Regarding the coating, this lens is coated, but it's single coated. In some of the lens clips you can see the lens reflects a slight orange in the front group. The SMC upgrade was for multi-layer coatings. The primary difference between the Super-Takumar and SMC was an improvement from 98% light transmission to 99.something %.
My favourite lens is the 50 f1.4 super takumar, it performs really well for a 60s lens, but pretty much any modern glass will easily out perform it. The appeal of these lenses is the subjective image quality, the colour, bokeh, the skin tones. On film they look fantastic, some of my favourite pictures I've ever taken. Also the rear element of the super takumars contain thorium, so they are radioactive, but a pretty small amount, I measured it with a gieger counter once and you'd have to be holding the glass against your skin for a year to get a dose worth worrying about. If the lens is further than a couple centimetres away from you then it's practically nothing.
If in the unlikely event the glass were to get shattered and then it would be different. So I understand at least that it would become an extremely hazardous. There are so many that are not radioactive, its easy to avoid them. Also if your eye ball is looking directly at a source of radioactivity it only has the gubbins inside your camera to stop any particles from hitting possibly the most sensitive part of your body.
I was always wondering whether you'd review this lens. I've got the SMC f1.8 version (and it is radioactive because it contains Thorium, but nothing to worry about unless you eat it) and I quite enjoy using the lens. