All Forum Comments
Comment by Mac posted on 5/500mm Takumar Experience Needed at 02/10/2008 - 23:50
Thanks!
Have both the tubes - bye-bye infinity, and the tele-converter - bye-bye Depth of Field.
I think I'll just weld it to one of my best film bodies and look at a "Normal" tele for the digital.
Hey, an excuse to buy a lens!
Comment by Mac posted on 5/500mm Takumar Experience Needed at 02/10/2008 - 20:38
How much cheaper can these lenses get?!
I thought mine was a bargain at £59!
There must be a nice mark up on these, and to think, some hapless retailers are still trying to knock them out at £100+...
Comment by Mac posted on Evaluating the 18-55 mm kit lens at 02/10/2008 - 13:07
I'm hoping that with digital, one could push the ISO up, the aperture down a bit, and get some DOF. (Maybe f11 at 1600?) Or am I dreaming as usual?
This is where SR would be a huge plus. (Something I don't have on my K110D, and haven't really missed - yet.)
One thing for sure, it MUST have better bokeh than a mirror lens!
Cheers,
Comment by Mac posted on 5/500mm Takumar Experience Needed at 02/10/2008 - 13:05
In keeping with our latest discussions about older glass, a friend in Vancouver, British Columbia will soon be offering a 500mm, f5, K mount, 6 1/2 pound Takumar telephoto lens on eBay. For what it's worth - serial # 816033.
I only have an f8 Russian Mirror Lens in 500mm, and see f5 as an advantage if there isn't much more loss of DOF.
I can't mount my mirror lens on my K110D due to the flash overhang, but imagine 500mm becoming 750mm on digital.
What I'm hoping, is that some of us have had some experience with this lens that you'd kindly share.
Then, if anyone is interested, I'll let you know when the item is listed.
Thanks,
Comment by Mac posted on 5/500mm Takumar Experience Needed at 02/10/2008 - 11:00
Very Deep Field of Focus.
What lens and settings were you using?
Well done!
Comment by Mac posted on Some more holiday photos at 02/10/2008 - 00:12
Clarky and Mac,
How much do you have to compensate for exposure failure on your camera.
My Super Tak 55/1.8 needs +1 from aperture F1.8 till F 4.0. And from F 5.6 till F 16 it needs -1. Very regular on my K10D. And not a problem of course because you use them in AV mode. Does your camera's differ in any way?
Martin.
I put on +2 EV and it seems to work for all 8 of my various screw mounts.
I notice that I need to set my internal meter to "broadest or general" rather than "spot" (if that makes any sense).
All my lenses are set to M or Man, and I leave the camera on Auto to select Shutter Speed. I generally lock the ISO at either 200 or 400.
Thank goodness for the Preview Shutter!
Have fun!!!!!!!
Comment by Mac posted on Takumar 50mm 1.4 at 01/10/2008 - 21:25
A SMC Takumar 24mm F3.5 just sold for £112.56 on ebay, so they are certainly keeping their value. Any guesses how much a SMC Takumar 85mm F1.8 will go for?
Best wishes, Kris.
The 85 would make a great portrait lens on digital.
Comment by Mac posted on M42 Super Takumar 135mm 1:2.5 vs 1:3.5 at 01/10/2008 - 21:15
I agree that my lens probably was built that way. Question is "Why?"
Does anyone else have a screw version of the 50MM 1:1.4, and can you look to see which way your iris is oriented?
George,
You're perfectly correct - the 50MM Super Tak was the only "radio active" lens ever made by Asahi. Some B&W photogs actually coveted this yellowed version as it didn't need a yellow filter.
I left mine for weeks in direct sunlight, with aluminium foil wrapped around the rear element. It became completely clear again and has remained so ever since.
Cheers!
Comment by Mac posted on Takumar 50mm 1.4 at 01/10/2008 - 19:33
A mint example of the 2.5/135 Tak is going for $ 350 + at the moment.
I presume Mac, you are aware of the "Takumar Club", found on that other forum. It's a pitty to say, but I really believe that thread is single handedly pushing the prices of the Takumars up these days.
I think....my next purchase will be the K-m. It is the ideal lightweight candidate to transform to a permanent digital Spottie.
Martin.
Thanks for drawing my attention to the Takumar Club.
I didn't know it existed.
Hey everyone, take a boo at the examples posted there if you had any doubts about Tak IQ!
Cheers!
Comment by Mac posted on M42 Super Takumar 135mm 1:2.5 vs 1:3.5 at 01/10/2008 - 14:01


Er, Marjolaine, you know that old mirror lens? Well, I think I'd like to use it again, and it doesn't fit the digital I just bought.
Soooooo......... all I need is a new body.
"Ya got THAT right, ya old slob!" "HERE!"
No, I'm not talking about a gym membership .......
Oh,.... never mind........