What Should Pentax Do?

thibs · 08-12-2014, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

So Fuji and Olympus are not serious?

Keep in mind that Fuji, Sony, and Olympus were THE definition of consumer grade camera makers in the days of film. In AF SLR world Pentax (and Minolta) duked it out with Canon while Nikon was the more elite brand (until Canon started making its sewer pipes). Olympus ducked out of SLRs due to AF problems and went gonzo on the P&S market while Fuji mostly stuck to P&S and medium format (Texas Leicas and their massive studio kit).

The camera market has never seen any sort of rigid duality.

Agreed on everything but Sony. I know Sony bought Minolta photo business but frankly, I never felt Sony did anything in the line of what Minolta did. So giving credit to Sony for that is... so-so IMO

**Aristophanes** · 08-12-2014, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I can't directly comment about Olympus, but I can with Fuji.
I have an X-T1 and I frequent some Fuji boards. There are a lot of pros that are using Fuji right now....but from what I've seen is the majority see Fuji as their second system. The system pros use when not doing "serious" work.
The flash system is miles away from being serious. They have a 50-140mm f2.8 on the lens roadmap, but they are missing telephoto primes.

They have made serious strides in the past 3 years, but they still have a way to go.

And remember, there are rumors of both FF and MF mirrorless cameras being talked about.
Those may never materialize, but it still goes to show that FF, right or wrong, is seen as the professional format, and until that perception is changed, people are not going to stop clamoring for one. It is up to the camera manufacturers to change the perception of the public, not the other way around.

There are a lot of self-proclaimed pros who claim they use Fuji.

Anyone with a SmugMug Pro account or similar can call themselves a pro.

Fuji's lenses are largish and costly. All companies make excellent glass.

Problem with FF is the cost goes way, way upend that omits market penetration. Once people start spending lots of $$ they tend to get full-featured systems including macro and tele and superior flash. That's still only DSLR.

Pentax needs to get built-in wi-fi and tethering going.

Imageman · 08-12-2014, 02:14 PM

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

ElJamoquio · 08-12-2014, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

That would give you a nice viewfinder, and very shallow DOF. IQ would be a mixed bag compared to more expensive APS-C setups. Certainly high ISO would suffer.

I wouldn't buy anything in M42 past 85mm or so. Maybe 135 would be OK. It's not worthwhile to me. Might be worth it to you, but those older, longer telephotos aren't very good, don't have AF, and are being coupled to a camera that doesn't do well at high ISO.

Depends on what you want to do. Honestly $400 for a 'one trick pony' (shallow DOF) is worthwhile compared to some other expenses. I'm about to spend $1400-1600 on a tilt-shift lens, for example.

lytrytyr · 08-12-2014, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)
Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)
comments please

I don't need a starter system,
I "need" a K mount FF to pair with an APS-C K mount camera
to give better wide angle coverage (faster, more even)
than what my DA 15 is giving me right now.

cali92rs · 08-12-2014, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

There are a lot of self-proclaimed pros who claim they use Fuji.

Anyone with a SmugMug Pro account or similar can call themselves a pro.

Fuji's lenses are largish and costly. All companies make excellent glass.

Problem with FF is the cost goes way, way upend that omits market penetration. Once people start spending lots of $$ they tend to get full-featured systems including macro and tele and superior flash. That's still only DSLR.

Pentax needs to get built-in wi-fi and tethering going.

Largish and costly are by product of being fast. I dont know of anyone that makes fast, small and cheap.

RonHendriks1966 · 08-12-2014, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

Just thinking how good it could be: Well it beats the hell out of the K-7 dog:
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Pentax-K-3-versus-Pentax-K7-versus-Canon-EOS-5D___914_615_176

I once used a very old pre-AI Nikkor lens on my Pentax (adapter) and that had some issues, but deliverd some stunning images. It was 300mm/f4.5 and with adapter it became 375mm/f5.6. Problem with some old lenses is that wide open they don't deliver and that is why you wanted to toy around with the 5D.

**Aristophanes** · 08-12-2014, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

Lose the old primes and get a middling, modern zoom. Much better.

**clackers** · 08-12-2014, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by kadajawi

Sony is doing well and growin.

I think you must read different financial and sales information to the rest of us, Kadajawi!

