Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Pentax Lens Review Database » Film Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » Non-SMC Pentax Prime Lenses
Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet Review RSS Feed

Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet

Reviews Views Date of last review
56 168,652 Sun April 2, 2017
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
95% of reviewers $55.48 8.09
Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet

This is a a budget lens; it is slightly faster than the non-SMC 135mm F2.8 telephoto lens.
This lens has no "A" setting and thus does not support aperture automation (Tv and P modes), only Av and M exposure modes can be used.

Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet
Image Format
Full-frame / 35mm film
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
Yes (no A setting)
Automatic, 8 blades
4 elements, 4 groups
Mount Variant
Max. Aperture
Min. Aperture
Min. Focus
120 cm
Max. Magnification
Filter Size
52 mm
Internal Focus
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 12 ° / 10 °
Full frame: 18 ° / 15 °
Built-in, slide out
Soft leather
Lens Cap
Weather Sealing
Other Features
Diam x Length
64 x 79 mm (2.5 x 3.1 in.)
395 g (13.9 oz.)
Production Years
1980 to 1988
Engraved Name
TAKUMAR (BAYONET) 1:2.5 135mm
Product Code
No SMC coating
Built-in HoodAperture RingFull-Frame SupportDiscontinued
Price History:

Add Review of Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-15 of 56
New Member

Registered: March, 2016
Posts: 5
Lens Review Date: April 2, 2017 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $45.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: F2.5, Small, Very sharp at 2.5
Cons: Cromatic aberrations, short hood
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 9    Value: 10    Camera Used: K3II   

Great lens. Nice bokeh and very sharp at 2.5. Is not easy to focus with it but with some training I have the trick. You must past the focus confirmation on clockwise, the more near the subject the more you need to past the confirmation.

Negative: the cromatic aberrations are here. The lack of contrast (easy to correct in post) can be solved with a bigger hood.
New Member

Registered: May, 2015
Location: Setúbal (near Lisbon)
Posts: 5
Lens Review Date: October 28, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $62.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: compact, bokeh
Cons: no MC, no A
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 9    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 8    Value: 9    Camera Used: Pentax K-1   

Site Supporter

Registered: August, 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Posts: 235
Lens Review Date: October 17, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $39.99 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast, build, bokeh, compact and color saturation
Cons: Long focus throw (even for a manual lens)
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 8    Value: 10    Camera Used: K50 & k30   

This lens has a very unique and pleasing bokeh. One of the best long portrait lens I have used. It is built like a tank. The focus ring is smooth with good resistance ( the long focus throw is the my only complaint. The apeture ring has a nice click for each setting. It does not have an A setting. To me this is a non factor. Any lens I buy that is 2.8 or less stayers wide open 95% of the time. For an older film lens it is relatively sharp. Wide open it is soft at the edges. For portrait work this is a desirable trait. For the price you will be hard pressed to beat this lens when used to it's strengths.
Site Supporter

Registered: November, 2014
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 266
Lens Review Date: September 25, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $20.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: build quality, inexpensive, sharp when stopped down
Cons: manual focus, flares when open, CA when open
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 8    Value: 9    Camera Used: K-1   

I like this lens because it is inexpensive and fun to mess with. I've taken some very sharp photos with it. The lens requires a hood or shade of some sort. Once you stop it down to f/8 or so it gets sharp. It works well with the Pentax K-1.
Site Supporter

Registered: September, 2016
Posts: 3
Lens Review Date: September 14, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $40.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Beautiful skin tones
Cons: Not for the JPEG shooter
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 9    Value: 9    Camera Used: K-30   

This lens is a horrible performer in many ways: it is NOT sharp at all at f/2.5, without post-processing shots often come out way over- or underexposed with unacceptable loss of contrast and it's unusable in harsh sunlight.

At the same time some of my absolute favorite shots have been made with this lens. You won't get any keepers SOOC with this lens but put a few minutes into post processing the raw files and you'll discover that it has a character of its own and renders skin tones very well.

Love/hate relationship, shots are either hit or total miss. Guess that's better than every shot being ok but nothing special, though, and accordingly I'll keep the lens.

Raising the grades for this lens. Long story short: I actually sold it when switching gear to m43 as the 2x crop factor turned this into too long of a lens. Now I have reordered it from ebay after getting a focal reducer (which effectively turns it into a 200mm F1.8 FF equivalent - not bad!). I did so because when looking through my photos from the past years the one with this lens really shines when it comes to people photography. Most of my absolute favorite portrait photos of my kids are taken with this lens.

Maybe it does so well because it compresses the midtones - no smc coating probably does this - leaving you with a very flat base image that responds exceptionally well to raw processing. Metering and white balance can be somewhat off also, at least on the K-30, but that's very easily corrected in PP when shot in RAW. I find that it's easier to put some some punch back into a flat image, compared with going the other way and try to dampen the output of modern "high contrast" lenses, which can feel borderline clinical/artificial. In the era of digital PP this is a must have lens IMO, especially considering the price/performance ratio. Film/jpeg shooters better stay away though, as illustrated by the before/after pics below.

