|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Jul 20, 2017 8:52:34 GMT -5
Over the years i aquired a lot of 135mm takumars. i never use them as i do allmost all of my shooting with nikon gear. The time however has come to put them through the test and in the following weeks i will be testing them on the digital KX. Questions are : Do the same lenses from a diffrent batch perform equally? How do older M42 mount lenses compare to the newer K-mount versions? How dos a 1:2.5 compare to a 1:3.5 lens of the same maker and focal lenght? How do no-name and quality brands compare? How dos a diffrent focal lenght compares when the same reproduction rate is used? How dos a zoom compare to a prime at equal focal lenghts and apertures? How dos a damaged lens performes? Wich one is the best in test? maybe you can think of another test, let me know and i'll see what i can do... These are the lenses that will be tested:  |
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Jul 20, 2017 13:29:39 GMT -5
Isn't the Voigtlander lens originally a Mamiya built one?
Hans
|
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Jul 21, 2017 16:20:34 GMT -5
Isn't the Voigtlander lens originally a Mamiya built one? Hans You tell me Hans, i only know the 135mm Voigtlander lens came with a icarex 35TM i once bought. I've briefly tested it before and it gave very good results, the f4 max aperture isn't that spectacular though... |
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Jul 22, 2017 5:56:46 GMT -5
From an Icarex TM, hm, than it is sure a Mamiya one... This Color-Dynarex stuff was also sold as (cheaper) alternative alternative to M42 lenses on the Voigtlander VSL1 camera, before they moved to the bayonet (QBM) mount.
Hans
|
|
|
|
Post by randyclark on Jul 24, 2017 2:39:51 GMT -5
I remember going in a camera store and was overwhelmed learning many types of lenses. But at the end of the day, you will surely know what you need specifically. |
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Sept 9, 2017 7:22:49 GMT -5
Here's my first test in this seies, two (old M42) 135mm 1:3.5 super multicoated Takumars mounted on the K-X focussed at infinity, focus confirmated on the K-X. One in "as new" condition but with mold on the rear element, the other "well used" but clean glass. The results speak for themselves, the clean glass one produced tack sharp crisp images even wideopen, the moldy one had no sharpness and produced considerable purple fringing, stopping down did impriove the image a bit but it didn't came near the clean example. So even though one Takumar looks as new it's ready for the trash can or some thourough cleaning (if it can be saved...). The K-X with both lenses  the scene  1:1 enlargement of the image produced by the moldy Takumar wide open  1:1 enlargement of the image produced by the well used, clean optics takumar, wide open  The "damage".  |
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Sept 12, 2017 8:58:36 GMT -5
while the M42 adapter is still on the K-X,h ere's some more testing, 3th party 135mm and takumar 200mm M42 lenses Voigtlander-COLOR- Dynarex135mm 1:4 wideopen:  Uniron auto tele 135mm 1:2.8 wideopen:  The same Uniron but closed down to 1:4 :  Pentax super takumar 200mm 1:4 wideopen, i moved back to get the same reproduction ratio as with the 135 lenses :  The Voigtlander isn't bad but compared to the Takumar it lacks contrast and colors are less vivid, the Uniron well what can i say, just forget about it... |
|
|
|
Post by julio1fer on Sept 12, 2017 19:49:04 GMT -5
Keep the test going. I have a 200/4 Takumar that needs some exercise.
|
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Sept 13, 2017 4:12:03 GMT -5
Keep the test going. I have a 200/4 Takumar that needs some exercise. Ok Julio, here's some more 200/4 testing, look what i've got on test: Pentax K-x with the super takumar 200/4 Nikon D300 with nikkor 200/4 Samsung NX 1000 with canon 200/2.8 ( a bit unfair as it's Dx 20Mp while the others are Dx 12Mp) I did a quick test but due to the stormy wheather and clouds the light changed to quickly to get consistant results. Should the wheather calm down i'll be heading out again to try and get shots that are suited for comparison.  |
|
|
|
Post by julio1fer on Sept 13, 2017 20:27:12 GMT -5
A nice array of bazookas!
|
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Sept 15, 2017 8:45:00 GMT -5
Inbetween rain showers i was able to do some quick testing. Pentax K-x with M42 Takumar 200/4 wideopen  Nikon D300 with Nikkor 200/4 Ai wideopen  samsung Nx 1000 with Canon 200/2.8 wideopen.  So what is happening here? The takumar has a yellowish color cast and isn't as sharp as the Nikkor, wich in itselve is sharpest and most color neutral in this test. But, but the canon looks sharper... but it isn't the 20Megapix of the samsung seems to give a slight resolution edge over the 12Megapix of the D300 and K-x. Enlarging to 300% shows the more agressive in body sharpening of the Samsung wich gives higher contrast and artefacts that are smoothed out by the Jpeg compression giving the inpression of more sharpness but lead to loss in detail. To be shure of the results the lenses should be swapped between bodies, sadly this isn't possible, partly due to diffrent flange distanses making it inposibble to attain infinity focus. Any way all results are (to me) more than acceptable and these "old" primes perform very well no matter where you put them on. With lens prices (the Takumar has cost me 2 Euro) at an all time low, bargains are to be had. Beware though as people are beginning to realise the real value of these lenses and prices are going up again! |
|
|
|
Post by julio1fer on Sept 15, 2017 19:53:20 GMT -5
Yes, do get them while the dip lasts. Thanks for this test!
|
|