Sony Credit Cut To Junk Status As Smartphones 'Cannibalize' Its TV And PC Businesses - Forbes

Alizarine · 08-12-2014, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I can't directly comment about Olympus, but I can with Fuji.
I have an X-T1 and I frequent some Fuji boards. There are a lot of pros that are using Fuji right now....but from what I've seen is the majority see Fuji as their second system. The system pros use when not doing "serious" work.
The flash system is miles away from being serious. They have a 50-140mm f2.8 on the lens roadmap, but they are missing telephoto primes.

They have made serious strides in the past 3 years, but they still have a way to go.

And remember, there are rumors of both FF and MF mirrorless cameras being talked about.
Those may never materialize, but it still goes to show that FF, right or wrong, is seen as the professional format, and until that perception is changed, people are not going to stop clamoring for one. It is up to the camera manufacturers to change the perception of the public, not the other way around.

to be fair to Fuji, well they might be the "secondary system choice" but still became top choice for that purpose-- in 3 years. That's great for a system that started from scratch and just recently... Compared to, say, Pentax and decades of the K-mount. Or the Sony NEX which has been around longer too.

JPT · 08-12-2014, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by Alizarine

to be fair to Fuji, well they might be the "secondary system choice" but still became top choice for that purpose-- in 3 years. That's great for a system that started from scratch and just recently... Compared to, say, Pentax and decades of the K-mount. Or the Sony NEX which has been around longer too.

It's an exciting time for Fuji fans. Fuji's strategy for building the X series has been quite interesting compared to the other makers, and I think quite smart. They started from the top with their bodies and lenses and then provided lower cost options. Other mirrorless makers started from the bottom or middle of the line up, introducing cheap consumer lenses first and only filling out the high end much later - Olympus f2.8 lenses are only coming out now after five years. In Sony's case the lenses never came before they moved onto the next thing. I think Fuji's attitude inspires confidence in users. They may not sell huge amounts of camera bodies, but I would guess the average X series customer invests more in lenses and feels more committed to the system.

I think Fuji as a company is in a similar position to Ricoh. Cameras are a high-profile but small part of their business at the moment. I think both companies are serious about cameras but more because they see it as an important part of their corporate identity than as a big money-maker. The big difference is Fuji had no system before the X series, so they are in a system-building phase. Ricoh has inherited a mature but under performing system with the Pentax acquisition. What they have to do to make it successful is different. If they really do make a full frame K-mount camera or a new mirrorless system, they will have to shift into system-building mode and I think that will be an exciting time for Pentaxians too.

noser · 08-12-2014, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

I think Zach Arias said almost this exact thing 4 or 5 years ago. There is some sense to it, given some reasonable assumptions.

pinholecam · 08-12-2014, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)

Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)

comments please

Feasible, with some potential issues.

35mm - mirror clearance problem (my 35/3.5 did not clear)
50mm - the 8 element version is documented as not clearing the mirror. My modified A50/1.7 was no issue. An already modified (by previous owner) K50/1.2, barely cleared. Some varying results out there concerning the 7-element Takumar 50mm on the 5D
135mm - no issue
200-300mm - should be no issues. They usually don't stand up to the resolution/CA resistance for more pixel dense sensors though, but the 5D is only 12mp on FF (about equal to the density of a 5mp aps-c) so its very forgiving.
That said, a PITA to use.

You would also need a EEG precision focusing screen (~$45) to get good focus accuracy with fast lenses.
The stock 5D screen is no good at all (maybe for f4 o5 f5.6 lenses only )

mannyquinto · 08-12-2014, 11:50 PM

Back in 2012, I posted is it possible to make a FF camera within the price range of 1K to 1.3K. The Sony A7 body is 1.5K and had attracted some to try it. I still think that a low cost, K-mount , no frills FF camera is still the camera that RICOH should build. It should attract a lot of new buyers especially hobbyist or those who have a lot of vintage lenses. I like it to have an OVF but it seems that to lower the cost of production it would then be mirror-less. Fine, just give us the option of adding a high quality VF to complement it.

