| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: January, 2012 Posts: 103 | | Review Date: June 4, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $38.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Build quality, sharp | | Cons: | Low contrast | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-r, K-01
| |
I think if this lens had the SMC coating it would be much better. As it is, it suffers from washed out color and overall low contrast. Don't get me wrong, it's still a good lens.... build quality and handling are amazing (though I must give it a little demerit because the built-in lens hood pops out by itself). It is very sharp and the bokeh is pleasant. At f/2.5 it is quite fast and there are times when this comes in handy (I got some good shots of my kids' concert in a poorly lit gymnasium). Fortunately it is sharp even at f/2.5. There is some CA, but it's not bad.
Regarding the focal length, I know some people like 135mm for portraits and wildlife, but personally I found it not too useful. 135mm is too short for serious wildlife shots and too long for landscapes. This is not a knock against the lens... it's just that 135mm is not a very useful focal length for me personally. Your mileage may vary. I actually bought it because I wanted a bit more magnification for macro shots. I planned on using it with extension tubes. What I did not realize at the time is that the minimum focus distance is 120cm. What this means is that I can actually get better shots with my SMC M 50mm f/1.7 with the tubes than I can with this lens because the 50mm lens has a minimum focus distance of only 45cm. So I didn't find this lens particularly useful for macro shots. Again, I won't knock the lens because of its focal length or even minimum focal distance because it is what it is and you may like it that way.
What I WILL knock the lens for is low contrast. Even though a bit of pixel peeping reveals that the lens is in fact very sharp, the pictures often don't LOOK sharp because the contrast is so low. True, you can boost contrast in post processing, but it's just not the same as having a nice contrasty lens to begin with.
Another minor nit is that this lens collects dust on the front element. The front element is bulbous and recessed into the front of the barrel and the hood, so it's difficult to brush dust out of there. It's not really much of an issue optically because the dust collects on the edges of the lens and is thus not in-frame. My suggestion would be to give it a good cleaning with a lenspen and then keep a protective filter on it at all times to prevent any more dust from accumulating.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2012 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 7, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $54.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | fast | | Cons: | heavy, low contrast | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-x
| |
First lens that I bought after getting my used camera kit. I am on a tight budget and this was very worth it for the speed and sharpness. In natural light, I find that it makes peoples' skin look very smooth! Sometimes at 2.5, the colors look "washed out" or even cold.
I want to use it for portraits, but so far have only used it outdoors satisfactorily. I look forward to using it in low light situations.
Feels good to hold, though very heavy compared to my other lenses. Would make a good weapon, if it ever came down to that.
   | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: November, 2012 Posts: 5
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 19, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp,bilt quality | | Cons: | non | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: k-5
| |
   I love this lens.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: January, 2011 Location: Skåne, Sweden Posts: 482
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap, fast, reasonably compact | | Cons: | Not that good at F2.5 (much better at F2.8) | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-5
| |
For what it is, it is not that bad at all. I wanted a cheap and fast, yet useful, telephoto lens. For $40 and in like new condition, I couldn't expect more of it.
At F2.5 it is soft and suffers from low contrast. I wouldn't use it at F2.5 unless it is in a low contrast situation. The positive thing is that it gets much better already at F2.8! There is lots of creamy bokeh (as expected from a 135mm F2.5 lens) that suffers from some abberations, but the focus transition is smooth.
I compared the image quality to some of my other lenses, and at F2.8 I found it to be similar to the SMC Pentax-M 100mm F2.8@F2.8 and the SMC Pentax M 75-150mm F4@F4. All of these are better then my DA 55-300 in terms of general image quality. Haven't had a chance to try out it in terms of flare resistance yet.
Handling is great as most of the lenses from the era. The manual focus ring is huge and well damped. It has a long throw so precise focusing is easy. Build quality puts most new lenses to shame (except lenses like the DA Limiteds and DA*). I find the coloring scheme to be somewhat to "happy" and signals that the lens is maybe not that serious. This might does not matter for use, but maybe for collectors.
Mine has a 55***** serial number and is made in Japan
 | | | | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2012 Location: athens Posts: 39
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 28, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | quality lens, sharpness | | Cons: | not good in strong light | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: pentax k-x
| |
I have read many reviews of this lens, some are very good and some are very bad that i dont think this lens deserves a bad review. It takes fantastic sharp images, great portraits and night shots. washed out pictures may be at some angle of light so stay in the shade or put a polarizing filter on then shoot, if you find the sweet spot of this lens the quality of pictures beats all other lenses that have a score above 9, serious
 Acropolis by night by alexcoitus, on Flickr
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Palm Springs, CA Posts: 65
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 2, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $38.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Quality and Quality | | Cons: | short focus 1.2m | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Kr
| |
I read the other reviews then check we are talking about the same lens. Mine is version 2 which is easy to identify by aperture markings and DOF marks. (search here for that thread)
What a wonderful lens!
