|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-03-2018, 06:02 PM
|
| |
I have been told it is a prototype. I have also been told it is a miss print. I used to work in manufacturing, so the misprint part is a little less credible to me. It isn't as though the guy setting it up didn't have a guide, so not being an English speaker should not be a problem. It also seems it would have been recycled (cleaned and reprinted). So I believe 4334600 is a preproduction sample. But like most things Takumar... who knows? :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-03-2018, 03:12 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-20-2018, 08:02 PM
|
| |
I have the Helios 44-2. Great lens. I have a Jupiter 37A, not so great. As far as unique rendering goes... every lens line renders a little differently. So they are all unique. That isn't something confined to vintage lenses. But yes, we tend to buy what we personally like, which is totally subjective.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-20-2018, 09:46 AM
|
| |
I'm a Canon DSLR user that adapts M42 mount lenses to my 5D Mark III. I have 41 M42 lenses. There are people that also adapt them to APS-C and Micro 4/3. That said, I don't think the market is as large as one might think. I spend many hours on Ebay cataloging the 50mm f/1.4 lenses I see and one would be surprised at how many do not sell and get relisted... over and over again. There are people that say they adapt these lenses to get that "film look" in their images. BS. Film and photographic paper gives the "film look", not the lens.
I love my M42 lenses, but I don't believe reviving the old Takumars would be economically viable. As far as paying a premium over modern Canon lenses? Maybe for a scant few lenses, but the reason those "valuable" lenses are priced in the thousands is because they are truly rare. A lot of sellers on Ebay put "rare" in their listings. Very very few lenses are rare.
People buy M42 lenses for a few reasons:
1. Nostalgia
2. They don't have a lot of money and get them instead of the modern lenses.
3. They bought into the idea they give a "film look". What they really mean is that they get horrible flare, slightly out of focus (operator error), images.
4. They like to post their latest thrift store find. "I got this today for $5." So the popularity is because they can be found dirt cheap. Try to sell them now in brand new condition and you are talking big $. I have seen NIB Takumars. They cost thousands. It would not be cheap to make a lens to the build quality of the old Takumars (Think modern Zeiss).
5. They are obsessive compulsive collectors.That's me. I know of more than a few people that have literally hundreds of these old lenses. They scour Ebay for lenses that are under $20 and buy them. It doesn't even matter what the lens is. They just buy it. They even buy them when there's a fungus farm in the lens. They will tell you that they have only used most once (flower pics mostly) or have not used most at all.
6. They also like having a couple dozen adapters.
So while internet forum and Facebook forum groups would give the impression these old lenses could be a new market for new lenses they aren't. They certainly are not wildly popular enough to build new assembly lines, R&D, and hire people to build them. There just are not enough people looking to spend into the high hundreds or thousands for a modern manual focus lens. I'm frankly shocked at what Zeiss gets for their line, but Zeiss is a very old name and serves a very niche market. Somebody is going to say Zeiss is the best there is. Not true. There are modern popular brands that have lenses that beat Zeiss. Zeiss is the equivalent of the middle aged guy that buys a Porsche... because he can. There really is not something extraordinary in a photo taken with a Zeiss lens. You can't look at a photo and tell what lens the photo was taken with. I could take the same photo with 5 different lenses. You would not be able to tell me which one is the Zeiss photo and why it is. You might get lucky, but luck is all it is. ;)[COLOR="Silver"]
---------- Post added 10-20-18 at 09:58 AM ----------
There are adapters for M42 to Canon FD. There are adapters for almost everything. Some even have focus confirmation chips.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-14-2018, 10:55 PM
|
| |
Thank you! I have also learned that the 50mm f/1.4 (8 element) lenses also have no product code.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
08-14-2018, 09:50 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
08-12-2018, 06:40 PM
|
| |
Welcome to the forum! How are the beaches around Galveston? I live in the DFW area, but have never been down there. Can you recommend some nice areas for photography and surf fishing on the coast near Houston?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
08-10-2018, 06:13 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
08-10-2018, 03:02 PM
|
| |
Thank you so much for your response! Thanks for all the information. It is greatly appreciated.
I assume the field of view is different between FF and medium format just like APS-c and FF? If I am correct, then a 90mm medium format lens will provide the same field of view as a 55mm on ff? If that is the case then maybe I should look for something longer for portraits in addition to the 90mm. I'll check out flickr to have a look.
Thanks again!
Charles
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
08-10-2018, 01:42 PM
|
| |
Please forgive my ignorance concerning anything Pentax other than FF Takumar lenses. I shoot FF Canon and L glass, and adapt very many (30+) old M42 mount lenses to that camera too.
However, I do have some questions regarding the 645Z and possible legacy glass adaptations. Are the 67 and 6x7 lenses the same mount lenses and can they be adapted to the 645Z?
For me the 645Z would be a huge investment. There are two modern lenses I would want to get with it, but I would have to save for a while to add them (In particular the Pentax 645D FA 90mm F2.8 ED AW SR Lens. I'm a portrait guy). In the meantime, I think the old manual focus lenses would be fun if they can be adapted.
Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-09-2018, 08:06 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-08-2018, 06:49 PM
|
| |
It's another 50mm f/1.4, but the name ring says "Super-Takumar" (37801), but the lens itself is a 37902 that supports open aperture metering. There are two things that make me hesitate: 1. There is some serial number overlap between models 37901 and 37902. This serial number could be from either model. So, somebody could have just taken the ring from a 37801 and placed it on a 37902 lens. The serial number overlap makes that a possibility. That seems unlikely because the store isn't asking much for the lens. A fraud would be asking far more and claiming a reason for a higher price. Right? It could just be that this is one of those transitional lenses and Asahi was using up extra parts. 2. The front element has a small amount of fungus around the edges. Not an insurmountable problem, but it is a problem.
