Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2019, 12:50 PM   #16261
Veteran Member
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,666
QuoteOriginally posted by Erictator Quote
Just checked it out... I lost all interest in the review when I read:



"Very difficult to open the lens cluster to clean away any dirt inside".



If a lens has been apart by an amateur then all bets are off for what I'd call a pure review. Don't get me wrong, there are many on here that could probably do a fine job cleaning their own lenses, but to then pan a lens that is pretty well known for being good to very good for lackluster performance makes the whole situation one where I personally would have enough self doubt in my ability to reassemble properly to keep my review to myself.



My other life long hobby is replete with amateurs who take apart small 2 cycle engines to "clean" them or inspect them, and then somehow reassemble it with the sleeve in backwards, then wonder why the engine runs like a dog...



Eric
good point




---------- Post added 14th Mar 2019 at 14:51 ----------

i used to hook up audio systems for my clients when i was a salesman. the number of return visits i had to do because they moved things........

03-14-2019, 12:53 PM   #16262
Pentaxian
Dartmoor Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dartmoor, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,857
I guess my ultimate right of reply is to post some reviews of my own, and I really need to get around to doing that. But it's actually quite hard to reduce my feelings about these lenses down to just a few simple paragraphs. I prefer to think of every photo I post as part of an ongoing process of learning and understanding more about what my Takumars can do, and I simply don't feel qualified to make any definitive statements.
03-14-2019, 01:06 PM   #16263
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
paulh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: DFW Texas/Ventura County, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,091
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
But it's actually quite hard to reduce my feelings about these lenses down to just a few simple paragraphs. I prefer to think of every photo I post as part of an ongoing process of learning and understanding more about what my Takumars can do, and I simply don't feel qualified to make any definitive statements.
My feelings as well - hence my lack of lens reviews....
03-14-2019, 01:10 PM   #16264
Veteran Member
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,666
i take most reviews with a big grain of salt. particularly on old lenses since there ia a good chance someone buggered them. that and most of us arent testing and measuring with the right equipment so its all just opinion
some people who have used the best gear made across many brands i may listen closely to (digiralis comes to mind)



03-14-2019, 01:19 PM - 4 Likes   #16265
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
paulh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: DFW Texas/Ventura County, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,091
Takumars, Trash & Tecate go great together ST35.3.5 on *ist D: (re-post from a few yrs ago):
03-14-2019, 11:24 PM - 7 Likes   #16266
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 80
SMC Takumar 50/1,4 + tube


---------- Post added 03-14-19 at 11:27 PM ----------

Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2,5 + tube
03-15-2019, 02:58 AM   #16267
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 10,847
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
Somebody with a grand total of three posts has just reviewed the 35mm/3.5 with an overall rating of 6 and a "no" recommendation. We really need to have some sort of a right of reply against these people in the reviews section of this forum.
There are at least as many reviews stating x lens is the greatest when it's in fact mediocre as there are stating it's poor when in fact it's very good.

The same reviewer has just added one for the Tak 50/1.4 stating that the yellow tinge is nonsense and it's just the coating, which is completely false. I take far more issue with that one, though at least he has given it a fair 8/10 rating.

03-15-2019, 09:51 AM - 4 Likes   #16268
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Fulton County, Illinois
Posts: 3,727
Some reviewers discredit themselves, the sad thing is that they still affect the point totals and averages.

The one that makes me laugh, is the reviewer who buys a manual focus lens, and in reviewing it marks it lower in Handling for not be autofocus, something it never was meant to be. It amazes me how often that comes up in reviews. Could we have those reviewers each face a mirror and give themselves a nice hard Dopeslap?
03-15-2019, 11:18 AM - 1 Like   #16269
Pentaxian
ZombieArmy's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
Somebody with a grand total of three posts has just reviewed the 35mm/3.5 with an overall rating of 6 and a "no" recommendation. We really need to have some sort of a right of reply against these people in the reviews section of this forum.
I think we don't have such system because I don't think people should be afraid to offer dissenting opinions on a "cult lens". You know and I know there are times that lenses are over rated (not talking about this situation in particular), I think it mainly happens with legacy telephotos but it also happens with other stuff too.

Just in my experience alone the Pentax-M 200mm F/4 is a grossly over rated pile of manure, and that's after owning 2 copies. F4 is dreadful in contrast and is soft and doesn't become good until F8. I used to think it was user error on my part but my Tak Bayonet 135 is not only sharper at f2.8 than the 200mm at f/4, but it's a better 200mm too when cropped to the same frame.

My experience has been so bad with the lens I still haven't made a review because I still can't be sure whether or not both of my copies are just bad, but still, I shouldn't be afraid to post that review on a lens that is considered good by a lot of people because it's something someone looking for a 200mm should know.
03-15-2019, 11:44 AM   #16270
Veteran Member
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,666
QuoteOriginally posted by ZombieArmy Quote
I think we don't have such system because I don't think people should be afraid to offer dissenting opinions on a "cult lens". You know and I know there are times that lenses are over rated (not talking about this situation in particular), I think it mainly happens with legacy telephotos but it also happens with other stuff too.

Just in my experience alone the Pentax-M 200mm F/4 is a grossly over rated pile of manure, and that's after owning 2 copies. F4 is dreadful in contrast and is soft and doesn't become good until F8. I used to think it was user error on my part but my Tak Bayonet 135 is not only sharper at f2.8 than the 200mm at f/4, but it's a better 200mm too when cropped to the same frame.

