Originally posted by ChatMechant K-01 breathing new life into my dad's old super-taks. Have the 135 3.5 and of course the 50 1.4. Deciding between getting the 20 or the 24 next, anyone know which is preferable? Eventually going to snag the 105 2.8 and the 200 4. Loving what I've been seeing flipping through this thread. There's a certain kind of clarity, like you could just fall into the pictures.
Anyway here's my new and old toys and a quick evening snap from that setup.
I believe that was wide open, 1/3s handheld! SR working just fine.
I have both the 20 and 24 in STak versions. Both were good condition.
I like them both, but they are different lenses. The 20 has some barrel distorion noticeable on APS-C. The angle of view enables quite interesting perspective. Since I got it I have tended to use it in preference to the 24. It focuses much closer than the 24, but at 4.5 is a little slow (does not play well witht he split image screen, and so presents a challenge to use). The 24 behaves nicely as a restilinear wide angle, and gives a reasonably wide perspective on APS-C. In summary, you would be happy with either. The 20 costs twice what the 24 costs. Both behave reasonably with the sun in the frame, but do produce several pentagonal flare spots. They do not seem to wash out the image though, which is good. One can manage the pentagonal iris image, but not generalised washed outness.
I like the 105 2.8. It is the only one I have between the 55 and the 135, so it gives a focal length contribution to my collection. Being faster than the 135 is definitely an advantage. Mine was used a lot before I got it, but is in good condition except for wear on the external paint. I used it for a picture of a koala in my front garden posted in this thread about 22 or 23 December last year.
I have the SMC 200/4. After a minor repair it has worked correctly. (I had to re-glue a reflection absorption tube just inside, looking from the rear.) I have not used it much. Under normal daylight work it is quite good. But I have noticed it does not perform well taking picture of people standing near to overhead projection screens in dull places, so wide open. I framed so tha tthe people were in the frame and the overhead projection was outside the frame, APS-C, but probably the screen was inside the FF field. Through the viewfinder it looked normal, but I had about 60-70% of frames get very low contrast resulting from the light spill effects. I have not had this effect with the 105 STak or the 135 STak.