New Member

Registered: July, 2015
Posts: 1

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: March 28, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $40.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: sharp wide open
Cons: Some CA but not heavy
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 10    Value: 10    Camera Used: Sony A6000   

I had to register to leave my two cents about this very good lens.
It is sharp wide open, great contrast, not heavy CA. Very good lens, the problem is not with the lens but with people that never used MF lenses before and now they are evaluating something that they cannot handle.This is very sad and good at the same time. We can buy good lenses for cheap! Took this picture @ F2.5 the focusing was not perfect the bird was about 5 meters away and moving all the time but one can see the possibilities. Cheers!

Will upload my picture later today.
Sorry! There is no easy way to attach a picture, one have to read for 3 hours to do that and I'm not going to do that. I'm sure many more people come to this forum but left after encountering this kind of design.

Registered: June, 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 815
Lens Review Date: August 23, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $40.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharp, good wide open performance, BOKEH, Colors, Rendering
Cons: Flaring, very bad contrast in harsh light, requires a bigger hood
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 9    Value: 10   

Great lens, a solid performer for the price. If you're willing to forgive its shortcomings in harsh light then I think you will love this lens.
I will stress though if you need a 135mm lens that has to shoot into direct mid day sun this is not the lens for you.

The handling of this lens is also quite nice, it feels very much like my Pentax-M 200mm, although this is much easier to focus with

But I will let the pictures do the talking

Veteran Member

Registered: December, 2007
Location: In the most populated state... state of denial
Posts: 1,098
Lens Review Date: August 20, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Size, aperture
Cons: Oily blades, heavy
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 9    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 6    Value: 8    Camera Used: KX (film)   

Not a bad lens, but not a killer
Nice mid-tele but it lacks the feeling of all the other SMC-Pentax lenses of the era
I think an off brand 135/2.8 will out perform it
Senior Member

Registered: June, 2015
Posts: 235
Lens Review Date: August 18, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $10.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, Nice contrast, build quality, focus,bokeh
Cons: none
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 8    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-30 K-5   

I have to give this lens a 10 because for the insane price I paid, I have one of my sharpest lenses, and a nice telephoto. It handles well with a nicely dampened focus ring, and is very nice to use with live view or VF. Optics must be nice on this because I get pin sharp results on the K-5 when using macro tubes and taking floral shots. Only issue with it is the coating as it isn't SMC but that's fixable by using an external hood(the one attached doesn't go out far enough) and a nice UV filter. I find that combo to pretty good when shooting towards the light. Overall I have to recommend this lens because it is sharp, easy to use, and fairly cheap for a high quality tele.
Site Supporter

Registered: May, 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,369
Lens Review Date: May 8, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $60.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Well built, relatively compact, K-mount
Cons: Flares up, lack of contrast
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 10    Value: 9    Camera Used: K5-IIs   

I wanted a lens that would fit in the range between 100mm and 200mm. Since I rarely use a focal length above 100 except for sports and wildlife I wanted a cheap lens that would tide me over until I could afford the DA 200mm.

The 135mm focal length is the equivalent of 200mm on a ASP-C sensor, which is about as far one can go without carrying a tripod/monopod.

After reviewing a bunch of Manual lenses in the 135mm range, I took a chance and settled on this one because it had a K-mount. I didn't want to be bothered by the added expense of an adapter.

I purchased this lens from KEH in practically brand-new condition which is not always good, because it could mean the owner ditched it before they even had a chance to get some dust on it.

In any case, I was impressed by the build and weight of this lens ! Everything worked smoothly from focus ring to aperture. It took me a while to get the hang of using the Green button to get the aperture, but after a while it became fairly easy. You just have to remember to use it every time the light changes.

Despite my eyes not being as good as they use to be, I was able to focus very easily with this lens. Although, the Focus Confirmation light really helped.

Like others have said, this is not an easy lens. Depending on where you point it, it can flare up pretty badly. I would say avoid pictures with a lot of bright sky in them, or a lot of bright head-lights and you should be OK.

The sharpness is a little duller than on some of my other lenses, but that can be easily improved by just bumping up the sharpness in the camera a notch or two. The contrast is not as good as some of my other lenses, but it's not really a show stopper, because you can boost the contrast inside the camera. Maybe a really good UV filter might also help.

At first I was a little disappointed by the pictures tell you the truth, and was seriously thinking about sending the lens back, but after I did this(boost the sharpening/Contrast in-camera) things improved a lot. So I figured, why bother since it's only an intermediary lens anyway.

