I did a little informal walk about with my Konica 28/3.5 and my Super Takumar 28/3.5 and I was a bit surprised at how it felt to use the same lens from two different manufacturers side by side. The Super Takumars are waaaaaaaay nicer to use than the Konicas. They feel really substantial and well made, the damping is terrific and they make the Konicas feel like cheap junk by comparison (which of course they are not). Image wise they are very very close. I would give the sharpness to the Konica by a tiny bit but I find the color from the Super Takumars have a very pleasing look and something else that I cannot quite explain but is really appealing. They are both fun lenses but If I could only keep one I think it would be the Super Takumar. Just the other day I was realizing that I have collected two very similar sets of lenses. One is m42 (Super Takumar 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 55/1.8 and a Helios 44M) the other is Konica (28/3.5, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 57/1.4 and 135/3.2). With the possible exception of the Konica 40/1.8 I can see that set hitting the close-out table pretty soon. I don't need that many lenses that do the same thing and the Super Takumar 105 and 135 are pretty cheap if I really want one (although I almost never use my 135 as it is). Some sample images are up on my Flickr photo stream here.