| Author: | | Forum Member Registered: February, 2013 Location: Zhukovsky, Russian Federation Posts: 92
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 27, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $140.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharpness, bokeh, build quality, handling on a digital camera | | Cons: | none, except little CA in some conditions | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-5
| |
This review concerns only Super-Takumar version. I have used many cool manual M42 Super and SMC Takumar lenses including 50/1.4, 55/1.4, 55/1.8, 135/2.5 and 200/4, but only this lens made me write the review.
I was fascinated with the style of sharpness. It's sharp with a little monocle-style glowing effect over the edges. The bokeh is outstanding like other Supe Takumars.
Another surprising point about the lens is focusing. Like many other digital photographers I have focusing problems with any manual lens. Even focus confirmation doesn't help. But not with this lens (like, for example, SMC Pentax-A 28/2.8) I haven't any focusing problems.
In conclusion, I have bought this lens for a test without any serious expectations, but it became one of my favourite lens.
    | | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: December, 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Posts: 9,050
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 8, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light, sharp, and the feel is... just great! | | Cons: | Not found yet... | | Sharpness: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-5
| |
My review is not a very sophisticated one, nor did I test this gem extensively. I received it just yesterday...
Fallen in love with the photos Mike made with this lens, as many others, I guess...
But the feeling of it is great, like all the other old Taks. Handling, focussing, all wonderful. And the first photos are great. DoV, sharpness, colour rendering, bokeh... I think this will become one of my favourites in no time!
I just don't understand the problems others have with the sharpness of this lens.... An example it can be sharp, even wide open:
Why are the shadows in life always bigger and uglier than the real thing? by Rense Haveman, on Flickr
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: November, 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Posts: 2,497 | | Review Date: January 12, 2013 | Not Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Build | | Cons: | Sharpness | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 8
Camera Used: k-x
| |
It's not a bad lens, it's just that it's not as good as other SMC Tak lens.
It's soft at 2.8, works if you are shooting women or kids. However, overall I was not as pleased as with other SMS Tak lenses and eventually let it go.
This one was taken with SMC Tak 105mm
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: November, 2012 Location: Cosenza Posts: 42
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 17, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $63.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | bokeh | | Cons: | soft at 2.8 | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Canon Eos 5D Mark II
| |
First of all: this lens clears the mirror of the Canon 5D Mark II without a problem (cheap chinese adapter). And, with the same adapter, the infinite stop is bang-on.
Small and well made, smooth focusing and aperture ring, the latter with clicks at half-stops.
Typical portrait lens. Quite soft at 2.8, but plenty usable; I saw this mostly when I was comparing it against other lenses, but in "solo" use I can never complain. It becomes sharp enough from f/4 and landscape-ready from f/5,6.
Still not a lens that I'd recommend for traditional (i.e. all sharp as a tack) landscape as primary use. But, again, I'm more in the "un-traditional" landscape photography so it does work for me.
Its big big plus it's the amazing bokeh it produces, almost perfect, with just a hint of a trace around the specular highlights. The only lenses, regardless of the format, I ever saw do better than that are the Symmar-S for 18x24cm and the Pentax 165/2,8 for 6x7 (this one has a different optical design, though, never to be seen in one of its smaller format siblings).
| | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Slovenija Posts: 145 | | Review Date: August 25, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | more versatile than Auto Tak 105 | | Cons: | bokeh, colors | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 8
Camera Used: Canon EOS5DmkII
| |
I have Super Takumar (first version with blue coating) and S-M-C Takumar. Nice little lens. Wide open perfomance on FF is quite good. Sharpness is not excellent, but is very compose, corners are much better than with Auto Takumar 105 and vignetting is not problem. Closing down the lens become more sharp, but never really top sharp (like macro Takumar 100, or Canon 70-200 zoom). Colours are a little bit washed out and bokeh is much more nervous than with Auto Takumar 105. Maybe not so good lens for portrait, but much more versatile than old 105 Tak.