Asahiflex · 08-12-2014, 11:53 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Imageman

A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars
An m42 adapter 10 dollars
5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm)
Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system)
comments please

I've yet to find a 5D Classic cheaper than $500 but yes, it's certainly a way to enter the FF world. I've owned two 5D's and while the FF sensor is great, the cameras are trash from a user's point of view. It has one of the worst back LCD screens, even the best photo in the world will look like crap on that LCD. And its user interface is utter crap compared to Pentax. But its sensor is definitely nice, provided you shoot in RAW. I liked what my 58mm f/2 Takumar did on the 5D: http://www.camerac.nl/foto/58mmTak/58mmtak-01.jpg

---------- Post added 08-13-14 at 08:58 AM ----------

Originally posted by pinholecam

Feasible, with some potential issues.

35mm - mirror clearance problem (my 35/3.5 did not clear)
50mm - the 8 element version is documented as not clearing the mirror. My modified A50/1.7 was no issue. An already modified (by previous owner) K50/1.2, barely cleared. Some varying results out there concerning the 7-element Takumar 50mm on the 5D
135mm - no issue
200-300mm - should be no issues. They usually don't stand up to the resolution/CA resistance for more pixel dense sensors though, but the 5D is only 12mp on FF (about equal to the density of a 5mp aps-c) so its very forgiving.
That said, a PITA to use.

You would also need a EEG precision focusing screen (~$45) to get good focus accuracy with fast lenses.
The stock 5D screen is no good at all (maybe for f4 o5 f5.6 lenses only )

My 7-element 50mm f/1.4 Takumars did not clear the mirror on two 5D's I had (back then I had no 8-element version).

Regarding the longer focal lengths: the 200mm f/4 Super-Multi-Coated is definitely up to snuff for serious work, IMO (see for instance http://i385.photobucket.com/albums/oo293/spotmatic/smctak200-05.jpg). Anything longer than that and IQ will degrade dramatically, indeed.

08-12-2014, 05:08 PM	#129
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by kadajawi Sony is doing well and growin. I think you must read different financial and sales information to the rest of us, Kadajawi! Sony Credit Cut To Junk Status As Smartphones 'Cannibalize' Its TV And PC Businesses - Forbes Last edited by clackers; 08-13-2014 at 01:32 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
This is what Pentax should do	Rekusu	Pentax Medium Format	19	01-12-2015 01:10 AM
What should I do?	kodai84	Photographic Industry and Professionals	4	01-05-2014 08:49 AM
Focusing on Pentax K-Mount only - Or what should I do with my M42s	antipattern	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	01-30-2013 10:26 AM
What Should I Do?	tabl10s	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	8	10-16-2012 03:55 AM
what Pentax should do	nathancombs	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	07-06-2007 01:39 AM

08-12-2014, 12:26 PM	#121
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Aristophanes So Fuji and Olympus are not serious? Keep in mind that Fuji, Sony, and Olympus were THE definition of consumer grade camera makers in the days of film. In AF SLR world Pentax (and Minolta) duked it out with Canon while Nikon was the more elite brand (until Canon started making its sewer pipes). Olympus ducked out of SLRs due to AF problems and went gonzo on the P&S market while Fuji mostly stuck to P&S and medium format (Texas Leicas and their massive studio kit). The camera market has never seen any sort of rigid duality. Agreed on everything but Sony. I know Sony bought Minolta photo business but frankly, I never felt Sony did anything in the line of what Minolta did. So giving credit to Sony for that is... so-so IMO

08-12-2014, 01:27 PM	#122
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by cali92rs I can't directly comment about Olympus, but I can with Fuji. I have an X-T1 and I frequent some Fuji boards. There are a lot of pros that are using Fuji right now....but from what I've seen is the majority see Fuji as their second system. The system pros use when not doing "serious" work. The flash system is miles away from being serious. They have a 50-140mm f2.8 on the lens roadmap, but they are missing telephoto primes. They have made serious strides in the past 3 years, but they still have a way to go. And remember, there are rumors of both FF and MF mirrorless cameras being talked about. Those may never materialize, but it still goes to show that FF, right or wrong, is seen as the professional format, and until that perception is changed, people are not going to stop clamoring for one. It is up to the camera manufacturers to change the perception of the public, not the other way around. There are a lot of self-proclaimed pros who claim they use Fuji. Anyone with a SmugMug Pro account or similar can call themselves a pro. Fuji's lenses are largish and costly. All companies make excellent glass. Problem with FF is the cost goes way, way upend that omits market penetration. Once people start spending lots of $$ they tend to get full-featured systems including macro and tele and superior flash. That's still only DSLR. Pentax needs to get built-in wi-fi and tethering going.

