|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-16-2012, 05:43 PM
|
| |
Good to hear as a baseline, Adam. Thanks for looking.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-16-2012, 05:39 PM
|
| |
...Or neither can give up in a fever as end of auction nears. Have sold at way out of line prices on ebay - embarrassing, really. This one does seem scarce tho.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-16-2012, 03:02 PM
|
| |
These pictures were taken with a lens that was the subject of a thread on this forum last week. Everyone was really good, the conclusion being: Super Takumar 135 3.5 Version 1, Ernostar 5/4 . They were shot with a Spotmatic, hand held and guessing at best settings due an inoperative meter. I scanned them at 150 psi from 4x6 glossy prints, developed and printed at a local 1 HR Photo place (well, 24 hrs. place now). I'd be very interested in what people think of its performance even with this very small sample. There is a bit of scanner dust, and perhaps some purple fringing ripe for PS correction. Thanks ahead for any observations.
Attachment 121246
Attachment 121247 |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-16-2012, 02:52 PM
|
| |
Thanks Marc for your clear and concise explanation. Identifying this ST 135 3.5 was a subject last week on the Pentax SLR Lens Discussion forum. I'll attach a couple of scans on a new thread in that forum ("A Good Copy Of This Lens").
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-15-2012, 10:32 PM
|
| |
I'd like to post some pics taken with my Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 lens so I can get a sense of the quality of its performanace from other users. Having only 4x6 prints to scan, save, and upload, I'm wondering if there's some way to get them on PF at a larger size - 8x12, say - so the lens can be fairly evaluated. I know I could scan at 72 psi and just blow them up, but that would present quite a lousy view of the lens' ability. I thought of scanning the prints at a higher resolution. I can get a large, sharp display of them in Photoshop that way, but they would end up being displayed at 72 psi (I believe) and showing at 4x6 here anyway - not much of a view. No resolution pro here, so any suggestions much appreciated. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-13-2012, 05:42 PM
|
| |
I contacted CarbonR at [EN] Home - Takumar - The eyes of the Spotmatic and requested a look at the flickr pics of this lens. He replied:
With this serial number and A/M switch instead of Auto/Man, it surely is a Super Takumar lens (at least the body). To be sure about the lenses : with can count the light reflections that you have on them pointing a single light point (ex. : LED key holder, light bulb, sun...). A 4/4 lens will show 8 reflections (one for each air/glass or glass/air transition) while a 5/4* lens will show 9 reflections (idem plus one for glass/glass transition)
Doing as suggested, I counted up and then asked for clarification:
- 1 large round white at the front
- 1 large round blue at the back
(these move in in tandum when the light is moved around the circumference of the lens)
- 2 curved (contact lens like) 1 white, 1 blue
- 3 small round, 2 white, 1 blue
- 1 small blue, and very close just behind it:
- 1 very small, somewhat faint, grey
My question is are ALL these the reflections to be counted - I guess I'm a little uncertain about the two large ones in the front and back, and the sm. faint grey one - it takes a little lens moving to see at all.
He just now generously followed-up:
Hi,
I've just checked with a single led and the two optical formula : the "old" one has indeed 9 reflections, the ninth looks like being next to the end when looking from the front lens to the rear lens (normal, as the extra lens element is at the rear). You may have to move a bit the led to see all of them. Differences in colors are normal and can come from different coatings.
CarbonR
His findings are a match with mine - taking care to address detailed aspects of my inquiry. I want to thank him on this forum for that, and everyone here who has been taking an interest. The lens is almost certainly a Version 1, Ernostar 5/4 as described by D_of_S on the 3rd of this month.
Now if I could learn why this is the only ST 135 3.5 I can find an image of without "coarse knotted curls on the aperture ring" -- ST1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (it is very plain), this bit of ST lore will be filled out.
:p
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-04-2012, 09:58 AM
|
| |
I agree with abacus07 - main point in the end has to be whether you like the lens or not. :rolleyes:
Took some shots of it this a.m.:
ST1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Shooting had to be very rushed, but it can be made out that this is an S T, the A/M is unnumbered, and the seemingly ubiquitous knotted curls on the Aperture Ring are not present. So now I'm wondering just what it is. Thanks very much if you know or have leads.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-03-2012, 05:31 PM
|
| |
The identity of this lens certainly would be less interesting without PF. When I searched ebay for images of the Super T, every one I looked at (until tired) was like this one:
Asahi Pentax 135mm f/3.5 Super Takumar M42 Lens 1747000 | eBay
If I understand you right, they ALL have "coarse knotted curls on the aperture ring". Mine has no f4 setting, but the aperture ring simply looks like a larger version of the much smaller ring that's closer to the threads. It has that side-of-a-coin type notching, but no raised and smooth sections at regular intervals like the 4:4's you describe - it's circumference doesn't vary at all.
Also, I'm not really sure what you mean by "parts number". The only # related to the lens model I can find is the SN, in this case 849844, which you may not mean. I further note that the Super T's pictured on ebay seem to have much higher SN's - in the millions - which may or may not mean anything.
If you haven't had enough of all this, I'd really like to know what you make of my lens, and of course more on how to visually identify the enhanced Ernostar 5:4 lens.
Much Thanks.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-03-2012, 07:54 AM
|
| |
Thanks all - every comment was useful. Happily mine doesn't seem to be from the 5/4 group - there's no f4 on the aperture ring, and there certainly are many fans of the Super T. Kicking around specifics: I payed $39 thru BH, condition seem fine, and as I ordered other things shipping was negligible. As a quick check, pricing on ebay is all over the place (as always) and I seem to have done ok if I don't want to return it (tho would I not like an $11 SMC). I'm new to Pentax, having appreciated the look, feel, and results of some Minoltas and Nikkormats. The lens is to use with a Spotmatic which I find uniquely beautiful, so whatever the final outcome of this shopping experience, it will just meld into many enjoyable experiments.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-02-2012, 10:01 PM
|
| |
Thanks riff - better bokeh is good and in most cases flair should be ok with a hood Re: price, condition aside (or equal, say), I see the question: Would one expect to pay less, same, or more for the Super Tak. Perhaps it is just a matter of personal preference about +'s and -'s, but when I read in a PF, "Maybe it's the lack of SMC, but I find this lens produced subdued colors...," I wonder if the listing of the lens was just a mistake or perhaps deceptive.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-02-2012, 08:35 PM
|
| |
Thanks for your interest in sorting this out.
I just received a Pentax M42 Screw Mount lens that was ordered on line. It was listed as a "Super Multi Coated Takumar 135mm f3/5", but it is actually a "Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5" (S# 849844). I've read about these two lenses, on PF and other in places. From what I understand they're both coated, but the SMC is earlier and has a very hard multi layer coating. Some report them producing superior results - which is why I was interested in it over the Super T in the first place.
Can anyone set me straight on this. Did I order better but got less? The listing was plainly in error and it's returnable. Would appreciate knowledge about the difference between the two types.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
03-02-2012, 04:40 PM
|
| |
| |