Push the green button on a Kr or K5 to set the exposure then just focus and smile at the performance. Low light, nature or candid are it's forte.
IQ is as expected from a Pentax prime.
I still feel like I stole it for a measly $38.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: April, 2010 Posts: 1
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 3, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharpness (across the entire frame!) | | Cons: | too "neutral" colorurs, PF at TA, not so good in backlight conditions | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 10
| |
This is one of the most underrated lenses. Ok it isn't so sharp at TA but at f/4 it is already a real blade, at 5.6-8 it is the sharpest lens I own, it outresolves the 16mpix sensor of my k5. It is sharper than my K55 1.8. Colours are very neutral, it hasn't a real personality (maybe because there's no smc), contrast is generally low. Bokeh is very nice (for me).
I rated this lens 8 and not 10 because ca, flare and colours.
But where this little masterpiece shine, is in the BW. I will never sell this lens. | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: September, 2010 Location: MD Posts: 1,033 | | Review Date: August 1, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, low light capability | | Cons: | low contrast, chromatic aberration | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
I recently obtained this lens on ebay for a rather low price, and I couldn't be happier. It does exactly what I hoped it would. I'm using the K-x, and my main reason for getting it was for its low-light capabilities. In particular, I wanted something for theater shots of my daughter and indoor pics. - The lens is solid and well-built. The built-in lens hood helps a bit. I have the preferred 'made in Japan' model with a 54***** serial number.
- The sharpness, even at f2.5, is excellent. It does get slightly better as you increase the f-stop, but the difference is not significant.
- It tends toward a warmer hue and less contrast than I like. Both of these are easily adjusted in post-processing.
- There is some chromatic aberration under certain circumstances, especially when wide open, but it is not distracting.
I have the DA-L 55-300 which I love, and I compared shots taken on a tripod w/ identical lighting. - At the same aperture, the sharpness of the 135 is usually as good and sometimes better.
- The 135 is sharper around the borders.
- The 135 has significantly less contrast. The pics have different hues, but both contrast and hue can be adjusted via white balance or in pp.
Here is a comparison shot of the Takumar 135 f2.5, Pentax DA-L 55-300, and a Vivitar 80-200 f4. All at 135mm, 100% crop, no adjustments. I don't know how well it will show up here, but sharpness of Tak and Pentax are nearly identical and the Vivitar just slightly behind. You can see the color/contrast, much of which can be adjusted in pp. The bird house was about 100 feet away.
The main thing about this lens is its ability to shoot at 2.5 on a 135mm lens. As a lens, I would give it a 8, but for value, a 10, so I'm giving it a 9.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Posts: 586
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 26, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $85.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Superior Pentax tone, Faster than usual 135's | | Cons: | Wished it could focus closer. Getting a price climb-up recently | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
ADDED:
Recently I got another copy. This one is MADE IN TAIWAN. To my surprise this lens is A LOT MORE FLARE RESISTANT than my Made in Japan copy.
I'm happy with this one. Don't expect much, but still it delivers far more. The F2.5 gives more possibilities when shooting in low light. I don't really fuss about sharpness of a lens, even a softie could be sharp when stepped down. I love colors, epecially the vivid ones. I had a few 135's, and this one gives by far the greatest color rendering, I wonder that Pentax do give this lens the SMC coating after all. I also respect good bokeh, and this one delivers the best. Apart from being criticized for the flare issue, mine performs well enough under direct sun, so I guess it just needed to be treated with care. Oh yes, I got the Japan version, with build-in hood, so flare is quite controlled. I'm giving this lens a full 10, because the fact this lens overrun all of my 135's, including the celebrated Sears Macro. I just wished this lens can focus closer.
More pics here.
Prices are climbing for this one, so be sure to get one quickly :ugh:
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2011 Posts: 20 | | Review Date: July 12, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Wide aperture! good zoom! | | Cons: | A bit soft. | |
got it today, and its amazing! good upgrade from the 18-55, if you can deal with the manual focus. the build quality is amazing! and the ilter is the same size as the 18-55 kit lens!
edited
IMGP1173 by thecozmiester, on Flickr
original jpeg
IMGP1171 by thecozmiester, on Flickr
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2011 Location: Copenhagen Posts: 510 | | Review Date: May 8, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, nice bokeh, good value | | Cons: | Fringes, bit tight focus (my one) | |
Im really happy with this lens, but the focus ring is a bit tight and you have to think about
direct light sources.
Here is a test shot:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32108329@N08/sets/72157626677473694/
»The Takumar (Bayonet) 135 mm., f: 2.5 is a much under rated lens. Soft and with low contrast etc. To me it´s a very capable, price worthy lens which I find, has good sharpness, contrast and a beautiful bokeh, but which is not a SMC lens, so you have to be careful with direct light sources. My one is also a bit tight to focus. I often happen to take photos in low light, hand held situations and for this I find it a very nice companion.«
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2009 Posts: 7 | | Review Date: April 6, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Price , acceptable sharpness wide open , good sharpness stopping down a lil | | Cons: | CA , its not hard to force out purple fringing , lack of contast ( in some situation ) | |
I got this lens from a fellow forumer for around RM210 - >70US$ today
So to me , the price/performance ratio of this lens is definitely a good selling point .
