| Author: | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Posts: 1,851 | | Review Date: February 25, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Build quality, angle of view | | Cons: | Distorsion, CA | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Spotmatic, K3-iii
| |
Recently acquired one as part of a Spotmatic bundle.
The lens is heavy, and feels like all other Takumars.
The angle of coverage is great, and despite having many distorsions it is fun to use. I dont do Architecture that much so I wouldnt notice.
Sharp in center and softer in the edges like most extreme WA. Chromatic aberration and purple fringing outside the center is very noticeable.
There is almost no bokeh, due to a large DoF. But when there is it is neutral.
It flares but it also came with the shade which does the job well.
Comparing this to the SIGMA 10-20, (which is 40 yrs younger), it is not up to the standards of the 21st century. However, for its age it is a very good lens
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2020 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: September 12, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | very wide for a vintage lens, sharp | | Cons: | vignetting | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Canon 5D mark iv, pentax sp500
| |
incredible lens, collector grade lens because not many were made, I'm so happy I finally saved enough to buy it.
| | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2020 Location: shanghai Posts: 9 | | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2019 Posts: 2
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 1, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Takumar build quality. Superb handling. Great color rendition, highlights and shadows. | | Cons: | Prone to flare but I'd say it is a pro! | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Sony a7iii
| |
Excellent old lens. Takumar build. I have the SMC version. I like the field of view and the color rendition this lens offers.
20mm Shot at F4.5
 | | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: August, 2012 Location: Dartmoor, UK Posts: 3,879
13 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 4, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | If you're a Takumar fan, you'll love it. | | Cons: | If you're not a Takumar fan, you'll hate it. | |
This lens was originally released in 1968, at a time when the only way to manufacture a 20mm rectilinear without the retail price being prohibitive was to accept some compromises. It was designed to be used with films such as Tri-X and Kodachrome, not with a digital sensor, and it was created to satisfy the aesthetic preferences of its own day rather than ours. So to criticise it for any characteristics that don’t match up to the specifications of a modern autofocus lens on a DSLR would be absurd, and I’m not going to do that.
The lens is slow at f/4.5 and not particularly sharp wide open, but that’s just one of the manufacturing compromises that I mentioned above. It was never really designed to be shot wide open, so you need to stop it down to at least f/8, or preferably f/11, and use it the way it was intended to be used.
Even then you’re not going to get the sort of hard-edged clinical sharpness that modern lenses are designed to deliver. This lens is all about micro-contrast and fine detail, characteristics that give you a sense of depth and dimensionality rather than the pseudo-sharpness produced by the strong edge contrast of modern consumer-grade lenses. Photographs taken with the Tak 20 won’t blow you away with in-your-face ultra-sharpness; instead they’ll draw you into the image and seduce you with their fine detail and their subtle handling of transitions between tones.
If you want explosively punchy contrast and psychedelically saturated colours, forget about it. The rendering style of the Tak 20 is exquisite in its naturalness. Shoot in dull light and you’ll get dull results; shoot in great light and you’ll get beautiful results -- which is exactly what photographers would have expected in the era when the lens was designed. Lenses that produce a contrasty, saturated look in desaturated and uncontrasty light are very much a modern phenomenon. With the Tak 20 it’s up to you get out there and find the light, and to my mind that’s exactly the way it should be.
If this was a lens that Pentax had released last week, marketed as intended to be used on a full frame DSLR, I wouldn’t rate it at even a 5. But it wasn’t released last week: it first came out fifty years ago and it deserves to be rated in the context of other lenses of its time. And on that basis I’m giving it a 10, because it’s my most used lens by far and it can do things with good light that are darn close to magical.
Some snaps, some film and some digital:
     | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: September, 2013 Location: Cuenca Posts: 640
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 4, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $230.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | high resolution, good contrast and tonal range, nice color palette, close focusing ability | | Cons: | vignettes a bit in the corners | |
 
I have the SMC version of the lens, and I'm very happy with it. It's my favorite lens, and I have two dozen or so M42 lenses, eighteen of which are Takumars.
