[Ian_O]

Dear all,

Thank you for welcoming me to your fine forum. For full disclosure I must tell you that until last week I'd never owned or used Pentax equipment before, apart from being a regular Ricoh GR user (which I think comes under the Pentax banner). Please bear with me as I share a story of rookie errors and naivety!

I use Fuji mirrorless cameras a lot and recently became interested in using high quality vintage lenses on my Fuji equipment. I read many online reviews and recommendations for inexpensive but excellent vintage manual lenses, and as I was looking for a 50mm (or thereabouts) with close focussing capability I was drawn to the Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 50mm f4. I noticed a suitable lens for sale online and ordered it, thinking "I already have an unused M42 to Fuji-X adapter" so eagerly looked forward to the lens arriving so I could try it out. Well, it arrived the very next day and I unwrapped it, got out my Fuji X-T4 went to mount it on the adapter and did a double-take. "This is no M42 lens", I thought, "this is a Pentax K bayonet mount". "Oh damn" I said ... or something fairly similar. I then checked the seller's photos and sure enough it showed a bayonet mount. The lens was in lovely condition (remarkable for a near fifty year-old lens) so I proceeded to curse a lot and order a Pentax K mount to Fuji-X adapter. This would take three or four days to arrive.

While waiting for the new adapter to arrive I looked for every bit of information I could find on the K-mount Super-Multi-Coated MACRO-TAKUMAR 50mm f4 ... and couldn't find much. What I did find was lots of photos showing lenses identical to mine with the same model number - 43912 but with M42 mount. I found absolutely nothing about a lens like mine with the same model number, same serial number range and a bayonet mount. My wife (who had been asking me what all the swearing was about) suggested that perhaps I had the Takumar equivalent of the Harrison watch and that I could sell this unique anomaly of a lens at Sotheby's for millions. Well, call me an old cynic but I thought there must be a much more mundane explanation, little realising that there was, but it would highlight my own stupidity.

In the course of my searches for information I searched for "M42 to Pentax K". Yep, you've guessed it. There on my screen was a photo of a tiny little adapter ring, allowing Pentax users to mount their M42 lenses onto their new-fangled K bayonet mount cameras! I hastily went to my bag, checked my "new" lens and there it was. The lens didn't have a bayonet mount at all but an adapter identical to the one on the screen! With some effort and a few sore fingers later I managed to unscrew the adapter from my lovely lens revealing the M42 mount in all its glory. To say I felt stupid is an understatement.

So, a) I could have used my lens straight away after all, b) I was the proud owner of a Pentax adapter ring I didn't know I'd bought, and c) I'd ordered a brand new K-mount to Fuji adapter which I didn't need. :-(

The adapter arrived the following morning and I've decided to put the Pentax ring back on the lens and use it with the new adapter as if it's a K bayonet mount. That means I still have an M42 adapter I can use with the next Takumar lens I buy. Yes, I feel sure there will be more. I went out into the garden and took a number of test shots of flowers etc., and I can confirm all I read about this lens is true. It's a stunner! It needs a more patient style of photography, and not every shot is perfect, but when I manage to nail the focus it's remarkably sharp and contrasty for a lens this old. I like it! I've attached a couple of those first shots below ... hopefully.

Apologies for the long and tedious first post, but for those of you who have suffered enough to read to the end, thank you, and I promise I will learn more about Pentax lenses here and hopefully not make such a silly mistake again. :-)

Best wishes,

Ian

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Sandy Hancock]

Welcome!

Many Pentax enthusiasts use their lenses on other brand mirrorless cameras - we don't judge you for that. Much

The good news is that you have now have a K-mount to Fuji adaptor, so you can also explore all the marvellous old K-mount lenses out there

[Nakedgun]

Welcome!

[K2 to K50]

........Apologies for the long and tedious first post, but for those of you who have suffered enough to read to the end, thank you, and I promise I will learn more about Pentax lenses here and hopefully not make such a silly mistake again. :-)

Best wishes,

Ian

No apologies needed - it was a fun read, and if any of us were having a quiet little chuckle at your expense, please believe it was a friendly chuckle. I can imagine this sort of thing could happen to any of us.

Cheers
Peter

[Chris_K]

Hi Ian,
These funny stories happen to everyone once in a while (ok, to me at least ).
Have fun with your new lens and enjoy the Forum.
Greetings from Poland,
Chris

[jcdoss]

Welcome to Pentax Forums from Germany! Thanks for the amusing story, I admit I did have a little chuckle. 😄. With regard to your new K-mount adapter, it's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

[Kerrowdown]

Welcome to the forum, enjoy all that it has to offer you.

---

Last edited by Kerrowdown; 09-02-2022 at 03:07 PM.

[K(s)evin]

Welcome to PF!

Enjoyed your post. A good story, well told!

[MarkJerling]

Dear all,

Thank you for welcoming me to your fine forum. For full disclosure I must tell you that until last week I'd never owned or used Pentax equipment before, apart from being a regular Ricoh GR user (which I think comes under the Pentax banner). Please bear with me as I share a story of rookie errors and naivety!

