[Cuthbert]

Most Canon FD mount lenses are much cheaper, as it's an orphaned mount. The Nikon 1.8 is a non-AI lens and not usable on most Nikon cameras, and the 2.0 can't meter on lower-end Nikon bodies. Too bad, since it's supposedly a great lens.

Yes, the FD cannot be used on more modern Canons but let's be honest, who use an old Nikkor lens on a new F6 for instance? I'm pretty sure the Nikkor 1.8 also came in Ai version, I don't know on which bodies the AIs f2.0 cannot be mounted, though.

On the other side the FD 85 mm f1.2L still it's worth of a lot of money, and with good reasons,I heard.

[Dangermouse]

I think the main reason for mad M42 Takumar prices is the ease with which they can be adapted to other mounts. You can buy an M42 adapter for pretty much any other system which just screws onto the lens and requires no machining or irreversible modifications. The K mount versions will only really be of interest to people using Pentax bodies. It's easier to fit an M42 lens to a current Canon DSLR than it is to adapt an FD, for example.

I've used my K55/1.8 on my K-5 and K-01 on numerous occasions, and would be intrigued to see what it produces on a K-3 or indeed any future Pentax FF body.

[Swift1]

You sure? It's pretty long, I wouldn't like to have some vignetting problems on the 1.4...sometimes I use "short" hood on longer lenses, but it's definitely good to have this one because I also own a 100 mm f2.8 and for that it should fit...

I use that exact hood on my F28/2.8 when shooting digital, and that's equivalent to 42mm on film. There no vignetting. On my K50/1.4 and film I use the 52mm hood made for the K105/2.8 and there is no vignetting.

[Jonathan Mac]

Many old lens hood are far shorter than they would ideally be. It's quite easy to test in the viewfinder by mounting the hood and then moving a finger down from a top corner to see if it has to move far to be visible. Remember most viewfinders are not 100% though.

[gofour3]

Phil, you're the expert in old Pentax lenses, is it true that the Tak 1.8 and the K1.8 (I assume they are the same lens optically speaking) are much better than the M 2.0? I noticed their prices on evilbay are ridicoulus, on the other side some similar lenses like the Canon FD 85 mm f1.8 and the Nikkor 85mm f1.8/2.0 don't have this "aura" and they are sold of one third of a Tak.

Yes the SMC Takumar 85/1.8 and the K85/1.8 are basically the same optically, with 6 elements in 6 groups and a minimum focusing distance of .85 meters. The main differences between the Tak 85/1.8 and the K85/1.8 is the K Series lens has the full SMC coatings on all lens surfaces, has a smaller 52mm filter thread and has a better f/22 minimum aperture.

The faster 1.8 lenses are a bit sharper, but it’s not like the M85/2 is terrible. The 85/1.8’s are one of the elite higher end Pentax lenses, so the prices they command is more. It’s like the K28/2 compared to the M28/2.

Phil.

[edmundrt]

My girlfriend and I ordered this 'because it's pink!' while drunk on Friday night, and it arrived today. To be honest I've wanted a proper Holga for a while, so I'm actually quite excited to get snapping with it this week. I've got some out of date Fuji NPH400 that'll be perfect.

[gofour3]

My girlfriend and I ordered this 'because it's pink!' while drunk on Friday night, and it arrived today. To be honest I've wanted a proper Holga for a while, so I'm actually quite excited to get snapping with it this week. I've got some out of date Fuji NPH400 that'll be perfect.

That camera demands a certain outfit that matches!
Best wear all black and go with the “Johnny Cash” look!

Phil.

[edmundrt]

That camera demands a certain outfit that matches!
Best wear all black and go with the “Johnny Cash” look!

Phil.

Consider it a priority. I may get some matching sunglasses.

[Swift1]

My girlfriend and I ordered this 'because it's pink!' while drunk on Friday night, and it arrived today. To be honest I've wanted a proper Holga for a while, so I'm actually quite excited to get snapping with it this week. I've got some out of date Fuji NPH400 that'll be perfect.