It's a fun lens that challenges me to see things differently, and it's a lens that I can set at f9 and zone focus, with everything from about two feet (maybe less) to infinity in sharp focus. I can hand-hold the camera to 1/15 second (reciprocal of the focal length) and get a sharp photo. Image quality, resolution, contrast and color, are classic Takumar.
The first sample ("Pooh Bear") was taken at minimum focus distance and maximum aperture, hand-held.
The second, a view of Bangkok, was taken at infinity and f9 with a 58mm to 77mm step-up ring and a thin 77mm polarizer. (You'll notice a little bit of vignetting in the corners, more pronounced on the left side. That's the only fault I can find with the lens, and it's minor. The lens renders colors and contrast very well without a filter. Moreover, to my eyes the lens seems sharp across the frame.)
Kudos to the engineers and technicians that produced the wonderful, world-class optics that are Takumars!
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2014 Location: Nissedal (Goblin Valley) Posts: 38 | | Review Date: October 25, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Build, Center sharpness | | Cons: | Edges unsharp | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: K10D
| |
As a landscape lens this lens is not good. It is extremley sharp with high micro contrast in the center, but edges are unsharp, even stopped down. The unsharpnes is very smooth, almost like a soft focus lens. The lens reminds me of the Leica Summicron R 35mm. Leica called it a "journalist" or "reportage"-lens. Same philosophy. Insanely sharp center with high degree of micro contrast, just amazing. My version is the Super Takumar, with original lens shade. (I compared it to the 18mm, 24mm,18-55 modern kit zoom, a 24-50mm A zoom, 28mm f3.5, all adjusted for distance, and center sharpnes of this lens is better than all of them. Edge sharpness is the worst of them). I have tested well over a hundred lenses from Canon, Nikon, Leica R, and Pentax, and this lens is on of the strangest I have stumbled across regarding sharp/ unsharp levels. CA is very bad, but easily corrected in PP.
Knowing this I took images of some more isolated subject matter, like portraits, leaves on trees, a fence-post, etc. Out of focus blur is nice and smooth, colors are deep, saturated and a bit cold, sharpness of main subject; to die for 
A lot of people will dislike this lens. Those who understand the strengths and weaknesses will love it. What a strange thing to have... Never gona sell it | | | | | Junior Member Registered: October, 2015 Posts: 28
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 22, 2015 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | color-tonalities-balanced characteristics | | Cons: | no major detractions-look at the pictures that people post with their criticisms-they always look good | |
I'm giving this underrated lens a boost in the ratings. The images it produces are exceptionally appealing. Folks compared
this lens to pixel peeping specimens some years ago and the lens got an unjust reputation as inferior at the forum and around parts of
the web. It is a sharp lens, has no major problems with ca, and the distortion isn't that great a detractor. It's image characteristics
make some, maybe most modern WA lenses appear dull, sterile, or unartistic in comparison.
Note: Having seen the above review regarding insane sharpness of subject, I also have observed that this lens makes a good pseudo macro lens because it focuses so close and the subject sharpness is truly, insanely acute. You can just crop way way in and still get a fantastically sharp, beautiful shot.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: January, 2011 Location: Skåne, Sweden Posts: 482
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 27, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Build quality, haptics, fun to use | | Cons: | Slow, not so special on APS-C | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-01, K-5, X-T2
| |
This review is for a mint condition S-M-C 20/4.5 bought second-hand in Sweden.
