| Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2010 Location: Copenhagen Posts: 4
4 users found this helpful
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2012 Posts: 7
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 15, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $135.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, bokeh | | Cons: | Heavy, Warm, some CA at 3.5 | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Olympus OM-D E-M5
| |
I use this lens with an Olympus OM-D which has in camera image stabilization. I have the Pentax-M 200 f4, the Super Takumar 135mm f3.5, a Konica Hexanon 135mm f3.2, a Tokina 60-300 f4-5.6, and an Olympus 40-150 II, and recently compared these lense for sharpness, color accuracy, CA, bokeh and handling. Here's what I found. 1. The Takumar 200mm 3.5 had the best overall sharpness at f8. It was sharper at f.35 than the Pentax-M f4, the Tokina 60-300 @ 200mm @ f5.6. Colors are warm and unsaturated. CA is noticable at f3.5 but is fine thereafter. Its a beast to handle and without bright sunshine results are not so good. In low contast lighting the lens is too heavy for the Olympus IS to handle. Photos are often blurry and drab. But in good light, with shutter speeds above 1/400 this is a very nice lens. 2. For all practical purposes, there is no difference in sharpness between the Takumar 135, Konica 135, and teh Olympus 40-150 @ 135mm f8. My copy of the Super Tak is in Mint condition. Looks brand new and its a lovely instrument. But the Konica has a build in hood and is easier to handle. And the Olympus only weighs 115gr and has autofocus. Guess which one will get used? 3. The surprise of the day is the Tokina 60-300. At 135mm it keeps up with all the lenses above. At 200mm it is sharper at all aperatures than the Pentax-M, and is just a shade less sharp than the Takumar 200mm f3.5. It is heavier than all but the Tak 200mm f3.5, but it is easy to handle, has neutral colors, and well controlled CA. 4. The Pentax-M 200 f4 is a nice handling lens with good colors, but sharpness is just so-so in my copy and I would rather use either the Tak 3.5 when I need sharpness or one of the 135mm when I want portability. Overall, I'm impressed with the Takumar 200mm f3.5. It is a 50 year old lens that performs really well. I disagree with the reviewer who claims that in comparison to modern lenses the Tak is not keeping up. In the hands of a skilled modern photographer it more than keeps up.
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2013 Location: Near Basle Posts: 9
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 10, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Preset, easy to handle | | Cons: | loss of contrast at sidelight | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Nex 6, EOS 5D Mark 3
| |
I use the lens on Sony Nex-6 and Canon EOS 5D Mark 2/3. The use of the preset aperture on both cameras is easy to handle and fun to work with.
The lens has less contrast than my 10yrs younger Nikkor-Q 200/4. the colors are natural and not so saturated like the Nikkor. My copy has even wide open a very good sharpness. Very little CA's are there (wide open) but not disturbing.
The lens has a good bokeh in front- and background. The mentioned 3D-effect is unique and more like a 2D-set in front of the background.
The lens doen't like sidelights.
Like an advertising slogan from the days of film: "Ideal for cloudy days and weddings".
Some photos are >here | | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2013 Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 118
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 24, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Great IQ, Great build, Preset | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: D7000
| |
Hands down my favorite 200mm lens. This lens is always in my bag. I loved it so much that I three copies now. The metal build makes sure this thing will survive a fall. I found that this lens perform better during the mid ranges of it's focal lengths. Doing so also gives it a more 3D effect.
JAH_7957 by Jarrett_Hunt, on Flickr
JAH_7948 by Jarrett_Hunt, on Flickr
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 29, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Preset, great IQ, easy to manage | | Cons: | Nothing so far | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I got this lens after seeing CJ's photos. It is just like he makes you believe it is. However, once you have his experience, for sure you will be able to get photos like his. This lens is very good. I do recommend. I have the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135/2.8 and found myself using this more and more. I think the preset has to do with the image. It gives the images an added three dimensionality (according to my eyes). Here are some photos.
Takumar200mmf3.5Preset-CaballoViejo-5 by Palenquero, on Flickr
Takumar200mmf3.5Preset-Broccoli-4 by Palenquero, on Flickr
Tak200mm3.5@5.6-Hawk1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
Union Station L.A. 2 by Palenquero, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,429
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 31, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | SHARP, Bokeh, All Metal, High Quality | | Cons: | Some CA in certain situations | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
I recently bought this lens and can't believe the quality and IQ for the small amount of money this lens cost me. The lens is EXTREMELY sharp, even wide open, and the bokeh is excellent.
18 BLADES! The diaphragm is located at the front of the lens and features 18 blades. The aperture is circular at all settings. They just don't make lenses like this anymore.
The focus ring is typical Takumar smoothness and has a nearly 360 degree throw. The overall build quality is outstanding and couldn't be matched with most glass today, only the most expensive.