Awesome!
Have fun with it

[45 Mike]

Wow, today I received 3 new lenses and two shutters.
I bought a pacemaker Speed Graphic 4x5 with a very nice 135 Optar in 4.7 with a Graphex (X) shutter. I also had a 127 Kodak lens in a Kodak shutter.
The difference between the two is subtle. I really wanted something wider and also longer.
I found 3 lenses, all of them are the Schneider Symmar convertibles.
The first is a 100/175 in a Compur #0. Then there is the 135/235 in a barrel. The cells fit the Compur #0 shutter.
Then I got a 150/265 in a gorgeous late model Compur #1.
Some may say that the convertibles are no good. However I think they will be just fine for me, I am not a "pro" squeezing every line/mm out of a lens. It's a Graflex, not a Linhoff.
Anyways, so that is six lenses in two shutters, right?
Nope. I know that Schneider says to remove the front cell to convert. However I also know that each cell can be used by itself.
So that would make 9 lenses in two shutters, right?
Nope. Because the cells for the 100/175 and 135/235 both fit the same shutter, I can also use the rear cell for the 100/175 with the front cell for the 135/235, which I think puts me close to 90mm, and I can use the rear cell from the 135/235 with the front cell of the 100/175 which puts me close to either 115 or 80mm I don't remember which combination gave me the widest angle.
Well, so I am fairly stoked at having 11 lens lengths in two shutters.
I am waiting for the lensboard to mount the 150/265 in.
Here is the scary part. I got the lenses, pulled the 135 Optar off my original lensboard. Mounted the 100/175 and put the lens in the camera to look, and went to adjust the body release for the front shutter, and pow. no body release.
I mean NOTHING, the button flops in the body, no spring tension, no FP shutter NOTHING. I can pull the button out to where the spring would push it, but it just flops there.
I wound up taking the front standard off, the back frame off, the release button plate removed, the FP timer cover removed.
Nothing I saw looked funky, it all looked good, nothing made sense.
The last time I used the body release it worked fine, and putting a new lens in the board could not have messed up the release button!
AAARRRGGHH.
As a troubleshooter, I know how to work a problem, and I thought back to the last thing I did before it went haywire.
I replaced the screws that I had removed to take off the side mounted Kalart/flash bracket.
The two screws at the bottom of the Kalart are quite long. Those two screws, when replaced, will push the lever off the body release and effectively disable the button. It just flops.
Hah.
Everything reassembled, lenses look fantastic, and tomorrow I am ready to try some test shots. By the time I got it all back together, it is just coalminer dark out there. :-)
Funny thing, at the end, the body release just will not work well with the Compur shutter style, so I ended up removing the "L" tab and will use a standard release cable after all. But it would have been sad to have lost the FP shutter as well.

[Paul Ewins]

I don't think Schneider were ever happy with "convertible" lenses because there is a compromise in image quality when you use one half of the lens. I'm guessing that it was a popular selling point in the US so they went along with it for marketing purposes. The Symmar-s is also convertible, but when they tweaked it for optimum sharpness as a whole the performance of the individual cells was reduced so the "convertible" markings were dropped. Technically the plain Angulons are convertible too (as shown in the attached page from the 1934 brochure) although that wasn't mentioned much in later years

[Jean Poitiers]

Thrift store score for 2€ ...

The meter works and has a good battery, but shutter is stuck. Will open probably this weekend to see if I can free thing up ... J (xpost)

[Dangermouse]

Score for €2!

If you're trying to remove that "2" from the back then try lighter fluid on a cotton bud. It might help the shutter too, depending on why it's jammed.

[45 Mike]

I don't think Schneider were ever happy with "convertible" lenses because there is a compromise in image quality when you use one half of the lens. I'm guessing that it was a popular selling point in the US so they went along with it for marketing purposes. The Symmar-s is also convertible, but when they tweaked it for optimum sharpness as a whole the performance of the individual cells was reduced so the "convertible" markings were dropped. Technically the plain Angulons are convertible too (as shown in the attached page from the 1934 brochure) although that wasn't mentioned much in later years

Interesting!
Well I took 4 test shots today, I used the same scene, same exposure settings.
I used the 100/175, shot it, then i swapped the front cell for the 135. I had thought I would get a wider angle, but no. I got a slightly longer lens. Maybe a 115mm

Then I installed the 135/235, again, same scene, same settings. Then i swapped in the front cell for the 100. And in fact I did get a wider lens, again about 120 mm.

In any case, the swapping cells to get more focal lengths is not worth the trouble. If I had gotten a wider than 100mm by swapping cells, then I would have been ecstatic. In both cases when i swapped the front cell, i got a middle focal length.
The 100/175 was meant for a 6x9 film size, and I can see some vignetting at large aperture. It is not very obtrusive, and the 175 does not vignette at all, so I think this will be my general use lens.

[Jonathan Mac]

Thrift store score for 2€ ...

The meter works and has a good battery, but shutter is stuck. Will open probably this weekend to see if I can free thing up ... J (xpost)

Wow, very pretty. Those things go for big money when operational. Good luck with fixing it.