PROS- Great build quality
- Fun to use
- Proper feel in manual focus ring
- Sharp in center wide open
- Works well with Speedbooster
CONS- Not that special focal lenght on APS-C
- A bit slow
- Soft in corners and does not benefit much from being stopped down
- Distortion and vignetting even on APS-C
I USE IT FOR- General ultra wide angle on APS-C with Lens Turbo
I have a collection of S-M-C TAKUMARS and this is the widest to date. I had used the 24/3.5 earlier and got a hand of a mint 20/4.5 for a fair price. My experience with the 24/3.5 was positive and on APS-C the 20mm would be very useful as a general wide angle. The lens is pretty much the same size as the 24/3.5 (a tad smaller actually). I understand that when the lens was released it was an impressive wide angle, but for use today on Pentax APS-C it has mostly build quality and manual feel speaking for it. It is relatively slow, distorts, vignettes etc pretty bad compared to newer lenses. It is sharp in center but soft in corners at F4.5, but doesn't seem to benefit that much from stopping down either. Bokeh and transitions are surprisingly smooth. It makes a good lens for close up fun. I found the scale focusing a bit harder to use on this than the S-M-C 24/3.5, but it could be my copy that is a bit off on the scale (it is mint condition otherwise).
Update: I have since my initial review used it quite a lot on a Fujifilm X-T2 with a Lens Turbo II adapter, giving it back it's full frame properties. The full frame 20 mm FoV is quite a large difference than using it with the 1.5x crop factor. 20mm is noticably wider and opens up for new possibilities compared to standard zooms typically starting at 24 or 28 mm. I have used it for travel as a kit of 20/35/85 mm focal lenght that covers my needs. The lens vignettes quite heavy on FF, and even a standard filter will impact vignetting even further. I did try the recommended setup with 77mm step-up ring and 77mm filter, that makes the setup look quite spectacular but still does not remove vignetting issues completely. Sharpness in center is good, but lacking in the corners. Still passing for acceptable for my purposes after stopping down a bit.
Fujifilm X-T2, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 20mm F4.5 (with Lens Turbo II) 1/2700 sec, ISO 200.
Fujifilm X-T2, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 20mm F4.5 (with Lens Turbo II) 1/2700 sec, ISO 200.
Fujifilm X-T2, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 20mm F4.5 (with Lens Turbo II) 1/2700 sec, ISO 200.
My pictures on flickr with this lens | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2011 Posts: 8,738
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 28, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Beautiful build, close minimum focus | | Cons: | some barrel distortion, f4.5 - more difficult to focus with split image | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K100DS
| |
I am very impressed with this lens which dates from when 20mm (FF) was cutting edge of the possible. The STak version seems to perform better than the STak 24 and STak 28 with the sun in the frame.
This is an exicitng lens, significantly wide, even on APS-C. Barrel distortion is obvious when taking pictures of frames (such as door frames). But that is part of the aesthetic one would use it for. It is not distracting if the object does not have prominent straightlines to be bent.
The minimum focus distance is so close that it opens exciting possibilities for near macro work with such a wide lens. The reproduction ratio is about 1:5 which enables a differnet perspective with very close focus. It will actually focus to about 12-15cm despite the specs. This makes for a different perspective for close work.
The lens body has a 58mm filter mount. The original hood base screws into this, but has the hood screw mounted into a larger thread on a part of the hood kit which is, effectively, a filter adapter. This is probably a way to avoid vignetting when using the hood, whilst enabling a compact lens. This could be inconvenient if you choose to use the lens on a FF body because then the filter would be too big for the lens cap, masking for a clumsy collection of pieces to handle.
The eBay average prices from April 2011 to October 2012 for auctions (including 'no bid'/'no sale' results: STak AUD223.76 (approx USD215); SMC Tak AUD263.03 (approx USD250). (The total number of lenses offered was 42.) It was worth the wait to be able to get a nice one, and I would recommend to anyone who is happy to accept the aesthetic of noticeable barrel distortion in a quite wide lens.
The handling feel is very good, just like the other STaks, and it is nice to look at.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: December, 2008 Location: Chicago IL USA Posts: 19
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 24, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | picture quality, compact size, depth of field | | Cons: | small max aperture | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Spotmatic IIa
| |
I have the SMC version. I bought mine new in 1977 (I think I paid $250 at the time?) and since then I have used it more than all the other lenses I have - combined. If I only go out with one lens, this is the one I take.
