| Author: | | Site Supporter Registered: September, 2013 Location: Cuenca Posts: 640 | | Review Date: January 28, 2024 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp, great colors and contrast, small, light, very affordable | | Cons: | vignettes with some filters | |
I have two copies of the Takumar 35mm f3.5, a Super and an Auto. I don't shoot with the Super. There's nothing wrong with it. I just prefer the auto-Taks. Because of no or minimal lens coatings they have a lower inherent contrast which renders subtle tonal gradations wonderfully. I lost my first copy when some gear was stolen, and I immediately replaced it. At first, I thought the replacement copy was defective but then discovered that the lens focuses past infinity, i.e. at the infinity stop images are unsharp. When adjusting for that the photos are impressively sharp. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, some very recent examples:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/101244128@N07/53476968278/in/datetaken-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/101244128@N07/53481336456/in/datetaken-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/101244128@N07/53482168787/in/datetaken-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/101244128@N07/53492990546/in/datetaken-public/
Remember this lens is sixty or more years old.
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: July, 2020 Posts: 119
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 7, 2023 | Not Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Colour, contrast, Takumar build | | Cons: | Not particularly sharp at distance. MFD | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 5
Camera Used: K-S2, K200D
| |
I wanted one of these for a long while before acquiring a Super Multicoated version in a bundle with a matching 105mm.
It seemed in great condition, no obvious faults but sadly it did not meet my expectation.
(I should remember my occasional suspicion that unused appearance might indicate some previous owner's dissatisfaction rather than exceptional care).
I've used a range of normal primes (APS-C) now and in the past - DA 35mm, DA Ltd 40mm, Rikenon 35mm, a Pentacon 30mm and an array of 28mm.
This one just didn't excel as I thought it might.
Colour is probably the lens's strong point, really attractive.
I didn't do any scientific testing. When viewing the images I got the impression they were soft even stopped down. "Close up" seemed ok but beyond 5m it was really quite noticeable. I made a few casual comparisons with the 40mm and the Pentacon, which seemed to confirm it.
I didn't find handling that great.
Mechanics of course all perfect but it is a bit too small (for a pure manual lens) and I especially didn't care for the MFD of 45cm.
Maybe I'd have judged it differently without it's reputation and if I didn't have some great alternatives in my arsenal. 6 seems particularly harsh although on the official scale that should mean it's still good rather than excellent. That said based on my copy I can't recommend it.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Posts: 1,851
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 17, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Built, optics | | Cons: | f/3.5 - only 5 blades | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Spotmatic, K5-II
| |
This lens flew under my radar for a long time, until I got a SMC when my father in law passed on his M42 stuff to me. (I put $50 as price as that seems to be the norm)
I was pleasantly surprised with this lens,
* I always preferred 28mm over 35mm focal, the field of view is less than 28mm but feels more natural
* Distorsion is well controlled
* Sharpness it has plenty
* Colors are vibrant
* Images feel different, I guess that's what you call 3D effect.
* Bokeh is neutral, and the 5 blade diaphragm doesn't help much
* CA is not bad in APS SLRs, very marginal wide open.
And of course it is a takumar, so it is built like a tank while being smooth
| | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2013 Posts: 7
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 8, 2022 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, 3D effect | | Cons: | Bokeh not the best | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K70, SP1000, Fuji X-T20
| |
This is an amazing lens.
I can only assume that not all copies are as good as mine, as the average review score isn't as good as I would expect. I can only speak for my experience with the SMC version.
The build feels just gorgeous. It's absolutely tiny. Sharpness is absolutely top class. Colours are rich and authentic. Pretty flare resistant. A little bit of fringing, but not too bad. The only significant drawback is a slightly coarse bokeh effect in some circumstances.
The real selling point for me is the 3D pop this lens produces. It's the reach into the picture effect I get from my Takumar lenses which is criminally absent from so many high priced over-corrected flat boring modern lenses. To be fair Pentax are often the exception here, but I think sometimes lens designers are fixating on getting that tiny bit of extra sharpness in the corners (which you rarely feel the benefit of in reality) and losing that lovely sense of depth. This one really is absolutely crackerjack in this regard.
Forget that fancy new lens with umpteen special elements. Save your money! Get one of these!
