

[Ira]

There's a Super-Tak 35 2 on eBay right now with a BIN price of just $170. I'm on my iTouch now and can't do the link, but I wanted to post this.

It looks to be in excellent condition, and this is a VERY excellent price for this lens.

I paid $240 a few months ago.

---------- Post added 03-17-11 at 10:42 AM ----------

I now see that there's someone else selling this same lens in equal condition for a BIN of $350.

I post this because I only want to help us Pentaxians.

The hell with everyone else.

[dude163]

I found some shots that I *forgot* to upload last year when i was having soe difficulties

super MC Takumar 50 f1.4 wide open and ISO 1600!

[erkie]

Test shot with the auto takumar 55mm f/1.8 I talked about 1 page back. I do love this lens, and I have no idea why






Wideopen at 1.8

Just look at how it rendered the out of focus area ! That's one of the things I love about this lens. A more impressionistic rendering IMHO . And no I don't find it distracting I think it ADDS to the overall picture Very nicely done

The addiction is just beginning

Eric

[theunartist]

Another flower shot...

Nice one ducdao!!! Painterly, very very nice...