Then even if somebody has the lens, what is to stop anyone from just saying a switch of the front rings took place? That's the problem. There does not seem to be a way to prove the name ring belongs on that particular lens. If there were a way to prove that I'd have already bought it, fungus and all.
Ole, does Mr. Oosten's book specify whether or not the serial number overlap contains particular serial numbers for either/or model? SN4338303 (37801 name ring, but 37902 lens body). What attracted me to this lens is the fact that it is only 1,503 examples away from my 4334600 "if" the name ring actually belongs on the lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-05-2018, 02:45 PM
|
| |
I'm at 3, but if the latest anomaly I just found is still at the store in the next few days I'll go back by and pick it up. That will put me at 4 and we'll have another strange one to look at.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-04-2018, 08:50 AM
|
| |
Ole, I have just found and purchased this 37801 (4333853) on Ebay. The serial number is only 747 before my early 37902 (4334600). Or have I just displayed my ignorance in understanding serial numbers for Takumars? According to the "Takumarology - Takumar Field Guide" (Page 10) there seems to be some overlap in numbers from the 37801 vs 37902. Maybe I should not have bought the 37801? Feeling kinda stupid now. :)
It seems a member here, Droo (field guide writer) is an expert concerning the 50mm Takumars. Hopefully he will sort this out for us. For the life of me I cannot understand the serial number overlap between models, but it is there.
I'll become a website supporter next month. I can't afford it this month after all this.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-04-2018, 07:31 AM
|
| |
I've looked at that and I have only seen 37902 with that open aperture metering gear on the mount. I have not seen one without it (open aperture metering). I believe the database is wrong on that account. I think it should state the 37902 supports open aperture metering to be accurate. It seems Ebay is becoming an important research tool.
I don't even like the 50mm focal length, but I am becoming obsessed with the Takumar 50mm f/1.4s. I'd pay good money for a good 37802. Always search for that and a 358 now.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-02-2018, 09:12 AM
|
| |
Here you go: Wt = 265gr with caps. 255gr without caps. 37902 is not rare at all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-02-2018, 04:24 AM
|
| |
I'll do that when the sun comes up here in Texas. Should I just post them right here or send via PM? Thank you. And yes, the Japanese model (37802) is a Super-Takumar. Still looking for one of those. I had hopes they had used one of those with the preproduction glass and added the "Multi-Coated" where it is to identify it. Since I could only see the 02 in the Ebay photos, I wasn't 100% sure until today. Great fantasy, though.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-01-2018, 05:33 PM
|
| |
Here are todays arrivals (S-T 200mm f/3, S-T 135mm f/3.5, Identity problem 50mm f/1.4, and S-M-C 28mm f/3.5). I had to buy the whole lot last week just to get the 50mm. The 50mm f/1.4 (37902) is special because of the name plate. Instead of reading "Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR" it instead reads "Multi-Coated Super -Takumar". So the name plate wording is mixed up. Takumar should be capitalized if it is a Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR. It just came today and all I had prior to today were the fuzzy Ebay photos from the seller. So the product code is confirmed to be 37902. I had hoped (wished upon a star) that this could also have been a 37802 which would have been the Japanese domestic version with only 2,000 made. Gerjan van Oosten told me there were only 4,680 of these made and I assume that is the number with the error? He also told me he believes this is a pre-production model of the 37902 (Gerjan van Oosten)? Maybe that is why the nameplate is like it is? Somebody else told me it is just a misprint. I have no idea and wish I did. I'm still foggy on that and hope somebody can give me further details. Anyway, this was all pure accident. I spend about 4-5 hours a day on Ebay looking for things that might be rare and came across this. I have OCD so that explains the exorbitant amount of time on Ebay. So keep your eyes peeled! This was sold to me on Ebay by a camera store in Ohio.
Arrivals today 3 web | Charles Diaz | Flickr
Arrivals today 4 web | Charles Diaz | Flickr
Today arrivals 2 web | Charles Diaz | Flickr |
|
Forum: Photo Critique
07-30-2018, 09:39 AM
|
| |
Do you have this posted in high resolution anywhere so that it can be purchased?
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
07-29-2018, 06:25 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Photo Critique
07-29-2018, 06:24 PM
|
| |
Beautiful! I really like this. It would make a very nice print, I think.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
07-29-2018, 06:23 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Photo Critique
07-29-2018, 06:22 PM
|
| |
I would say yes, and taller too. The flare is hard to overcome. There's got to be a trick to it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-29-2018, 03:47 PM
|
| |
Honestly, what the photographer does with the lens is far more important than the lens itself, in my opinion. I would enjoy the heck out of it. I have a couple of really crappy lenses (Hanimex come to mind.) and I can get nice photos with it. To quote myself here, "Try not to hold the camera too straight. Try not to get the focus too perfect. Try not to completely stop the motion. Try to pay more attention to form and composition and light and how everything plays for or against everything else. Those are my challenges to myself. Forget the MTF charts. Forget the lens reviews. Every tool is different and has a purpose. Choose the right tool and then use all your strength to wield it valiantly with the heart." Yup, there are crappy lenses... but there are people who actually look for those and love them. I know I do. :) There are plenty of people with what are considered fantastic lenses who make crappy photos no matter what they have. It's the crappy photos we should worry about more. ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-29-2018, 02:04 PM
|
| |
You folks are the experts so it is best to ask at this website than anywhere else. I have a Super-Takumar 105mm f/2.8 lens. I've narrowed it down to being an early model 2 (Serial #830202 with the cursive style font on the name ring). The problem is that there is no product code on the a/m switch. What gives? Is that common with some of the Takumars? To make things tougher there is not a listing or serial number range for the early model 2's at the Takumarology website.
|