Slow, but tremendous depth of field. Can be used as a fixed focus lens around f8. Takes only a small fraction of a turn to go from minimum distance to infinity. Built super solid, mine is still nice and tight after 30 years of use. Focus to the corners is excellent although with some vignetting.
I just recently treated myself to a Zeiss Flektogon 20mm f2.8 M42 lens, and the only reason I did so was to get the extra speed. I did some very careful comparisons between identical shots taken with the Takumar and the Zeiss and differences were surprisingly minor. Under very severe conditions the Takumar had slightly more abberration than the Zeiss.
The 20mm f4.5 SMC Takumar is a great lens. If you're into wide-angle photography and don't have a problem with the slow speed, this is an outstanding choice.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: November, 2006 Location: Jakarta Posts: 667
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 17, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $175.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, well buit | | Cons: | Some chromatic aberrations, distortion | |
I have the non SMC version of this lens. It's a good lens, especially when compared to other superwides of its age. It is very sharp even wide open (especially on a crop sensor because the corners are a bit mushy on full frame) and has nice colors. On the downside, distortion is present (although easy to correct) and there are some chromatic aberrations in the corners. The lens flares when directed towards the sun but this behavior has to be expected from a non-smc lens.
Regarding the filter diameter, it is true that there is a 58mm threaded mount on the lens, but a filter mounted directly on it would cause severe vignetting on a full frame camera (film). Therefore, there is an optional Pentax lenshood which comes in two parts, the rear one being used alone to increase the filter thread diameter from 58 to 77mm, in order to prevent vignetting.
Cheers!
Abbazz
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 509 | | Review Date: September 21, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Built, contrast, color | | Cons: | resolution, dark view finder, CA | |
This lens shows how hard it is to design a ultra wide angle lens without a high speed computer and AL elements. It pushes the boundary quite a bit.
Image quality wise, it is no competition with the contemporary counterparts such as DA21 or FA20. But it is indeed a landmark for lens design. For that purpose, it is a keeper.
Mine is the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar version, which is supposed to be better against flare and better with color rendition. I would agree with the assessment. However, CA is apparent at f4.5.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2009 Location: Sterling, VA Posts: 70 | | Review Date: February 3, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Build qualty, excellent contrast | | Cons: | distortion | |
Excellent lens for wide angel shooting; great contrast and colors. Some distortion, though if you are shooting landscapes it is not an issue
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: March, 2007 Location: Greater Copenhagen Area Posts: 430 | | Review Date: March 27, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Build quality, close focus ability and overall sharpness | | Cons: | Barrel distortion and F4.5 | |
I have the Super-Tak version of this lens. It is nearly in ”as new” condition with matching metal hood. Build quality is of the typical high Takumar standard, and focusing is super smooth – 90 degrees throw from infinity to 20 cm/ 0.65 ft. Sharpness is good even wide open. In fact, I get better overall results with this lens than the DA 16-45 at about the same focal length when the subject has a flat surface like in architectural shots (the DA’s de-centering problem with soft corners shows itself then).
I don’t find chromatic aberration to be a problem with my lens, but it can sometimes appear as yellow/cyan fringing. However, the lens does display rather severe barrel distortion. That is rarely an issue in landscape shots, but can be irritating in shots of architecture and the like. It is easily corrected in post-processing though.
With F4.5 it cannot be called a fast lens, but with a focal length of just 20mm F4.5 is totally acceptable, except maybe for in-door shots.
One major plus is the close focus distance of less than 20 cm/0.65 ft, but I have to detract from its total score because of the rather small aperture fully open and rather strong barrel distortion.
Shot showing barrel distortion (yes, the door was crooked, but beams, posts and windows were straight):
Landscape shot:
Both with the K10D and straight from Pentax Photo Lab 3.51 - no extra sharpening applied.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