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2021 Posts: 15
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 9, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Small, smooth, sharp(stopped down only) great colors | | Cons: | Wide open it isn't great, bokeh | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Sony A7 III
| |
At first when I had this lens I was a bit disappointed... The a/m switch didn't work well, so I assumed I took pics stopped down, but in fact I shot them all wide open. And wide open (3.5) this lens is a bit of a letdown. Stopped down at f8 this is a great lens for landscape photography.
But the best thing about this lens is how it renders colors! The colors are very true to life, just perfect! I don't have many vintage lenses that come close to this.
I made a video to compare this Super-Takumar with a modern day Sony kitlens, and this good old Takumar blows the modern lens out of the water! Check it out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djPkGF9PjyQ | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2019 Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 30, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small size, build quality and feel, image quality. | | Cons: | only 5 blades, slow blades, focus turns the wrong way | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Sony a6000 and a7.
| |
This is a nice lens. So nice in fact that I bought a second one after selling the first one I owned.
The negatives are: only five aperture blades; this is a little stingy. Slow blades. This was the reason I sold the Super Takumar version I owned. It turns out that my current Super Multi Coated version also has slow blades. It is worth checking the function of blades if you have a chance before buying. The final negative is that like Nikon, Pentax focus moves in the opposite direction to all other makes. If you only use Pentax this won't be a problem. For those of you adapting a variety of lenses to you mirrorless bodies it can be a pain.
The positives are: It is such a beautiful lens to hold. It feels well made, the smoothness of the focus is wonderful. This is a lens that will last for many more decades and continue to work well. It can produce nice bokeh including bokeh balls despite only going to f3.5. The images are pleasingly sharp across the frame regardless of whether used on full frame or apsc. The lens balances well on both formats as well.
This is a nice lens that can be used for a wide range of photography; street, landscape, environmental portraits etc.
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2020 Posts: 1
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 24, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | 3d pop, stands up to digital sensors | | Cons: | vignetting | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: Canon 5D Mark IV
| |
Incredible little lens, f3.5 still produces decent bokeh and out of focus areas, gives a 3d pop with good nice slightly desaturated colors (maybe it's due to lower contrast, but I really love the look it gives). I disagree with what the other reviewer said how users are bumping up the sharpness and contrast in editing to give the lens more pop and hyping up the lens, jacking up the price. Prices are going up because the Super Takumars are truly beautiful well built lenses that produce a very interesting image. I think people are realizing the quality and unique rendering, with even digital film makers also using them on their projects, that's why the price of these lenses are going up.
I've shot indie movies with this super tak slapped on a Canon C300 and produced beautiful results.
| | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2015 Posts: 11
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 31, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, little CA | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
I have the third version (no. 4 on the list above): min f/16, course ribs on aperture ring; distance scale window (product code: 43571).
This lens is super sharp wide open and has very little CA wide open. I have used several other manual Pentax and Takumar lenses and most of them are soft wide open, except this one! What’s the point of buying an f/1.4, f/1.7, f/2, f/2.8 lens if its soft wide open? No point at all. That is why this Super-Takumar 35mm f/3.5 is among the best manual lenses!
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2017 Posts: 3
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 17, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Small, lightweight, build- and image quality | | Cons: | M42 (from today´s view) | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K1
| |
I own the second version of the Super-Takumar, with minimum stop at 16, and no distance window, in good condition.
Built quality is very good, -old school, in the same league of a Zeiss of this aera, and I believe, that optical quality is not far away from Zeiss neither.
Focus ring is smooth to operate, the clicks of the aperture ring are well defined. The black finish is flawless.
I use it with an original Pentax M42/ K adaptor on my K1 and before on *istDl2.
About adaptors: you can find very cheap M42 adaptors. All these adaptors which have a sort af "baseplate" sitting outside on the camera, do not work correctly.
Because of this +- 1 mm thick "baseplate", the distance between the rear lens of your optic and the film, or sensor ist incorrect. Focus to unfinity is so im
possible.
The original Pentax adaptor, which is a lot more expensive, fits flush in the bayonet connector of the camera, not creating this problem.
With both cameras I noticed directly the beautiful color rendering own to this lens. Sharpness is also very good, bokeh is less.
I find that the color rendering is comparable to 55mm f1,8 K series lens.