Having said that, for less than 80 bucks I have a decent lens that will take me a little further than my Pentax 100mm f2.8. Optically there is no comparison between the 2 lenses, but that's because the 100mm is an extremely sharp modern Macro lens. The thing I like about this Takumar 135mm Bayonet however, is that it render images with that Retro look, that really smooth look that works great with portraits and certain subjects.
New Member

Registered: January, 2015
Location: California
Posts: 2

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: February 25, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $8.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, good bokeh, fast, pretty cheap
Cons: A tiny bit soft wide open, heavy CA under some conditions
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 9    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-5ii, MX   

I obtained this lens as part of an auction lot along with a Pentax MG, M50/1.7, bag, and Minolta accessories. The lot cost me $20, and I scrapped the MG for parts, so I'd say I paid about $8 for this.

My copy has an oily aperture. The lens will often refuse to stop down, but it loosens up after a couple minutes. I usually use it wide open, I only really stop down for DOF reasons, not sharpness. It makes pretty bokeh bits, as long as you don't shoot bright, reflective things. The flare from this lens can actually look good under the right circumstances, but usually you just get nasty CAs. This focal length is more useful on film, but is still very handy on APS-C. The focus ring is heavily dampened, making it pretty easy to focus, even without a magnifier or split-prism screen.


The lens itself:
Takumar(Bayonet) 135mm f2.5 by Owen Fort, on Flickr

Sample Shots:
Squash by Owen Fort, on Flickr
IMGP9440 by Owen Fort, on FlickrIMGP9388 by Owen Fort, on Flickr
IMGP4933 by Owen Fort, on Flickr

Demonstrating the fairly significant CA problems(expected, it isn't a SMC lens):
IMGP4938 by Owen Fort, on Flickr
New Member

Registered: August, 2013
Posts: 3
Lens Review Date: December 8, 2014 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 10 

Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 10    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-30   

I'd say it's my standard lens for most photography I do or at least my preferred one unless i need a different focal length. I got it from my father who took pictures with this lens on an old k1000 and after all that time it's still a mighty fine piece of glass. This right now is a lens that if I have a kid and they want to get into photography and is old enough I'd pass it on to them and I think it would still preform great.
Inactive Account

Registered: August, 2012
Posts: 12

2 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: August 13, 2014 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $50.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: FL on aps-c, f2.5, built in hood is cool
Cons: long focus throw
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 9    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-5   

I found this lens for a great deal on Craigslist. I didn't expect much but man, it is slowly becoming my favorite lens. I love shooting manual with the green button. I'd say it is really really quite sharp, much better than a kit lens could provide. At f2.5 i don't find it that soft really at all also. No issues really with aberrations, or flare that I've found so far.

Anyway here's some photos. View my Flickr lens tests to see more.

IMGP22081 by JZackery, on Flickr

IMGP21861 by JZackery, on Flickr

Blinds by JZackery, on Flickr
Forum Member

Registered: February, 2014
Location: Warsaw
Posts: 69
Lens Review Date: June 26, 2014 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $65.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Image quality, build quality, fast, sharp
Cons: Soft at 2.5, needs biger hood
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 9    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-500   

Very nice lens, fast, sharp and reasonably cheap, image quality is very nice colours are very natural.
Lens lacks any coating so shooting into the sun results in flare and very low contrast, but it can be fixed by using longer hood.
At f2.5 lens is soft but very useful in low light. Gets sharp at f4 and very sharp at f5.6.

Lens is fully manual and lacks coating there for requires some effort to take good shot.

Very sharp, fast and useful lens.

Site Supporter

Registered: February, 2011
Location: Niagara
Posts: 2,807

3 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: December 8, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $45.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Slide out hood, fassst aperture and 52mm filter thread
Cons: old coatings not suitable for digital when doing bad things like shooting into the sun.. go figure
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 5    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 8    Value: 10   

I bought this off an internet classified with a number of other film relics as a "take it or leave it" lot. I peruse the classified regularly for fast primes and other desirable photo goodies. This was a real treasure.

On finding the lens listed I reviewed the assessments here and found many reviewers commenting about this lenses poor sharpness. I assure you, this lens is VERY sharp. I have been shooting it wide open for a few weeks, and i have been extremely pleased with the thin DoF and wonderful detail.

Drawbacks : -Yes, it suffers from poor flare, and PF / CA as you'd expect from a non SMC lens of this age. That being said, it performs much better than say SMC Pentax 300mm f4.0 in this regard.
- The focus ring can be a bit stiff
- The built in metal hood is a bit short for APS-C shooting
- the crazy thin DoF can be tough to get tack focus

For perusing, I have posted several photos from my Single In December 2013 effort (almost all were shot wide open, because that's what you are really interested in right):

Wide Open

Dec 2nd: What's in yours? by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

Wide Open

Hood Ornament by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

Wide Open

For the birds... by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

Wide Open

Craftsman by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

f4.0 using CIF

Happiness is... by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

Annnnd example of some of the flare that can be had (with some Kr inbody creative filters)

Awaiting the new day by _Matt_T_, on Flickr

Thanks for reading, if you are considering a purchase - Jump on it -
I cant wait to shoot some film and update this post.

Looks good on Film too!

Sometimes... by _Matt_T_, on Flickr
Add Review of Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:06 AM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]