My experience has been so bad with the lens I still haven't made a review because I still can't be sure whether or not both of my copies are just bad, but still, I shouldn't be afraid to post that review on a lens that is considered good by a lot of people because it's something someone looking for a 200mm should know.
in general, I agree (though I am not as harsh on m200 f4, though it lacks contrast , my super tak 200 really isn't alot different in IQ but weighs more . in both cases i will spend time in post correcting things I may not with a top flight modern lens , but then the Fuji 200 for my camera would set me back $6500 with the 1.4tc it ships with ... my M-200 cost $15 , my Super Tak 200 $35 shipped from japan , I couldn't buy a filter for the Fuji for $50 and i rarely require the FL
03-15-2019, 12:33 PM   #16271
Pentaxian
ZombieArmy's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
in general, I agree (though I am not as harsh on m200 f4, though it lacks contrast , my super tak 200 really isn't alot different in IQ but weighs more . in both cases i will spend time in post correcting things I may not with a top flight modern lens , but then the Fuji 200 for my camera would set me back $6500 with the 1.4tc it ships with ... my M-200 cost $15 , my Super Tak 200 $35 shipped from japan , I couldn't buy a filter for the Fuji for $50 and i rarely require the FL
I'm not comparing the M 200 to a modern lens, I'm comparing it to my other legacy lenses. If it can't keep up with a 135 pretending to be a 200 while not having any redeeming qualities like rendering, it doesn't really belong in my kit.
03-15-2019, 02:59 PM - 1 Like   #16272
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,559
QuoteOriginally posted by goatsNdonkey Quote
Some reviewers discredit themselves, the sad thing is that they still affect the point totals and averages.

The one that makes me laugh, is the reviewer who buys a manual focus lens, and in reviewing it marks it lower in Handling for not be autofocus, something it never was meant to be. It amazes me how often that comes up in reviews. Could we have those reviewers each face a mirror and give themselves a nice hard Dopeslap?
you get a THUMBS UP FOR THAT
03-15-2019, 03:14 PM - 1 Like   #16273
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
rayallen's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Forresters Beach, NSW, Australia.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,013
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonathan Mac Quote
the Tak 50/1.4 stating that the yellow tinge is nonsense and it's just the coating, which is completely false. I take far more issue with that one, though at least he has given it a fair 8/10 rating.
He surely exposed himself as one who does not know what he is talking about. The yellow tinge is real and it's not the coating. If only he knew how easy it is to fix it and return the glass to water clear.
03-15-2019, 03:28 PM - 1 Like   #16274
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Fulton County, Illinois
Posts: 3,727
QuoteOriginally posted by ZombieArmy Quote
I think we don't have such system because I don't think people should be afraid to offer dissenting opinions on a "cult lens". You know and I know there are times that lenses are over rated (not talking about this situation in particular), I think it mainly happens with legacy telephotos but it also happens with other stuff too.

Just in my experience alone the Pentax-M 200mm F/4 is a grossly over rated pile of manure, and that's after owning 2 copies. F4 is dreadful in contrast and is soft and doesn't become good until F8. I used to think it was user error on my part but my Tak Bayonet 135 is not only sharper at f2.8 than the 200mm at f/4, but it's a better 200mm too when cropped to the same frame.

My experience has been so bad with the lens I still haven't made a review because I still can't be sure whether or not both of my copies are just bad, but still, I shouldn't be afraid to post that review on a lens that is considered good by a lot of people because it's something someone looking for a 200mm should know.
When a set of reviews has some people giving a lens a 9 for sharpness, at the same time some other people are giving it a 5, it does take some careful reading and questioning.
-- Do these people have equivalent copies of the lens, but very very different standards?
-- Do both factions post sample images, and did the people posting 5s post sharp pix for some other lenses (meaning they just don't need new eye glasses)?
-- If both kinds of reviewers are being accurate, do others have to seriously worry about a great quality variation among copies of that lens when they shop for one?

If there is a big swing in quality between copies, it is a good thing if the reviews warn us about it.
03-15-2019, 03:32 PM - 2 Likes   #16275
Veteran Member
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,666
QuoteOriginally posted by goatsNdonkey Quote
When a set of reviews has some people giving a lens a 9 for sharpness, at the same time some other people are giving it a 5, it does take some careful reading and questioning.

-- Do these people have equivalent copies of the lens, but very very different standards?

-- Do both factions post sample images, and did the people posting 5s post sharp pix for some other lenses (meaning they just don't need new eye glasses)?

-- If both kinds of reviewers are being accurate, do others have to seriously worry about a great quality variation among copies of that lens when they shop for one?



If there is a big swing in quality between copies, it is a good thing if the reviews warn us about it.
well it is a combination. raves from people who have never used a high end lens or system. quality variance caused by age of lenses... i have taks almost as old as me and i am 59..
and the need for glasses lol
i look at vintage lenses as a way to acheive a certain rendering . if the result looks good great. clinically sharp isnt always the thing i want... i def have some and love them but ....

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, adjustment, asahi, auto-takumar, camera, d2x, days, ds, eric, f3.5, f4, fisheye, flickr, focus, handle, iq, iso, k3, lens, manor, moves, nikon, pentax lens, post, results, segments, shots, subject, takumar, versions
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Takumar: Super Takumar 135mm f3.5 includes case, hood and caps Peter Zack Sold Items 7 05-17-2010 07:12 PM
Adorama is dangerous! And so is the Takumar Club! NaClH2O Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 01-24-2010 09:54 AM
For Sale - Sold: Hard Cases for Takumar 28mm/3.5 and Takumar 135mm/2.5 gabriel_bc Sold Items 8 01-11-2010 10:17 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax-F 28/2.8; Takumar 400/5.6; Takumar 500/4.5 - pics thePiRaTE!! Sold Items 5 03-06-2008 09:47 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top