I use Fuji mirrorless cameras a lot and recently became interested in using high quality vintage lenses on my Fuji equipment. I read many online reviews and recommendations for inexpensive but excellent vintage manual lenses, and as I was looking for a 50mm (or thereabouts) with close focussing capability I was drawn to the Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 50mm f4. I noticed a suitable lens for sale online and ordered it, thinking "I already have an unused M42 to Fuji-X adapter" so eagerly looked forward to the lens arriving so I could try it out. Well, it arrived the very next day and I unwrapped it, got out my Fuji X-T4 went to mount it on the adapter and did a double-take. "This is no M42 lens", I thought, "this is a Pentax K bayonet mount". "Oh damn" I said ... or something fairly similar. I then checked the seller's photos and sure enough it showed a bayonet mount. The lens was in lovely condition (remarkable for a near fifty year-old lens) so I proceeded to curse a lot and order a Pentax K mount to Fuji-X adapter. This would take three or four days to arrive.

While waiting for the new adapter to arrive I looked for every bit of information I could find on the K-mount Super-Multi-Coated MACRO-TAKUMAR 50mm f4 ... and couldn't find much. What I did find was lots of photos showing lenses identical to mine with the same model number - 43912 but with M42 mount. I found absolutely nothing about a lens like mine with the same model number, same serial number range and a bayonet mount. My wife (who had been asking me what all the swearing was about) suggested that perhaps I had the Takumar equivalent of the Harrison watch and that I could sell this unique anomaly of a lens at Sotheby's for millions. Well, call me an old cynic but I thought there must be a much more mundane explanation, little realising that there was, but it would highlight my own stupidity.

In the course of my searches for information I searched for "M42 to Pentax K". Yep, you've guessed it. There on my screen was a photo of a tiny little adapter ring, allowing Pentax users to mount their M42 lenses onto their new-fangled K bayonet mount cameras! I hastily went to my bag, checked my "new" lens and there it was. The lens didn't have a bayonet mount at all but an adapter identical to the one on the screen! With some effort and a few sore fingers later I managed to unscrew the adapter from my lovely lens revealing the M42 mount in all its glory. To say I felt stupid is an understatement.

So, a) I could have used my lens straight away after all, b) I was the proud owner of a Pentax adapter ring I didn't know I'd bought, and c) I'd ordered a brand new K-mount to Fuji adapter which I didn't need. :-(

The adapter arrived the following morning and I've decided to put the Pentax ring back on the lens and use it with the new adapter as if it's a K bayonet mount. That means I still have an M42 adapter I can use with the next Takumar lens I buy. Yes, I feel sure there will be more. I went out into the garden and took a number of test shots of flowers etc., and I can confirm all I read about this lens is true. It's a stunner! It needs a more patient style of photography, and not every shot is perfect, but when I manage to nail the focus it's remarkably sharp and contrasty for a lens this old. I like it! I've attached a couple of those first shots below ... hopefully.

Apologies for the long and tedious first post, but for those of you who have suffered enough to read to the end, thank you, and I promise I will learn more about Pentax lenses here and hopefully not make such a silly mistake again. :-)

Best wishes,

Ian

Welcome to the forum Ian. Great first post!
Kind regards,
Mark

New Zealand

[Ian_O]

Thank you all for your lovely comments. This seems like a really friendly place to be.

By the way, if anyone looked at the EXIF of those first couple of shots I posted and was confused by the lens info, I forgot to change the lens selection in the camera. Of course there's no communication between lens and camera, so in the Fuji I set up standard lens details, but always forget to change the selection when I use manual lenses.

I've just been looking at the 300mm f4 Takumars and feel one of those could be my next Pentax purchase!

Cheers,

Ian

[ramseybuckeye]

Welcome, I guessed the adapter was on before I got to that part. So it's an added bonus, those genuine adapters are not cheap anymore. There are a lot of great Takumars and Pentax K mount lenses out there, see the lens review section, if you haven't already been there, which I think you have. There is a part of the forum for non Pentax cameras too. Many of the users here shoot Pentax and Fuji, and other brands too.

[bdery]

Great story!

I'd ordered a brand new K-mount to Fuji adapter which I didn't need

But... you do need it!

Think about all the glorious Pentax lenses you can now adapt!

[wadge22]

Welcome to the forums!

Honestly, finding that M42 to K adapter was a bit of a score. If it's a genuine Pentax one, those are worth a decent amount of change these days. If you ever go to sell any of your stuff, don't just leave it on a lens and not ask for what it's worth!

[Ian_O]

Welcome to the forums!

Honestly, finding that M42 to K adapter was a bit of a score. If it's a genuine Pentax one, those are worth a decent amount of change these days. If you ever go to sell any of your stuff, don't just leave it on a lens and not ask for what it's worth!

That’s a very good point. It seems to be a genuine Pentax adapter, which probably makes the £79 I paid for the Takumar AND the adapter a decent price. 😀

[OrchidJulie]

That’s a very good point. It seems to be a genuine Pentax adapter, which probably makes the £79 I paid for the Takumar AND the adapter a decent price. 😀

More than decent, Ian, that's a score! I confess, I had a chuckle, and I also suspected the denouement (to my knowledge there were no bayonet-mount SMC Takumars of that vintage) before getting to the end of your wonderful post. I suspect there's not a one of us who doesn't have some secret tale of some silliness from days gone by!
Regardless, welcome! Enjoy the new gear!