[fikkser]

Lately I have found my 50mm Tak not so sharp - in good light it would require stopping down to f/5,6 to get tack sharp images, compared to the Pentax-M 50mm f/1,7, which I can use at f/2,8 while maintaining the desired sharpness. At f/1,4, the Takumar is so soft I can barely see any use for it. Last night I did an A-B test between the Tak and a Helios 44M and got the following results:
- both at f/2 (Helios wide open), the Helios is noticeably sharper
- the 8mm more in focal length are noticeable too
- the yellowing seems to affect color balance only, but not the transmittance of the lens (the pictures look exposed the same, at f/2, 1/60 and ISO 1600)

my yellowed takumar was like one stop darker. after 2 days with aluminium foil and an uv-lamp it was as new.

[theunartist]

Lately I have found my 50mm Tak not so sharp - in good light it would require stopping down to f/5,6 to get tack sharp images, compared to the Pentax-M 50mm f/1,7, which I can use at f/2,8 while maintaining the desired sharpness. At f/1,4, the Takumar is so soft I can barely see any use for it. Last night I did an A-B test between the Tak and a Helios 44M and got the following results:
- both at f/2 (Helios wide open), the Helios is noticeably sharper
- the 8mm more in focal length are noticeable too
- the yellowing seems to affect color balance only, but not the transmittance of the lens (the pictures look exposed the same, at f/2, 1/60 and ISO 1600)

Could be a bad copy... Here's a shot with a Super Takumar 50/1.4 wide open, at full resolution, you can see details in the headrest inside this matchbox car. At wide open and close up, there is no depth of field, ergo, no room for small errors.

I've found the Super Tak 50/1.4 is even a decent street lens. However, I don't use it much anymore; I use the Super Takumar 55/1.8 which is even sharper in certain places...






Super Tak 50/1.4

[ducdao]

Could be a bad copy... Here's a shot with a Super Takumar 50/1.4 wide open, at full resolution, you can see details in the headrest inside this matchbox car. At wide open and close up, there is no depth of field, ergo, no room for small errors.

I've found the Super Tak 50/1.4 is even a decent street lens. However, I don't use it much anymore; I use the Super Takumar 55/1.8 which is even sharper in certain places...






Super Tak 50/1.4

(Re: the 3rd picture) Rick, you better use it before it expires

[Pepe Guitarra]

Any one has a comment on my previous quesition?

[sameagle]

Any one has a comment on my previous quesition?

Pepe,

Are you familiar with the lens reviews on this site? Here is the link to the reviews on the lens you mention:

Vivitar 35mm 1:1.9 Auto Wide-Angle M42 Lens Reviews - Prime Lenses - Sigma, Tamron, Adaptall and 3rd Party Lens Review Database

- Sam

[Pepe Guitarra]

Thanks Sameagle:
I saw that review and was going to jump into the Vivitar, but the price is $120. I think that is too much, when I can buy the Pentax DA 35mm f2.4 for $150. I wanted to hear from someone who has had it to see if it is worth more than the Supre Tak 35mm f2. One of the reviewes points out that the lens is not sharp but the result is good, it is another kind of good.

[repaap]

Could be a bad copy... Here's a shot with a Super Takumar 50/1.4 wide open, at full resolution, you can see details in the headrest inside this matchbox car. At wide open and close up, there is no depth of field, ergo, no room for small errors.

I've found the Super Tak 50/1.4 is even a decent street lens. However, I don't use it much anymore; I use the Super Takumar 55/1.8 which is even sharper in certain places...






Super Tak 50/1.4

Re: pic 3. Sharp things and these is not a good combination...

I think that sometimes people look too much at sharpness... There are IMO more important things too, like rendering, distortions in bokeh( swirly at helios, not so bad with takumars) color etc. You can change some things by PP, but really it is more easy to reduce than increase something like contrast...for me it is...

[theunartist]

(Re: the 3rd picture) Rick, you better use it before it expires

Re: pic 3. Sharp things and these is not a good combination...

I think that sometimes people look too much at sharpness... There are IMO more important things too, like rendering, distortions in bokeh( swirly at helios, not so bad with takumars) color etc. You can change some things by PP, but really it is more easy to reduce than increase something like contrast...for me it is...

I agree with both of you, sharpness is something we all look for in a lens and we expect sharpness when needed, but it's not the only thing that makes a good lens.

I think something like quality Tamrons or even Pentax K or F lenses are very "cold" but extremely sharp lenses. They, for me, are sometimes too sharp, too clear when maybe I'm looking for something more. Personally, I like deep/rich colors and decent amount of contrast in lenses; Takumars in general bring it...

[bigsur]

@Porga that image you posted a couple of pages back............awesome.

[Mike Cash]

Pentax K-5
S-M-C Takumar 35/2

[fikkser]

See what a 5D, super takumar 55 1,8, Jack daniel's and some Becks can produce all at iso 3200 1/40 f1,8 (I think). Some with pp and some straight from the camera.

[Porga]

@Porga that image you posted a couple of pages back............awesome.

Thank you. :-)

[Arjay Bee]

Tele tak 300 6.3

[Mike Cash]

Are those guys replacing the hatch covers on a container ship?

Pentax K20D
Takumar 105/2.8 (Preset)

[dude163]

Super Tak 200 f4 at an airshow practice ( friday )




It was super sunny with some clouds and it started to rain ( daughter shot) , then the T6 took off all sparkly in the sun, then the hercules landed 20 minutes later with heat haze and blue skies everywhere!


T6 climbing out and My daughter at F8, Hercules at F22 to get the spinning propellors , I kept forgetting this wasnt multicoated so I lost a few shots to flare