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2012 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: June 13, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp, smooth bokeh, great build quality & focus ring | | Cons: | haven't found any yet | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: spotmatic sp1000
| |
I just scanned my first roll shot with my new SuperTakumar 105mm and I was blown away. Even with the lo-fi scanner and using a cheap expired film, the lens is marvelous. very sharp when needed stopping it down just a little, beautiful bokeh (comparable to my tamron 90mm macro which is also amazing in this respect), just a tiny bit soft wide open, which is perfect for portraits.
Buy one if you find it, even the non SMC version... buy a spotmatic along with it if you don't have one, just to try it!
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 2, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Everything | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I am a convert by Mike Cash too. I got the SMC version (two of them, one like new, and the other good). I saw Mike using the Preset and wanted to get it, but then realized taht it is not the lens, or the camera, it is the man behind the camera. Mike takes wonderful photos with this and any other lens. That being said, I have gotten wonderfu pics with the 105/2.8 and plan to continue doing it. I will post more when I have photos ready to post.
SMCTak105mmf2.8-FincheOnFence2-5 by Palenquero, on Flickr
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: August, 2010 Location: Ontario Posts: 22 | | Review Date: November 7, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | great price, excellent build, very decent sharpness | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I have to say from the outset that price IS a concern. Were that I could walk out today and buy the DA 70mm Ltd, but such is life. I got such a bargain on the K20 that I continue to shop for bargains. Of which there are quite a few. And I certainly consider this lens to be one of them. I can't compare to better lenses or faster lenses because I don't have them, but I have been extremely pleased with the results of this lens. Any time the pictures are less than good, I can always blame myself. 
Considering how much one pays for the build of the DA 70mm (@ $599C), this thing is beautifully built. And I find the f2 to be a blessing more than a curse more often that not, because my focus can be a tad more forgiving!
I think it's a great lens, considering I paid $60 for it. The photos are always worth more.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: October, 2010 Posts: 6,242
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 30, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | compact, sharp, color, and rendering. focusing. | | Cons: | Leaves contacts bare(most m42 lenses do.) on camera. | |
I have had this lens for abaout one month for now. I used it in Single in September, so Maybe I have quite good feel how it is for now.
First thing that I thought when I opened that box, where it came that it was small. (I have seen K-version of this lens and it is huge compared to this) feel of focus and all metal was just perfect and brought a smile on my face. It still does that. 
So mounted on DSLR, I like FoW more that 135. More space. Easy to focus. I can clearly see from my K-7 without any aid when it is in focus. it is not so easy with wider lenses, and even my M135 is harder to aim. I have sharp eyes too so maybe it helps, dunno. aperture ring is so snappy that it sings, I can hear how much I open it up/close it, so whaen shooting in Av- mode I don't have to check it out. 
Image quality is just great, it is fun to shoot with. something about color rendering is crazy it delivers punchy colors. And color is still kind a natural/cool. RAW shooting is way to go, as I have seen that JPEG.s are too colorful. So what else is there to say. I like it. I got it from ebay at 70 € and I'm happy with it. I will buy more takumars for sure. If you don't have this and you like tele's around 85-135 range, just buy it. I think that it is worth even more than I bought it.
   | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2010 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 813
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 22, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Perfect lens. The sharpest lens bar none. | | Cons: | Nil | |
Whats with the low raing?
I have a mint copy, and it is just the sharpest lens I have seen, whether for digital, or film usage.
High contrast even wide open.
Razor sharp from F2.8 from centre to edges.
Very flat field, suitable for duplication usage.
Very high resolution.
Negligible CA in any light (read = zero)
All this in a compact well made lens that will last for a century or more?
If you have a Pentax film camera, you absolutely MUST HAVE this lens.
Perfect.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Seattle Posts: 1,915
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 8, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
|
It flares. It's soft. But I love this lens. Given the choice between this and my Super Tak 85/1.9, I would reach for the 105 nine out of ten times (the one in ten times in favor of the 85 are just the guilt I feel for not using it).
