1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Pentax m42 prime lenses vs Oly & Pana 4/3 & m4/3 lenses

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by barry13, Mar 7, 2014.

  1. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi,

    I have an Olympus E-3 with a bunch of 4/3 lenses, and I bought an OM-D E-M1 recently with 2 mu-43 lenses, and now I've found my father's collection of old Pentax m42 screw-mount prime lenses.

    I'm trying to decide which of the Pentax lenses are worth keeping...

    I don't mind manual focus, but I'd rather sell off any with poor image quality and get something better in mu-43, if affordable. I'm also not fond of the weight and size of the 200 & 300mm Pentax lenses.

    I have a severe back injury and am not able to travel/walk around with heavy bags (which is why I got the E-M1; I can't carry the E-3 and it's large lenses around comfortably).

    I also have 3 Pentax 35mm bodies; I might sell the unwanted lenses with the bodies.

    Olympus M.Zuiko mu4/3 Lenses:
    14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II
    40-150mm ED f4.0-5.6 R

    Olympus Zuiko Digital 4/3 lenses:
    7-14mm F4.0
    8mm F3.5 Fisheye
    12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD
    35mm F3.5 Macro (_very_ slow focus on E-3, probably no better on E-M1)
    70-300mm F4.0-5.6
    EC-14 TeleConverter - 1.4x

    Zuiko DIGITAL ED 50-200mm F/2.8-3.5 SWD
    A relative has this one but does not seem to use it; I am hoping he will sell it to me. It is very large/heavy though.


    Other 4/3 mount lenses:
    500mm f/8 Opteka Telephoto Mirror Lens

    Pentax / Takumar lenses, m42 screw-mount:
    17mm F4 Fisheye SMC Takumar
    20mm F4.5 SMC Takumar
    35mm F2 SMC Takumar
    50mm F4 MACRO SMC Tak
    50mm F1.4 SMC Takumar
    50mm F1.4 Super-Takumar
    105mm F2.8 SMC Takumar
    200mm F4 SMC Takumar
    300mm F4 SMC Takumar
    Vivitar 2x-1 TeleConverter
    Pentax Auto-Bellows and slide copier (supposedly works best with the 35mm and 105mm for Macro)

    The 17mm Pentax seems redundant as I already have a 8mm fisheye, but I'm wondering how the rest compare in IQ to mu-43 lenses.

    I will keep at least one of the 50mm F1.4 Pentax lenses.

    1. My understanding is that some of the higher-grade zooms (and even some cheap ones) on mu-43 are excellent at certain focal lengths; would they compete with any of these Pentax primes?

    2. how does the Pentax 50mm f4 Macro compare to the Oly 4/3 35mm macro (or the mu-43 macros)? Will the 50mm have higher magnification than the 35mm?

    3. are the Pentax Teles better than my Oly 70-300mm or the 50-200mm?

    4. is the Olympus 50-200mm 4/3 dramatically better than the Oly 70-300mm 4/3?

    5. any other recommendations?

    I've done a few test shots (I got an m42-mu43 adapter yesterday), and so far it seems the IQ with the 200mm + the Vivitar 2x teleconverter is poor, but I didn't have a chance to compare it directly with my Oly tele zoom yet. Also it was windy so the tripod & camera may not have been perfectly stable (I did use the 12-second shutter delay timer though).


    Thanks!
    Barry
     
  2. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    If you plan to get rid of the Olympus 7-14mm, then get rid of everything else as well. It might be a large lens, but it's one of the best ultra-wide zooms made.
     
  3. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi, I wasn't very clear, I plan to keep most or all of the Oly lenses and am trying to decide on the Taks.

    Thanks

    Sent from my SM-N900T using Mu-43 mobile app
     
  4. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    Cool, I would weep knowing someone got rid of their 7-14mm, for an old manual prime or whatever.
     
  5. orfeo

    orfeo Mu-43 Top Veteran

    673
    Sep 27, 2013
    FR
    2. I love mine.

    The macro lens as all the takumars in your fathers collections are really fine pieces of glass.
    It's not the gear that matters, it's what you do with it, and with some PP and knowledge, gear doesn't matter anymore.


    You won't get much change by selling them. It's your fathers I would keep the lot all together. The long lens are not worth shooting nor selling, but you can shoot it just for fun.
    All those lens are great and offer real good image quality. I would keep those, so when the day you have a full frame sony A7 or anything next to that you have a full set of superb primes.

