Super Takumar Lenses

[grahams]

Donald, - "Though I don't honestly understand how a lens can get significantly better;

 

It's not the lenses that get better - it's the emulsions that we can now use them with, that are so much better. Gives old lenses a whole new lease of life....

[gib]

having just spent a little time going through some old slide trays.....one other factor that might be in the equation, not just the lens, not just the new emulsions, but our growth and evolution as photographers, we're likely better, too.

[silent1]

Well, what I was trying to saw was more along the lines of wondering how a 1.8 could be any better than this 1.4 -- this lens is so good I can't see how even the best modern film could show any better image (well, maybe Tech Pan, but I shoot only Tri-X in 35 mm at this time).

 

Unfortunately, I must also report a saddening discovery -- I learned today that my radioactive Super Takumar f/1.4 50 mm is yellowing. I hadn't noticed it previously, though since it's due to thorium decay in the glass I'm sure it must have been slowly going on all the time I've had the lens (and the 15 to 25 years before then since the lens was made -- I got it on a 1968 Spottie, but the lens might be older since both came from a pawn shop). The yellow isn't strong yet, probably filter factor of about a half stop, but it does produce a noticeable contrast enhancement when shooting clouds against a blue sky -- no wonder my cloud shots with Tri-X in this camera look better than those with TMY (and no filter) in my 6x9!

 

I may try putting the lens in the sun for a time; some have reported bleaching of the yellow color from prolonged exposure to direct sunlight, but I might well have to try an f/1.8 (when I can afford one), or even switch to one of the various f/2.0 50-55 mm M42 lenses I have around if the yellowing progresses much further -- when the filter factor hits 1 stop, I'm better off (other than for cloud shots) with a clear f/2.0, if they're optical peers.

 

Perhaps I should look up the list of radioactive serial numbers and try to find a Super Takumar or SMC Takumar 1.4/50 that isn't on it...

[berk_sirman2]

I have been reading a lot on Super (and SMC) Takumar M42 lenses which have led me to buying a 50/1.4 and a 55/1.8 which I am still waiting in the mail. In the meantime I am enjoying my Yashinon DS-M 50/1.7 which no one seems to mention. I am wondering whether this is because Takumars and other more popular M42 lenses were more superior optically than the Yashinon DS-M 50. Or is the Yashinon simply underrated?<div></div>

[connealy]

Great glamour shot Birk! I agree about the Yashinon. I have a Yashicamat and a Lynx which both produce terrific images. The Yashica cameras and their lenses rank right up there with Pentax for quality at a bargain price.

[stephen_kruft]

Yashinon lenses: In the mid-60s I used a achool's Yashica SLR that was not particularly good with its normal lens, but I have (and still use on Spotmatics) a Yashinon 60mm macro that is just great and also goes to 1:1. I don't know how old it was. It is a preset lens, as the 1:1 macros all were as far as I know.

[david_harrison5]

I just picked up a Spotmatic II and a Super Takomar 50/f1.8 lens off e-bay. An earlier comment about lens yellowing worried me: the coating looks yellowish. Is this something to worry about?

[mr._g]

for more information on yellowed lenses go find the spotmatic group over on Yahoo. Most people believe that this radioactive glass poses no threat.

 

There is a cure for getting rid of the yellowish tinge and they describe it over there.

 

On the other hand if you shoot BW, it is like a built in yellow filter which can be a good thing.

[emmanouel_pateros]

"I would be surprised if the Pentax lenses were better than Nikons, but I think they're about as good. And, you can get them for close to the price of Russian glass. The Spotmatic is light and fast handling."

 

Why some people regard Nikon the best Japanese lens maker in the World ?

Have you ever seen a takumar lens ? Takumars, Chinons (early models), Yashinon 50 f/1.4 were made by Tomioka. Pentax had nothing to do with the lens constraction. Some other early Cosinons like the 50 f/1.2 were Tomioka lenses. Maby Tomioka constructed Nikkors 50 f/1.4 and f/1.2 Do you know that Nikon is Nikon and it is not Tomioka, Sigma, Tamron , Soligor , Kiron and I do not know what ?

Do you know that Japan does not have good earth glass? Nikon imports the good quality glass for the PRO Lenses from Ukraine. If the Ukranians did not know how to make glass, Nikon would give her nice money ? Compare Kalleinar lenses for Nikon AIS optically with the Nikkors designs. I have seen A4 prints and I cannot tell the difference.

People still try to find the difference between the Takumar 50 f/1.4 and the Yashinon 50 f/1.4 and they spent money and film for stupid things. They forget that these lenses are now nearly 50 years old and they didn't have the same life. It is not only the dust and fongus. Even a sudden change in temperature can harm the glass. Most of the Japanese f/1.4 lenses are Planar designs, and this design is sensitive(Minolta, Sears ,Mamiya). I have the Sears / Mamiya 55 f/1.4 and the Takumar 50 f/1.4 along with the Tak 55 f/1.8. I never shoot lenses wide open because I don't have film for wasting. If I had a digital camera I would play with these games. Meanwhile when somebody constructs a lens he aims to construct something good at medium apertures and a lens f/1.4 at f/8 by the laws of physics is better than a f/2.8 or a f/3.5 zoom at f/8. I learned that in the University. Optics is science is not art. Photography is art.