Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-24-2009, 09:30 PM   #46
Veteran Member
raymeedc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 951
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
One of my H3 has both Heiland and Honeywell (Ser. # beginning with 33)on it while one only has Honeywell on it (Ser. # beginning with 47). I'm guessing the one is in the transition from Heiland to Honeywell.
Wow, that must be a pretty rare example. Just curious, where on the body is Honeywell written, & where does Heiland appear?

07-24-2009, 10:05 PM   #47
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by raymeedc Quote
Wow, that must be a pretty rare example. Just curious, where on the body is Honeywell written, & where does Heiland appear?
Heiland appears in the usual place. Honeywell appears just below the H on the prism. I'll take some pics of them both this weekend for comparison. The H and "square" that surrounds the H are subtly different as well.
07-26-2009, 09:39 AM   #48
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 33
Original Poster
I'll look into the 55 later this week probably.

Thanks for the info on the naming sequences. Very interesting stuff - I did a bit more googling around too on it. Lots and lots of info out there.

In the meantime, I purchased a 50/4 s-m-c macro takumar off of the marketplace. I expect that it will probably arrive at some point this week.

Now I just need a body to use it on.
07-26-2009, 12:33 PM   #49
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
The macro tak is a nice pre-set lens. It is 1:1. It takes a little to get used to the preset diaphragm but once you do its not bad. I have used mine on the K200d and it works great on digital.

07-26-2009, 06:49 PM   #50
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 33
Original Poster
I believe I read that the s-m-c version is auto-aperture and focuses to 1/2 lifesize, not 1:1?
07-26-2009, 07:07 PM   #51
Veteran Member
raymeedc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 951
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
I believe I read that the s-m-c version is auto-aperture and focuses to 1/2 lifesize, not 1:1?
You are correct. Blue is describing an earlier pre-set model that preceded even the Super Takumar version.
07-26-2009, 07:12 PM   #52
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
I believe I read that the s-m-c version is auto-aperture and focuses to 1/2 lifesize, not 1:1?
You are correct. Some how I missed the s-m-c earlier and just saw the macro tak.
07-26-2009, 07:19 PM   #53
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 33
Original Poster
Cool. Thanks.

Should be fun!

The only pentax lens I currently own is a leica thread mount version of the 43/1.9 limited. I love it, so I am very excited to try out the 50/4 takumar and see how it does!

07-26-2009, 07:30 PM   #54
Veteran Member
raymeedc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 951
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
I am very excited to try out the 50/4 takumar and see how it does!
Great lens. I have the same version as yours.
07-26-2009, 08:52 PM   #55
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
Cool. Thanks.

Should be fun!

The only pentax lens I currently own is a leica thread mount version of the 43/1.9 limited. I love it, so I am very excited to try out the 50/4 takumar and see how it does!
That's a somewhat rare lens. Who knows if it has the same optical formula as the limited. Do you have the matching range finder?
07-27-2009, 12:19 AM   #56
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
I'll look into the 55 later this week probably.

Thanks for the info on the naming sequences. Very interesting stuff - I did a bit more googling around too on it. Lots and lots of info out there.

In the meantime, I purchased a 50/4 s-m-c macro takumar off of the marketplace. I expect that it will probably arrive at some point this week.

Now I just need a body to use it on.
the macro-takumar is a wonderful lens. incredibly sharp. I have the earlier preset version and it has almost completely replaced my 4/100 s-m-c macro-takumar.
07-27-2009, 03:57 AM   #57
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 33
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
That's a somewhat rare lens. Who knows if it has the same optical formula as the limited. Do you have the matching range finder?
It is from a limited run of 2000 total. The optical formula is the same but this version is larger to account for the different distance to the film plane - rangefinders dont have a mirror box.

I have the matching optical viewfinder, which is terrific. It has 43mm and 50mm framelines.
07-27-2009, 07:35 AM   #58
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
It is from a limited run of 2000 total. The optical formula is the same but this version is larger to account for the different distance to the film plane - rangefinders dont have a mirror box.

I have the matching optical viewfinder, which is terrific. It has 43mm and 50mm framelines.
After using what is essentially a Limited for rangefinders, you are going to like these Taks. I was looking at that lenses last week and it was making me envious of rangefinders which I have had limited interest in before.
07-27-2009, 07:49 AM   #59
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 33
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
After using what is essentially a Limited for rangefinders, you are going to like these Taks. I was looking at that lenses last week and it was making me envious of rangefinders which I have had limited interest in before.
I have a few photos from a test roll of it uploaded in case you are interested -- Pentax 43/1.9 Limited - Leica Mount

I was trying to push the lens to its limits in horrible lighting conditions. I managed to make it flare when it had no lens hood, but with the retractable lens hood extended, it was impossible to flare.

Included are some purposely out of focus shots to check out the bokeh. Also included are some wide open, close up photos. Seems damn sharp to me wide open, despite some criticisms I had read online. No sharpening done in the LR development tab - low output sharpening applied though.

I love the lens. Three cheers for the 43mm f/1.9 L mount!

You can get into rangefinders for relatively little money. I picked up my Bessa R for $140 in essentially mint condition.
07-27-2009, 07:52 AM   #60
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by david.elliott Quote
I have a few photos from a test roll of it uploaded in case you are interested -- Pentax 43/1.9 Limited - Leica Mount

I was trying to push the lens to its limits in horrible lighting conditions. I managed to make it flare when it had no lens hood, but with the retractable lens hood extended, it was impossible to flare.

Included are some purposely out of focus shots to check out the bokeh. Also included are some wide open, close up photos. Seems damn sharp to me wide open, despite some criticisms I had read online. No sharpening done in the LR development tab - low output sharpening applied though.

I love the lens. Three cheers for the 43mm f/1.9 L mount!

You can get into rangefinders for relatively little money. I picked up my Bessa R for $140 in essentially mint condition.
what film were you using?
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!
body, camera, focus, glass, k-mount, lenses, pentax, quality, viewfinder, viewfinders
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
adapters for non-K-mount lenses to Pentax K-mount DSLRs: new dimensions for LBA Douglas_of_Sweden Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 152 07-29-2017 05:47 AM
Is it possible to use K mount lenses with a 4/3 body? emr Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 05-05-2009 08:25 AM
Optical differences between Takumar and K-mount lenses? bsbxl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-26-2008 05:59 PM
Is there a mount for Minolta lenses, on a k10d body? ranamar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 06-23-2008 11:49 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:43 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