The close-up picture below has been taken with the little 35mm at f4, 200 iso, 1/5 second, freehands ( thx shake reduction  ) in lowlight condition.
I find the colors beautiful despite the far from ideal light condition. Sharpness af f4: I think, nothing can be said against?
Not bad at all for an almost 60 years old lens, I am sure that there are newer lenses performing less.
A drawback is the old M42 connector: usefulness is only 8 for me.
For one who wants to prove his skills taking pictures with a , -capable-, but completely manual lens,
a combination of a small mirrorless camera in combination with his little Takumar would be a pleasure to handle.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2018 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: October 13, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Very small, excellent contrast and colors, good flare control, great central sharpness | | Cons: | Middling mid-frame sharpness and low corner/edge sharpness, difficult to find in good shape | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 7
Camera Used: SP-F, X-T3
| |
I have the Super Multi Coated version. This lens is for someone who values a good performing lens that is small and lightweight. With that said this lens was very good overall. Wide open it's already very contrasty and central sharpness is REALLY high (NO spherical aberration!), but mid-frame and edge sharpness aren't quite there. Even when stopping down to f/5.6 the mid-frame and edge sharpness don't catch up to the center, there's a considerable gap between the two and it's only when you get to f/8 when it starts to even out. This seems to be caused by a combination of field curvature and high coma aberration. I also noticed a small to moderate amount of chromatic aberrations at all apertures. Given the reviews and the f/3.5 aperture I was hoping for something that was in the league of the K 28mm 3.5. It has the contrast but not the overall resolution I'm afraid, but it has traits help make it desirable. High contrast, flare and ghost resistant, small and lightweight, it's a nice lens to behold and use that's for sure. It's recommended if you can get it for a good price.
I'd also like to mention that I had a very hard time finding a good copy of this lens. I must have tried 6 or 7 different copies, all listed as "excellent" and "perfect optics" only to discover that they had a considerable amount of haze or some coating wear upon close inspection. I finally found a good copy, one that was never used and still in the original box! Even in truly mint condition there was a very tiny amount of light haze present but it was within my margin of error for vintage lenses and so I kept it.
I also see that the K mount version rates much better overall, but some reviews mention the issues with edge and corner sharpness too. Both lenses have the same optical formula, so it's hard to say what the difference is between them.
UPDATE - I have tried a good K-Mount version, and other than being slightly cooler in overall rendering, it performs the same. I thought it handled better than the Takumar, though...
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2019 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: October 1, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Takumar build quality. | | Cons: | Tiny size | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 8
Camera Used: Sony a7iii
| |
Very small body size!
35mm Shot at F3.5
 | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2019 Location: Dubai Posts: 4
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 5, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Build quality, lens flare, weight, sharpness, focus ring. | | Cons: | Might be too small for the sausage-fingered! | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
When it first arrives in the post you'll think 'there's just no way' - I mean it is tiny. I've used for photography but mainly I use this for video on a Sony A7R ii and it's just beautiful. The flare is great, it's very sharp and focusing is easy, with a very solid and smooth focus ring (the whole lens is solid metal). At this price it's just amazing. Brilliant piece of lens design, I love it and use it on my top $$$ video productions.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2016 Posts: 1
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 22, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $84.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | small and light, colors, 3D | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
Time for me to give something back to the community, as I always profit from the lens reviews myself.
I recently purchased a K-1 next to my K-3 and I was searching for an affordable prime wide-angle lens for mostly street / abstract and landscape photography. I was used to the pancake smc 21mm 3.2 lens, and I still think that in combination with my K-3, this is one of the best allrounder combination for my purposes.
Designed for APS-C sensor bodies only, the 21mm shows heavy vignetting on the K-1, and using the crop-function does not make sense to me at all, as I will loose resolution (24Mp on K-3 to 16Mp crop mode K-1). Why did I not just stick to my K-3 with the 21mm then? Well, this is a topic for another thread.
So I found a very well preserved piece for only 84$. I have already possessed a Pentax M42 adapter ring (another 60$ for a high quality one), so I really staid below 100$ for the purchase, so the financial risk for me was quite low.
Version
I got the second version of the Super-Takumar, without distance window and no special coating.
Chromatic Aberration
With wide-angle lenses I usually don't shoot full open, and I am mostly shooting black and white, so I could not care less.