METAL METAL METAL. This lens is all metal and glass, not a hint of plastic. You would think this would make the glass pretty heavy, but it isn't, thanks to having only four elements where most modern designs have 12+.
The only downside of the lens is some CA at certain shooting conditions. That is entirely acceptable though because of the lenses other qualities and can be easily post processed out.
Here are a few shots I took so far with the lens. All the shots were taken wide open at F3.5! This is now my favorite lens and has the 3D quality to the photos that I haven't seen in any other lens.
takumar 200mm f35 test 1 by Colorado CJ, on Flickr
takumar 200mm f35 test 3 by Colorado CJ, on Flickr
Playing catch with Freya 1 by Colorado CJ, on Flickr
Playing catch with Freya 3 by Colorado CJ, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 509 | | Review Date: May 4, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very well built, sturdy in hand, number of aperture blades! | | Cons: | slightly low on contrast, sensitive to direct light | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 7
Value: 10
| |
What can we ask for from a lens made in the 60s, before I was even born. Not much. This lens represents the high point in Pentax history. Very well made. Like a tank.
Since it has only one layer of coating, the coating shows bluish tint. Pentax made a compromise between the number of elements and the reflection within the lens. So this only has 4 elements and 4 groups. Simple design, but very effective. Showing unique characters.
Resolution is OK. Contrast was so. It is not easy to handle. But look at the number of aperture blades. You feel good even before taking photos.
The limitation is clear.
Heavy, have to adjust 3+ on a modern digital camera. Contrast is not the highest. Quite long.
Hey, for a lens made in the early 1960s, it is pretty good. If it were made today, I would give only 7.  | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2011 Location: British Columbia Posts: 15
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 14, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Fast and sharp, with character and scary build quality | | Cons: | Takes up almost as much space as the 300mm f4 in my camera bag | |
4 elements, no coatings (that I know of), and a sweet round aperture. This lens is truly graceful, with minimal glass between the scene and the camera.
Smooth focus, even for a Takumar. Good bokeh at any aperture. Dynamite for longer range portraits.
No detents on the aperture ring allows perfect tuning of DOF. Very handy!
This one is not quite as surgically precise as my 200mm f4, but in my honest opinion gives a deeper and more dynamic look to most images.
Despite the lack of super coatings, it works very well in extreme sunlight as long as you use the hood. Colours seem very natural and balanced.
The Takumar 200mm f3.5 is a bit on the big side, but balances nicely in the hand and makes for a nice steady shot once a camera is stuck to the back of it.
Hard to rate against modern glass because it's just so different, but for dynamic images and user joy, it gets a solid 9 out of 10 from me. If you see one for a good price, grab it. It's a really fun lens.
Here's an image at f5.6, 1/50 sec, hand held.
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2007 Location: Singapore Posts: 348
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 31, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | bokeh, sharpness, colour rendition | | Cons: | nil | |
My interest in this lens was piqued by the good rating it received here, and when I had the chance to get it I picked up a fully functional copy of it, albeit a bit old.
I finally took it out for a serious walkaround with it and really really like what this lens is capable of! When I first got it I snapped the obligatory few indoor shots with it, comparing it with the CZJ 200mm sonnar i had. My initial impression is that the lens doesn't lose much to the CZJ, though its min focusing distance was slightly longer than the sonnar.
When I took it out for shots today I was pleasantly impressed! The lens is pretty sharp, wide open; not very prone to flare for a lens of its age (with a hood on). Nice colour rendition. Biggest strength would be its bokeh though. Pictures below to show what I'm talking about. And its lighter and easily more manageable than the CZJ 200mm
And here's a close up of the bokeh so you can see how creamy smooth it is - this shot was at 5.6, the wonderful circular bokeh courtesy of its 16 bladed aperture:
One last picture
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Slovenija Posts: 145 | | Review Date: September 6, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp wide open, bokeh, rich colors, nice look | | Cons: | Size, flare | |
Very sharp alredy at f3,5, even more from f5,6. Very good bokeh and colors. Very easy to set in fokus (because of brightness). For best results need to be used with hood.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2009 Location: Kagoshima, Japan Posts: 237 | | Review Date: April 18, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Excellent build and IQ, focus throw, color rendition | | Cons: | weight | |
I have to say first that this lens belonged to the "dead lens club" when i bought since it had a really bad case of fungi on the inside elements. But when I started disassembling it i noticed that the front part can be unscrewed rather easily and found that the fungi was on the closest part of the third element, wich i then cleaned easily with some solvent. So now it's closer to the Un-dead lens club? I don't know.