My 1st impression was the built is like a tank .
After a day of testing i have some conclusions below:-
#Acceptable sharpness wide open , lack resolution
#Stop down a bit would help , i have tried f2.8 and it got a lot better in terms of resolution and sharpness .
#The built in lens hood is somewhat not protruding enough to make any significant effect ,my test shots that came from me pointing just a little bit parallel towards the light source seemed to have a layer of coloration , and lack of contrast , a longer bigger third party lens hood would certainly help , or just maybe i have a lemon unit with me .
#CA is definitely an issue , although not overly too , i would have to zoom in a bit to have notice it . Nevertheless it is not hard to force the fringing . I do not know if stop down would help since what i have in mind is that the usage of getting this sort of lens would b using it wide open( or maybe stop down by a tiny bit ) to get the separation of subject .
#My version is japan made , the one that has been reportedly the sharp version , with serial number 541xxxx
#The focusing is smooth and well damped
considering the price i paid , this is actually quite a good lens
finally i posted 2 100% cropped sample , very casual test shot , mind me 
1st crop , f2.5 iso500
2nd crop f2.8 iso1000
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223
8 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 6, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharpest, fastest, well built and very unexpensive | | Cons: | None. Maybe it is too fast! | |
I like this lens to much that I have bought several. The prices shown is the average. This is a wonderful lens, sharp, great colors, I use it for portraits, to shoot anything. I also use it as lens one, when I connect it to another Pentax-M 50 mm f1.4 to shoot reverse macro. It gives me a ratio of 135/50= 2.7:1. That is 2.7 times the size of real life. My Tamron 90mm f2.8 gives me only 1:1. If you do not have one, you are missing. One advise: Use it with a shade if you are out in the sun. It is so fast, and the lens is so big and so close to the edge that you need to have a shade. I have one very long. There you go.
-----------------
It has been several months now since I have this lens and came back just to confirm that both copies I have are wonderful lenses in my Kx. I do not understand the bad reputation that some have created for this lens, it could be in part to the fact that the lens is manual and has to be stopped down. I have the Pentax K 135mm f2.5, and the Pentaxk 135mm f3.5 and this lens keep up with them. Of course in a relative comparison, I would rate the K135mmf2.5 at the top, the f3.5 in the middle and this Tak in the third position. To give you an idea, I would rate 10, 9.5, and 9 respectively. Here are some samples:
---------------------
Update, I have used this lens now on my Pentax K5 wth excellent results(see photos below - the first ones):
@f2.5
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f2.5-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f4
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f4-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f5.6
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f5.6-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f8
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f8-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f11
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f11-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f22
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f22-SolarLamp-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
===============================================
@f2.5
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f2.5-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f4
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f4-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f5.6
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f5.6-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f8
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f8-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f11
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f11-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f16
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f16-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
@f22
Takumar(Bayonet)135mmf2.5@f22-arbortest-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
---------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2010 Location: Tetbury Posts: 5 | | Review Date: February 26, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | Fast, nice weight, build quality & IMQ if used properly | | Cons: | None for what it is | |
I have had this lens since 1983 when I bought it second-hand and I couldn't part with it. I'd sell my M75-150 F4 first and I'd definitely choose it over my DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED if shooting at ~135mm. I took this with it today - let the picture do the talking .....
(Non working link removed)
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: January, 2008 Location: Paris, TN Posts: 3,350 | | Review Date: January 28, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | A good soft portrait lens | | Cons: | Not ideal for outdoor / landscape use | |
My feeling is that this lens was designed more for studio use than as a mid-range general telephoto lens. I've noticed that all of the early Pentax mid-range lenses I've compared seem to be optimized for either far or near distance use, and this lens certainly performs better within about 12-18 feet than it does beyond that.
From F2.5 to 3.5 it corresponds to the classic, soft portrait effect with a bit of softness from edge to edge. At F4 it begins to sharpen up in the center but still holds softness in the OOF areas and a slight lack of contrast that can be bumped in post-processing. Color rendering seems very neutral with good saturation similar to the classic Super Tak 135/3.5.
If you're looking for a lens to explore the soft, romantic "Hallmark Card" images and close-ups, experimenting with this lens will offer interesting results on a budget. It's a convenient lens to use with extension rings for nature subjects.
I wouldn't recommend it for general purpose, outdoor telephoto tasks or sports where uncontrolled bright lighting could be a problem although it does seem to control contrast fairly well if used with respect for the older coatings and the built-in lens hood. The various 135/3.5's might be a better choice for high-contrast, outdoor action.
H2
K200D @ ISO 400 F4.0 and F2.5
 | | |