Distortion
Present, no lens profile present in Lightroom, but can be easily done manually and set up a preset.
Handling
The quality of the focus ring is awesome, comparable with the one from the Super-Takumar 1:1.4/50mm. Very precise.
Image quality
Haven't shoot a lot, but the pictures I have shot show a very very good technical quality, especially when you stop down to F5.6 to F8, which I mostly use for street/landscape. The lens has a very good micro-contrast, which I really like to have for black and white pics. You will read a lot about bokeh, and that this lens has a bad bokeh character. I agree to the part, that there are plenty lenses out there, that produce a more beautiful bokeh. But bokeh is overrated imho, especially for a wide-angle lens.
The lens is small, light, produces beautiful colors, and creates "poppy" foreground objects when close-focusing.
I think it is a must-have for street and landscape photography, with its 35mm it fits perfectly to this domain. You will make nothing wrong when purchasing this lens.
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2016 Posts: 201
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 19, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharpness, color rendition, flare resistance | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: istD, K7, K1, A7rlll
| |
The 35/3.5 is a workhorse and a very fine lens for outdoor, studio, reprographic and a lot more uses. For me the color rendition and the sharpness is one of the best strength of this lens and if I need a wide angle in an unknown situation, I will put it in my bag.
If I need more details / resolution I will take a 50mm macro lens or the mirrorless camera with the Contax G-Biogon 28mm (with PCX-filter 1.5m).
I own the S and SMC version and both are perfect.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2019 Posts: 15
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 14, 2019 | Not Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Small and light | | Cons: | Over-inflated cost and over-rated | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 5
Camera Used: K2 ME Super K-X
| |
I have a 100% clean Super Takumar version that is in mint condition and I used to have an older one that I needed to take apart and clean out. Both gave very similar results. I really cannot work out what all the fuss is about with this lens as it really is not 10/10 as a performer. But it is a nice robust "all right" performer. Sadly, these Takumars sell for an online hyped-inflated price that doesn't fit the lens at all. If they were about $40 then they'd be acceptable.
So now to concentrate on the Super Takumar version that I still use. Use a wide and shallow hood in bright light as the front lens is very close to the filter rim and it is prone to minor flare at times. If the hood is too deep you'll get dark corners. I do find it a bit difficult to focus well all the time. The barrel focus ranges do not correspond accurately if you want true pan-numerical sharpness. Contrast is good in all conditions. Distortion is good. But from my experience, nothing is excellent with this little lens. Using it with film, it is not 10/10 in terms of performance. But it's good close up and to about 20 yards and even 30 yards in some contexts. But expecting sharpness beyond these distances at f5.6 to f11 brings dismay and forces software fiddling to get a fine image. Using it with a basic digital K-X, and it's not massively better. On a film camera it struggles to reach infinity when that body is fine with other lenses. On a full frame digital Sony it is a little better but really ordinary around the central 60% of the image at f5.6 and f8 with a slightly sharper infinity. I have a cheap Tokina lens from the 1990's with a PK mount that is far better than this M42 35mm lens, and that only cost me $12. I have a $30 Pentax SMC 'M' 28mm and that is far better and sharper.
Tactile design is lovely, for sure. But design does not take the photos. How it feels and how the focus ring turns is wonderful, but I prefer a lens to see for the camera and not simply be seen in my hands. The turning circle is superbly small, so you can be pretty speedy with your focusing style. The Takumar is so very small and compact lens that is a bit difficult to use in some conditions if you have anything chunkier than fine fingers. Thus is especially true when taking manual images.
Servicing and maintenance is fussy, fiddly and problematic. It's very difficult to open the lens cluster to clean away any dirt inside. The front lens tends to accumulate dirt around the edge that can be awkward to clean out unless you use a cotton swab (mind the plastic on the glass) so you are forced to use a filter if you want to stop the front glass getting dirty. This is where some lenses are allowed to gather grime and fungus by some previous owners. The rear glass pieces are tiny and fiddly to remove and clean up. Again, fungus creeps through and dirt allowed to build up around the edges of the rear pieces of glass.
If you are wealthy enough to blow a load on what some sellers want for the Takumar 35mm then be wise instead and get a Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon. They are not as "vintage pretty" for those who buy lenses for superficial reasons, but they take far better photos.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