The color rendition is astounding but have to say that my copy is mostly unusable with my K-m because it needs around +2.5-3 EV compensation which it obviously doesn't have. I used it with a broken Spotmatic +sunny 16 and all i can say is that it's really sharp even at wide apertures, though i used it mostly at f5.6.
I love the preset aperture for me is not as much as a "semi-auto" aperture ring as a mean to select the appropiate OOF rendering even if it's in-between half-stops. Something that would work in Av mode if it wasn't because of out-of-range exposure compensation. I would get every preset possible if i had the money to buy them. Bokeh is really nice for portraits IMHO. Soft, smooth (back) OOF renditions, don't know too much about front ones.
This aside, i must say that I indeed used it also as a semi-auto ring and it works really nice that way also. The fixed ring is indeed stiff but as said before is for it not to move accidentally. Just remember to fix it before you start shooting if you know your subject and everything will work smoothly.
About weight. If you have used other similar lenses (read, high quality/large aperture primes) in this range you'll know that you can't expect a light lens. Also, we're talking about a full metal bodied lens so it's normal. If at all possible get the tripod ring, but it can be managed without a monopod. Also, the tripod ring may be more of a nuisance than actual help when you are carrying it.
Finally, the long throw manual focus. I may say, this is a love-it-or-hate-it situation. I personally like it since my subjects for this focal lenght are between 5 and 10 meters mostly so having such a fine tuning is really welcome.
(Non working link removed)
All in all, this is an excellent lens. If you don't really need the extra half stop, the 200 f4 maybe a better choice -a lighter and smaller lens may see more use in the field-. But if you have the chance to try one, the preset may be of your liking.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 17,888
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 17, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | fast telephoto, very precise focusing | | Cons: | none | |
picked up this lens as part of building an M42 kit.
Having played with it now for about 2 weeks it is time to do the review.
My copy of the lens is missing the tripod mount, which would be an issue if you need the stability, the lens is a little heavy to support from the camera body.
Focusing is a bit slow but very accurate due to almost 350 degree focusing throw from minimum to infinity, but focusing is very smooth and consistent throughtout the entire range of ficus.
The preset aperture ring is quite stif, but the stop down ring is very light to move, I think the lens is deliberately made this way to avoid unintentional changes in aperture.
optically the lens is excellent. There is only very slight CA, mostly longitudinal, with green showing in out of focus subjects behind the focus point, purple for out of focus in front of the subject. Lateral CA, while present, is minimal, I had to look for it. The longitudinal CA also shows up a little in teh circles that show up for out of focus bright lights. The bokeh from the circular aperture is very pleasing
SHarpness of the lens is incredible for the age of the lens as is color rendition.
Metering is a little off on my K10D, I have not tested yet on K7D or *istD, but on the K10D it needs about +1 stop when being used in Av mode.
Overall a very capable performer.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: May, 2008 Location: Vancouver, BC. Posts: 89 | | Review Date: November 26, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $53.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, good bokeh, built like a tank | | Cons: | weighs like a tank, focuses like a tank | |
I truly love the feel of this lens, but it is definitely not the sort of item you'd want to haul everywhere you go - when I carry it I find myself holding it around the neck of the lens (which is conveniently narrow) rather than onto the body because of the weight and heft of it.
Image quality is great stopped above f/4, the 16-bladed aperature makes for excellent bokeh. Focusing takes some effort on my version, but I've come to love the preset diaphragm and it's smooth throw.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2008 Location: Langen, Germany Posts: 106 | | Review Date: October 2, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $49.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Superb build quality, great colors and bokeh, sharp | | Cons: | Heavy | |
This is a great lens. I have also the s-m-c Takumar 200mm f4. Wide open the s-m-c is sharper but the images of the "old" Takumar have some fantastic characteristics. Stopped down to 4 or 5.6 it's very sharp. The bokeh is very good. It's pure fun to work with this lens. I never seen any lens with such a great build quality.
Combined with an extension tube this is one of my "flower-lenses". I use it very often to take fotos of flowers. The closest focusing distance is 2.5 meters, this is the point why it gets only a rating of 9.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Auckland Posts: 452 | | Review Date: June 26, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp lens wide open, superb colour, smooth bokeh, very solid | | Cons: | prone to fringing | |
This is a sharp preset lens with great resolution and silky smooth bokeh. Colour is on par with the Pentax standard, i would even say its better than all my other Pentax lenses period producing nicely saturated greens, blues and reds. Theres something about this lens that just makes taking great photos so easy. My only qualm with this lens is that purple fringing will occur when shooting high contrast conditions, lacks the smc of later lenses  . Definately not the kind of lens you would want to lug around your neck all day, though its not as big as other 200's or zooms, with the metal hood attached this is a heavy lens. They definetly dont build Metal and Glass peices like this anymore.
| | |
;)
;)
