| Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2019 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: April 21, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $160.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, even at f2.8. Readily available at bargain prices. | | Cons: | None that spring to mind. | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 67
| |
Superb lens that I use a lot for portraits, both outdoors and in the studio ( with both flash monoblocs and continuous led lighting ).
Excellent sharpness right from f2.8. Narrow depth of field at f2.8, but well worth the effort. I frequently shoot at f2.8-f4.0 with impressive results.
Despite having a L/S 165mm f4.0, this is my favourite 'portrait' lens.
67mm filter size is reasonably economical. My example is fitted with a cheap 67mm 'telephoto' plastic lens hood that came from a dealers 'bargain bin' around twenty-five years ago, I suspect it's an elderly Bronica or Kowa item.
This 150mm f2.8 is relatively light in weight by Pentax 6x7 standands but is of superb optical and mechanical build quality. Shopping around, examples that are cosmetically 'well-worn' but retain unblemished optics and work well, can be found these days at remarkably reasonable prices. | | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2016 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: May 30, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $270.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp foreground at maximal diaphragm, intuitive focusing | | Cons: | no matched | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax 6x7
| |
This is incredible lens! Very sophisticated in your arms/ Visible focusing in widest diaphragm, so you have time to choose correct composing and see details by corner of your eye.
This lens 15% sharper than super-multi-coated takumar 6x7 105 mm 2.8 - but this is my own opinion. Nice for portraits and you may to shoot with you digital camera via adapter also with nice results.
I didn/t see negative aspects of this lens. So my overall rating is 10. | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Melbourne Posts: 2 | | Review Date: March 3, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $71.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Large aperture; great for portraits, Price! | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 67ii and 6x7
| |
The 150mm Super Takumar was my first 6x7 lens, coming attached to the first 6x7 body I purchased. It became one of my favourite lenses. More recently, I purchased the Super-Multi-Coated version in excellent condition for a bargain price. I use this lens handheld mostly for portraits. Of course, at f/2.8 there is not a lot of depth of field to work with when taking a portrait so focussing and stillness of subject is critical. The results are beautiful and the images have a magical look to them. I have owned most of the 67 lenses and the 150mm is one of the three I have decided to keep (the others being the 105mm, 75mm f/4.5).
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 7,962
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 14, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $210.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good optics and versatile focal length. | | Cons: | Quirky hood and lens cap. | | Camera Used: 6x7, 67 and 67II
| |
The 150/2.8 was one of the original lenses when Pentax introduced the 6x7 system in 1969. I have the second and last 1971 version (SMC Takumar 6x7 150/2.8) and it has the same optics as its predecessor, but does have the newer SMC coatings. The 150/2.8 lens was replaced by the 165/2.8 in 1982.
Usage:
I guess Pentax wanted to have a 135 format 85mm focal length equivalent in the 6x7 system, so replaced the 150/2.8 with the 165/2.8. This is a shame as the wider 150mm focal length is different enough from 165mm to warrant both in a lens lineup. I like 165mm a bit better for portraits, but 150mm is a little more versatile and great as a “detail” lens. Even though the optics are different, I find the 6x7 150/2.8 on par with my newer 67 165/2.8.
CLOSE-UP WORK: Pentax made a close-up filter for the 150/2.8 lens. The 67mm T132 close-up filter gives you magnification up to 0.24x, with a focusing distance of 0.88 to 1.53 meters. The results are quite good, though the DOF is very shallow. These close-up filters cause no light loss or have an exposure compensation like an extension tube, so are a handy alternative.
FILTER: The 6x7 150/2.8 uses 67mm screw in filters, or Pentax 6x7 67mm bayonet filters. It also comes with a 67mm metal bayonet lens cap that works with bayonet filters or the lens itself. This cap will not work if you use a screw in filter, so I use a newer 67mm plastic clip-on cap insted.
CASE: The 6x7 150/2.8 comes with a dedicated hard lens case. It will also fit in the S90-140 soft case.
HOOD: The 6x7 150/2.8 uses a metal screw-in hood, marked with “Takumar/6x7 1:4 135mm 1:2.8 150mm”. This hood only alligns to the correct orrentation if used on the lens itself or with bayonet filters. For screw-in filters use the newer PH-SA67 hood designed for the 135/4 Macro.
Summary:
The SMC Takumar 6x7 150/2.8 is a quirky old treasure and unfortunately most people will go for the newer 165/2.8 lens instead. The 150/2.8 is worth seeking out and is a good alternative to the 165/2.8.
Price: I found my 6x7 150/2.8 on eBay and it cost $210.00. It was Mint condition, I purchased the hood and case separately.
Sample shots taken with the SMC Takumar 6x7 150/2.8. Photos are medium resolution Lab scans from original slides and negatives.
Camera: 6x7 Film: Fuji Provia 400X ISO: 400
Camera: 67II Film: Kodak T-Max 400 ISO: 400
 | | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,271
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 28, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive and fairly sharp | | Cons: | Not a good landscape lens | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
The 150 Super-Takumar and 150 SMC Takumar have the same optical configuration, just a coating difference. I believe the Super-Takumar has a three layer coating; the SMC version is a 7 layer coating. They are both 5 element Double Gauss type designs, which is quite common in the industry. This lens does well for portraits and weddings due to its speed(f/2.8) and focal length. It is not so good for landscape work due to it only having an f/22 smallest stop. Color rendition seems to be good, distortion is low and no chromatic aberrations have been seen. Its use for macro work is limited by it not having smaller stops. The 150 is a solid, well built but heavy lens that can be bought "used" only, since it has been out of production for at least 24 years. It is one of the best values on the used market. Sharpness is not quite as good as the 105mm but it is close. This makes sense because the 105 has 6 elements instead of 5 in the 150. Because this is such an old optical design (circa 1970), people tend to think it can't compete with the latest Pentax designs. This is just not true. Stopped down just a bit, this lens does really well and is sharp enough for publication purposes. My estimate concerning lp/mm is in the 80 range at f/8 to f/11. It is sharpest at f/8 to f/11 but does well between f/5.6 and f/22.
Be aware that the 1.4x rear converter will not fit on this lens. This was a mistake in my opinion.
Overall a good lens that was intended for portraits and weddings and does okay for both. It does well in hand held action work too. I use mine for hand held travel work as well. It is limited for other uses. It was superseded by the 165 f/2.8 and 165 f/4 LS. I tend to use my 90-180 zoom instead of this lens now, as the zoom is more versatile. I have no intention of selling my 150 tho. It is the best value of the entire lens line.
| | |