08-12-2014, 02:14 PM	#123
Imageman Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 461	A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please

08-12-2014, 02:23 PM	#124
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please That would give you a nice viewfinder, and very shallow DOF. IQ would be a mixed bag compared to more expensive APS-C setups. Certainly high ISO would suffer. I wouldn't buy anything in M42 past 85mm or so. Maybe 135 would be OK. It's not worthwhile to me. Might be worth it to you, but those older, longer telephotos aren't very good, don't have AF, and are being coupled to a camera that doesn't do well at high ISO. Depends on what you want to do. Honestly $400 for a 'one trick pony' (shallow DOF) is worthwhile compared to some other expenses. I'm about to spend $1400-1600 on a tilt-shift lens, for example.

08-12-2014, 03:30 PM	#125
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please I don't need a starter system, I "need" a K mount FF to pair with an APS-C K mount camera to give better wide angle coverage (faster, more even) than what my DA 15 is giving me right now.

08-12-2014, 03:40 PM	#126
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Aristophanes There are a lot of self-proclaimed pros who claim they use Fuji. Anyone with a SmugMug Pro account or similar can call themselves a pro. Fuji's lenses are largish and costly. All companies make excellent glass. Problem with FF is the cost goes way, way upend that omits market penetration. Once people start spending lots of $$ they tend to get full-featured systems including macro and tele and superior flash. That's still only DSLR. Pentax needs to get built-in wi-fi and tethering going. Largish and costly are by product of being fast. I dont know of anyone that makes fast, small and cheap.

08-12-2014, 04:11 PM	#127
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please Just thinking how good it could be: Well it beats the hell out of the K-7 dog: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Pentax-K-3-versus-Pentax-K7-versus-Canon-EOS-5D___914_615_176 I once used a very old pre-AI Nikkor lens on my Pentax (adapter) and that had some issues, but deliverd some stunning images. It was 300mm/f4.5 and with adapter it became 375mm/f5.6. Problem with some old lenses is that wide open they don't deliver and that is why you wanted to toy around with the 5D.

08-12-2014, 04:30 PM	#128
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please Lose the old primes and get a middling, modern zoom. Much better.

08-12-2014, 05:46 PM	#130
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by cali92rs I can't directly comment about Olympus, but I can with Fuji. I have an X-T1 and I frequent some Fuji boards. There are a lot of pros that are using Fuji right now....but from what I've seen is the majority see Fuji as their second system. The system pros use when not doing "serious" work. The flash system is miles away from being serious. They have a 50-140mm f2.8 on the lens roadmap, but they are missing telephoto primes. They have made serious strides in the past 3 years, but they still have a way to go. And remember, there are rumors of both FF and MF mirrorless cameras being talked about. Those may never materialize, but it still goes to show that FF, right or wrong, is seen as the professional format, and until that perception is changed, people are not going to stop clamoring for one. It is up to the camera manufacturers to change the perception of the public, not the other way around. to be fair to Fuji, well they might be the "secondary system choice" but still became top choice for that purpose-- in 3 years. That's great for a system that started from scratch and just recently... Compared to, say, Pentax and decades of the K-mount. Or the Sony NEX which has been around longer too.

08-12-2014, 06:54 PM	#131
JPT Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,821	Originally posted by Alizarine to be fair to Fuji, well they might be the "secondary system choice" but still became top choice for that purpose-- in 3 years. That's great for a system that started from scratch and just recently... Compared to, say, Pentax and decades of the K-mount. Or the Sony NEX which has been around longer too. It's an exciting time for Fuji fans. Fuji's strategy for building the X series has been quite interesting compared to the other makers, and I think quite smart. They started from the top with their bodies and lenses and then provided lower cost options. Other mirrorless makers started from the bottom or middle of the line up, introducing cheap consumer lenses first and only filling out the high end much later - Olympus f2.8 lenses are only coming out now after five years. In Sony's case the lenses never came before they moved onto the next thing. I think Fuji's attitude inspires confidence in users. They may not sell huge amounts of camera bodies, but I would guess the average X series customer invests more in lenses and feels more committed to the system. I think Fuji as a company is in a similar position to Ricoh. Cameras are a high-profile but small part of their business at the moment. I think both companies are serious about cameras but more because they see it as an important part of their corporate identity than as a big money-maker. The big difference is Fuji had no system before the X series, so they are in a system-building phase. Ricoh has inherited a mature but under performing system with the Pentax acquisition. What they have to do to make it successful is different. If they really do make a full frame K-mount camera or a new mirrorless system, they will have to shift into system-building mode and I think that will be an exciting time for Pentaxians too.

