Pentaxian Registered: January, 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 2,795 5 users found this helpful | Review Date: January 3, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $800.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | No PF or CA of any kind, short MFD, 100% natural color rendition | Cons: | Only 25 are known to exist, bokeh not that good | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K-5
| | This must be one of the rarest Takumars out there and also one of the most expensive. I have the price list from 1972 and only the 1000mm f/8 Takumar was more expensive. The 85mm f/4.5 Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar was 5 times the price of the 85mm f/1.8 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. It is estimated that only 25 of these are known to exist.
I was lucky to find one in my country. It is in a less than desirable shape and well worn outside. But I had the chance to try it before purchasing, and despite its worn appearance it's still a Takumar in all aspects: thanks to the tight tolerances and high quality focusing grease the focusing is still buttery smooth without any play. The diaphragm works perfectly too.
Usually this lens comes complete with a box and several filters, but not this one.
What's so special about the 85mm f/4.5 Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar? It's a 5/5 design by Yasuo Takahashi which does not contain glass. The five elements are made of Quartz and Fluorite. The front element is concave (!) and it's completely uncoated (!), because coating blocks UV light.
It's not the fastest lens around, but it's very sharp and, thanks to its design, completely devoid of CA and PF even in the worst conditions. It easily outperforms APO (ED) glass because of that. And this also means that the focus does not shift in UV and IR light (the reason that many lenses have an IR marker is that the infrared focal plane differs from the focal plane for visible light).
I also like it because of its 100% natural color rendition (simply because there's no color shift and no coating).
The lens was designed with scientific purposes in mind. So bokeh came probably last on the list and I find the bokeh also less than desirable. This is not noticeable in pseudo-macro shots though.
This shot of my son says it all... | |