I don't have much new to add to the conversation -- people above had already sung this lens' praises in portraits, and I'm not sure I can dissect precisely how it achieves this. All I'll do is forward my humble evidence to its credit:
I enjoy Takumar lenses, but I think long after most of them fall into disuse at some point in the future, it'll be only this and the 50/1.4 I reach for.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2010 Posts: 5,901
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | What's Not To Like? | | Cons: | A Bit Heavy | |
I got this lens with a Spotmatic and a Takumar 50MM kit lens from someone as a gift and I consider this hands down my BEST lens. I would NEVER give it up and should something ever happen to it I'd probably sell the most valuable thing I own to get another one. It is the one lens in my kit that I just couldn't do without.
I'm a portrait person. When I take up my camera 75% of the time I'm going after taking pictures of something living. For me it's all about expression and faces. This lens? It has got to be one of the most perfect portrait lenses EVER.
It's good for other things too. I've found it makes for nice plant shots and I've even used it for photographing small colorful things like glass pendants. It does it all well, but there's a certain quality that this lens has, a way of smoothing skin and lighting it up that just makes faces look so beautiful that you can't help but love it. Great bokeh all round, but the skin smoothing effect is by far the best reason to buy this lens. It makes everyone look like great and I don't have to post process for an hour to get there either.
It's a bit heavy compared to modern plastic lenses but it's a smooth lens, and very easy to use otherwise. It can be just a bit fuzzy around the edges depending upon the light, but anything that's centered with this lens is usually well defined and often razor sharp. It's your typical great Takumar in that respect but there's just a little added glow with this lens. One that it makes it a warm, friendly lens whenever a face, particularly a human face, is the subject of a picture taken with it.
10 out of 10, no bones about it. I'd buy a dozen of these if I could afford them to back up this one and if I could only keep ONE lens in my entire kit? I'd have to chose this one. No question at all in my mind about it. It would be really tough leaving my 3 Nifty 50's behind, but I'd still do it to keep this one handy if I ever had to go there.
No one gets this lens from me. Not even from my cold, dead hand if I have any say in the matter. I don't know if they can safely cremate you with a Takumar lens in your hand, but this one? They can just put it right on my SPII and I'll just take with me straight to the afterlife if you please!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: GTA, ON, Canada Posts: 1,673 | | Review Date: November 12, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, great image quality | | Cons: | a little soft wide open (if you're not into that) | |
I have a cosmetically rough Super Takumar version with pristine optics (as a former college photography program loaner it has a serial number and inventory plate on it) that came with both original caps but no case or hood.
I like the focal length and how the lens handles. It is a little soft wide open, but sharpens up nicely - a good portrait lens. Using a long lens hood would be a good idea to reduce the likelihood of flaring.
Samples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/steinback/sets/72157624156936842/ | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 92 | | Review Date: September 21, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | size, built quality, color | | Cons: | M42 (not really cons) | |
I have the S-M-C version, and it is just great.
The focus is so smooth, as all Takumars, that you can do it with only one finger.
I especially like the color it produces. The resolution is not a concern for this lens as the sharpness from f/2.8 is already satisfactory and beyond f/4.0 it is all very good. However never tried below f/5.6 since I use split focus screen and it is too dark to see any thing below f/8.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: March, 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Posts: 5,216 | | Review Date: March 25, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Optimal focal for a medium tele on APS-C | | Cons: | POSSIBLE major flare problems | |
I have the M42 Super version (serial # series 418XXXX).
Took it out for the first time a few weeks ago on my KX, even though I've had it for a long time. I wanted to do a few quick shots in bright sun, but the images were so washed out, or overexposed, or hazy, that I thought there was something wrong with it.
Well, just yesterday, I shot it under different lighting conditions, and I can see that my early problems were caused by a combination of poor M metering technique (my fault), and flare. In other words, contrary to the comments above, I suspect my uncoated lens is VERY susceptible to flare. (It's not marked coated anywhere, and I can't tell.) So don't base a possible purchase decision on this part of my assessment. I have to shoot with it more.
Anyway, I am EXTREMELY pleased with its sharpness, and like most old Pentax glass, the build quality is like a tank. I'm going to shoot with it more or less exclusively for the next couple of days, so I'll return here and add further comments.
Here are two images, first time out with the lens:
 | | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
