Discussion in 'Adapted Lens Sample Image Showcase' started by kevinparis, Mar 13, 2010.
another oldie classic complete with radioactive glass
Kevin, what adapter are you using with your EPL1 to use the Takumar lenses? I want to pick up some manual lenses locally but want to get the right adapters.
Love the BW photos. Also checked out your website. very nice.
Nice photos! Some of the Pentax 50s are as good as 50s get (the tak being one of them). That's why I could never leave Pentax as much as I love my GF1 (and the 20 and 7-14!).
Just stumbled upon this old thread doing some research on 50mm takumars...wow...I LOVE those 2 shots Kevin, and the first in particular is excellent.
I found a 50/1.4 at a pawn shop here in Melbourne and I suspect the guy isn't aware of what it is and it's going for cheap. I had a look at it and it's the later model, the SMC version with the focus ring which has hundreds of tiny dimples as opposed to the older super-tak or S-M-C version which has the fluted grooves on the focus ring. The lens is in spectacular shape, the body is virtually blemish free and the glass looks pristine with the exception of 2 tiny (almost microscopic) dust specs. I've noticed online too that this later version sells for much cheaper than the older grooved focus ring version, but as far as I know....both types are spectacular 50mm primes....amazing optics, super smooth mechanics and build.
So it got me wondering. WHY is the later SMC usually available for around a third cheaper if they are essentially the same lens? Is is perhaps a styling thing with the older version perhaps looking slightly cooler ??
I would have thought that the later SMC version would be more expensive as it's coating s considered superior to earlier models eliminating much flare.
Ok, this may sound silly as there is much material our there on this next point...but also kWh contradiction of opinions...which version is the one that has the yellowing issue ??? I am I correct in saying the SMC version with the dimpled focussing ring is NOT the version with yellowing issues or is it the other way around ???
The one I saw seems perfectly clear btw.
Thanks guys....appreciate your help, having found this lense for what seems a great price I would like to male an informed decision and perhaps purchase it before the weekend....and before it vanishes
Can't answer your question, but do know the excitement when you spot a bargain, think you should grab it before someone else does.
On Sunday went to a recycling shop in Brisbane rummaged through an old box of junk and found a Meritar 1-2.9 50 mm lens, silver with fluted aperture ring, they charged me $2 for it, waiting for an adapter to arrive in the mail for Olympus Pl-1. I couldn't believe I got a bargen.
This bloke is selling the takumar 50 for $35....I've seen them range from 150-250 online !!! I'm SURE he doesn't know that some consider it amongst the very best 50 primes ever made !!!
I think I'll take your advice and snap it up.
Still, I'd love to hear from anybody able to perhaps shed some light on my questions.
Inspired by nicthetasmaniac's many lovely photos with a later version of this lens, I went hunting around and was able to score an SMC Takumar at a reasonable price. It arrived this afternoon and it's bee-yoo-ti-ful! A couple of low-light sample images below.
The thing is, the m42-m4/3 adapter is now stuck on the lens. The tiny screws holding the adapter "tube" to the threaded flange don't grip it tightly enough, so if I really try to twist the adapter off the flange part just sits there screwed to the lens and the black tube slides around.
Also, it looks like the inner flange diameter is just slightly too small, and the aperture bayonet makes contact with it - when focused at infinity it is difficult to stop down, although away from infinity it moves easily enough. Still, if I ever get this thing off I'm going to purchase a different, flangeless adapter!
St. Francis by Fin Azvandi, on Flickr
Sunset Bokeh test
These are amazing images and what a lovely bokeh on the last.
I had the same problem with my M43-M43 adapter. I had to tighten the screws and now it seems to be ok. I had to tighten the screws on my K-M43 adapter as well, so I'm not surprised.
Thanks everyone for posting photos. I'm looking to add one of these lenses.
Question, with the crop factor this comes out approx. 100mm? Do you find that OK to shoot with? Handheld or tripod a must?
I think if you poke around here in the forums you'll find that lots of people have a lens in the 40-55mm range, it's a nice focal length for m4/3 since the ~100mm equivalent makes it a good portrait and mild-telephoto lens. Handheld is no problem!
From a walk around the lake a cool autumn morning. Cropped to 16X9.
This thread is thin, so here's some more Takumar. Some from a year or two ago. Shot on an EP1.
And two more, also shot on an EP1
Here's a few from my Thanksgiving trip to NYC:
Metro-North by Fin Azvandi, on Flickr
Blessing Bishop by Fin Azvandi, on Flickr
Fall Colors by Fin Azvandi, on Flickr
Palmesel by Fin Azvandi, on Flickr
Whenever I get a new lens I take a picture of a cat.
Another cat... by john m flores, on Flickr
Finally got a chance to try my new 50 out today!
<a href="http://blog.delorenzo.ca/post/13662163781/1359"><img width="1000" src="http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/13662163781/1/tumblr_lvlyi128QU1r6jzi3" /></a>
A few more... I shot with this lens for two weeks straight. Only took it off when my 28mm Takumar showed up!
<a href="http://blog.delorenzo.ca/post/13955973053/whitehorse-at-night">http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/13955973053/1/tumblr_lvx68kePoo1r6jzi3" width="1000"></a>
<a href="http://blog.delorenzo.ca/post/13856038055/ice-fog">[img]http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/13856038055/1/tumblr_lvtc2fiAVj1r6jzi3" width="1000"></a>
<a href="http://blog.delorenzo.ca/post/14206552031/raven">[img]http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/14206552031/1/tumblr_lw6lbwUggn1r6jzi3" width="1000"></a>
<a href="http://blog.delorenzo.ca/post/14054849694/starbuck-playing-in-the-snow">[img]http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/14054849694/1/tumblr_lw1111VUHU1r6jzi3" width="1000"></a>
Great shot of the dog especially! I'd bump up the exposure or brightness a bit, though, as the camera metered it to gray. Great action shot though. We'll have to see some of your 28mm, too.
Thanks! Tried it with a bit more exposure... Good call.
He's a tough little bugger to photograph. He's constantly in motion and so black that he becomes tough to expose, especially with a total white background. Sometimes hard to keep detail in both.
Separate names with a comma.