    You can get some money out of the 17, 20, 35, 50 macro, fast 50 and even the 100mm, but all that cash will only buy you a cheap m4/3 plastic lens that will be worthless in ten years, while your takumars beautifully made of metal and glass will still be valuable items.
     
  6. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi,

    OzRay, yes I really do like the 7-14mm; it and the Oly fisheye are great for taking real estate pics, etc.

    orfeo,
    "The long lens are not worth shooting nor selling"

    Are you saying they're worth shooting because of the weight or they're not as good as the Oly Zooms (which ones, including m43 please)?

    Anyone know what the magnification of the 50mm Tak Macro would be on m43?
    Would it be 1x like the Oly 4/3 50mm Macro?

    Thanks!
    Barry
     
  7. orfeo

    orfeo Mu-43 Top Veteran

    673
    Sep 27, 2013
    FR
    Yes the long lens are heavy but quite compact for their FOV. They are sharp but you will notice the CA I believe.
    The macro will be 1:2 magnification. Not a big deal.
     
  8. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Yeah, I noticed some CA with the 300mm when photographing the moon a few nights ago.
    I haven't tried fixing it in software yet.

    Thanks,
    Barry
     
  9. Charlieboy

    Charlieboy New to Mu-43

    6
    Jun 9, 2014
    Central California
    Same here. A green halo around the moon itself. Lightroom helped get rid of most but not all of it.
     
  10. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi,

    I did some more thorough testing of all the Takumar lenses on my E-M1... put camera on a tripod, and took pictures of a neighboring house with tile roof, iron fence, etc. and compared sharpness and CA with my ZD and m.ZD lenses.

    Note that these lenses probably are much better on a larger sensor (they're designed for 35mm / full frame), but most are not sharp on our 4/3 sensors, based on my tests.
    All appear to be in perfect optical condition except the two 50 1.4's which have some defects.

    Results:

    17mm F4 FISHEYE SMC Takumar
    @f4 - seems a bit soft, but filters may have accidentally engaged
    @f8 - seems OK. sharpness very good (similar to 14-42mm & 12-60mm); a little horizontal CA

    20mm F4.5 SMC Takumar
    @f4.5 - soft
    @f8 - better but still softer than Olys

    35mm F2 SMC Takumar
    @f2 - MUCH sharper than 50mm SuperTak
    @f4 - similar sharpness to 50mm SuperTak; slightly better than 50mm SMC. 12-60mm ZD is BETTER at 3.7!
    @f8 - no better than @f4; possibly worse than 50mm SuperTak; definitely worse than Oly lenses

    50mm f1.4 SMC TAK
    extremely soft thru f5.6, better at f8 (but Oly lenses are sharper)
    @f8 very usable.

    50mm f1.4 SuperTAK
    much better wide open than SMC 50mm
    very soft until f4 (35mm SMC is better before f4), good at f5.6, better at f8 (but Oly lenses are sharper)
    Oly m.ZD 40-150mm R f4-5.6 'kit lens' @50mm f4.2 (wide open) is much better than this at f4
    @f8 very usable.
    Some CA at wide apertures

    50mm F4 MACRO SMC Tak
    @f8 - good, sharper than 50mm f1.4 SMC and SuperTak; about the same as m.ZD 40-150mm R f4-5.6 'kit lens'.
    Macro: sharp at center, very soft corners (worse than 35mm ZD macro)

    105mm F2.8 SMC Takumar
    bad CA and soft except at highest aperture

    200mm F4 SMC Takumar
    seems fairly sharp but has severe CA

    300mm F4 SMC Takumar
    some to severe CA,
    seems much less sharp than 200mm Tak


    Barry
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2015
    • Like Like x 3
  11. Rum Maximus

    Rum Maximus Mu-43 Regular

    49
    May 11, 2013
    LV, NV
    Mattimus
    If you decide to let that 17mm fisheye go, please let me know. I might be interested at some point.

    Thanks!
     
  12. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi,

    After testing everything on my E-M1, I decided to sell off all the Pentax stuff.
    So far, I've netted over $1100, and used the money to buy the 12-40mm m.ZD and a couple primes.

    I still have an ES camera body, and the 50mm macro and bellows and slide copier.

    Barry
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2015
  13. StirlingBartholomew

    StirlingBartholomew New to Mu-43

    6
    Apr 10, 2014