I can see a use for the 85mm soft, but 28mm? Seems an odd choice of lens to produce a soft variant for. Any guesses what its intended use was?

K.

No worries, I insulted Clarky's SMC-K 30mm the other day calling it an "M" (which there never was...)

Matt... I didn't look at the non-SMC k-mount ones. Arrgghhh...

The 28mm lens is more complicated than I thought. The M42 Super-Takumar came in no less than 3 f/3.5 versions (58mm filter and minimum f/22, 58mm and f/16 and 49mm and f/16) and then an S-M-C version which is probably the coated version of the last Super. There are then three K series versions (f/2, f/3.5 and f/3.5 shift), four M versions (f/2, f/2.8 versions 1 and 2 and a f/3.5) and two A versions (f/2 and f/2.8 ). It gets a bit saner with one F and two FA versions one of which was the specialised "soft" version.

A mere 16 variants to collect...

K.

Pink... that is the more common f/2.8. We were talking about the less common f/3.5 (although I have just seen about 3 of them on ebay so I guess they aren't as uncommon as I thought, I just wasn't looking). I have the M28 f/2.8 (although I admit I haven't used it on my digital but have used it a great deal on film). I may even have the A one somewhere, I'll need to dig through the boxes.

K.

If beer is involved I had better come by train...

How about this? I hope you don't mind.

Quality could be better as I was editing the colour jpeg. Better with the original RAW file.

K.

Thanks for that link, it is a very moving story.

K.

foxy proxy is your friend...

Does the - act as a "do not match" modifier? So you are searching for K without m2 :

Try searching for K*m2 .

Nope, doesn't work (just tried it).

The DA 12-24mm is probably the sharpest lens I have ever owned, and the DA* 50-135mm is a close second.

K.