08-12-2014, 08:37 PM	#132
noser Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Calgary, AB CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 292	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please I think Zach Arias said almost this exact thing 4 or 5 years ago. There is some sense to it, given some reasonable assumptions.

08-12-2014, 11:21 PM	#133
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please Feasible, with some potential issues. 35mm - mirror clearance problem (my 35/3.5 did not clear) 50mm - the 8 element version is documented as not clearing the mirror. My modified A50/1.7 was no issue. An already modified (by previous owner) K50/1.2, barely cleared. Some varying results out there concerning the 7-element Takumar 50mm on the 5D 135mm - no issue 200-300mm - should be no issues. They usually don't stand up to the resolution/CA resistance for more pixel dense sensors though, but the 5D is only 12mp on FF (about equal to the density of a 5mp aps-c) so its very forgiving. That said, a PITA to use. You would also need a EEG precision focusing screen (~$45) to get good focus accuracy with fast lenses. The stock 5D screen is no good at all (maybe for f4 o5 f5.6 lenses only )

08-12-2014, 11:50 PM	#134
mannyquinto Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: manila Posts: 152	Back in 2012, I posted is it possible to make a FF camera within the price range of 1K to 1.3K. The Sony A7 body is 1.5K and had attracted some to try it. I still think that a low cost, K-mount , no frills FF camera is still the camera that RICOH should build. It should attract a lot of new buyers especially hobbyist or those who have a lot of vintage lenses. I like it to have an OVF but it seems that to lower the cost of production it would then be mirror-less. Fine, just give us the option of adding a high quality VF to complement it.

08-12-2014, 11:53 PM - 1 Like	#135
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by Imageman A canon 5D mk1 200 dollars An m42 adapter 10 dollars 5 m42 primes 200 dollars (35mm 50mm 135mm 200mm 300mm) Total cost of going FF 410 dollars (cheap starter system) comments please I've yet to find a 5D Classic cheaper than $500 but yes, it's certainly a way to enter the FF world. I've owned two 5D's and while the FF sensor is great, the cameras are trash from a user's point of view. It has one of the worst back LCD screens, even the best photo in the world will look like crap on that LCD. And its user interface is utter crap compared to Pentax. But its sensor is definitely nice, provided you shoot in RAW. I liked what my 58mm f/2 Takumar did on the 5D: http://www.camerac.nl/foto/58mmTak/58mmtak-01.jpg ---------- Post added 08-13-14 at 08:58 AM ---------- Originally posted by pinholecam Feasible, with some potential issues. 35mm - mirror clearance problem (my 35/3.5 did not clear) 50mm - the 8 element version is documented as not clearing the mirror. My modified A50/1.7 was no issue. An already modified (by previous owner) K50/1.2, barely cleared. Some varying results out there concerning the 7-element Takumar 50mm on the 5D 135mm - no issue 200-300mm - should be no issues. They usually don't stand up to the resolution/CA resistance for more pixel dense sensors though, but the 5D is only 12mp on FF (about equal to the density of a 5mp aps-c) so its very forgiving. That said, a PITA to use. You would also need a EEG precision focusing screen (~$45) to get good focus accuracy with fast lenses. The stock 5D screen is no good at all (maybe for f4 o5 f5.6 lenses only ) My 7-element 50mm f/1.4 Takumars did not clear the mirror on two 5D's I had (back then I had no 8-element version). Regarding the longer focal lengths: the 200mm f/4 Super-Multi-Coated is definitely up to snuff for serious work, IMO (see for instance http://i385.photobucket.com/albums/oo293/spotmatic/smctak200-05.jpg). Anything longer than that and IQ will degrade dramatically, indeed.