|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-22-2010, 01:54 AM
|
| |
That's a nice photo, ultraviolet. It's certainly showing nice bokeh.
Incidentally (sorry to be indulging in a bit of thread-hijacking, jeztastic!) is your Super Tak 135/3.5 an early version (with f4 shown on the aperture ring)? I have one of those, and also find it performs poorly - just trying to find out if it's a bad copy or if they're all like that. (My S-M-C Tak is much better.)
Back to the Bayonet, I wonder if they're a "stretched" version (aperture-wise) of the ("mark 2") Tak 135/3.5 design? I say this because they're both organised as 4 elements, 4 groups, and it would make sense for Pentax's entry level 135 to be based on an existing design (but minus the SMC). If so, we should be expecting good performance, certainly when stopped down a bit.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-21-2010, 02:14 AM
|
| |
Firstly, the price: £40 is a little on the high side, I would say, but I suppose you have the convenience of being able to go to a local shop and inspect it minutely (and presumably, try it out). If it's in mint condition and works perfectly, then fine. Don't expect sharp results wide open, though - stop it down for decent sharpness. And don't expect contrast and colours to be in the same class as a modern Pentax lens.
Regarding filters: by all means get a UV filter (and the Hoya HMC would be an excellent choice) for protection purposes, but don't expect a filter to help compensate for the lack of multi-coating within the lens. Apart from blocking UV (which almost certainly isn't necessary anyway in a modern DSLR), a filter can only add to image degradation.
Personally, I think the built-in hood is a great convenience, and wouldn't bother with an additional one. In fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find one which had the correct dimensions for any significant improvement over the built-in hood, in my view.
Lastly, don't forget there is a plethora of affordable, decent 135s out there - they were the popular telephoto in the 70s and 80s, and they were made in large numbers, many of them very good too. If you don't mind M42 mount (i.e. you'd need an adaptor) you could try for a S-M-C Takumar 135 f3.5, or for something very similar in K-mount, an SMC 135 f3.5 (usually referred to as the "K 135 f3.5"). The SMC M 135 f3.5 has also been mentioned, and I love mine because it's so small. Expect to be able to buy any of the above, in good condition, for £25 to £35, on Ebay (but only if you're patient!!).
|
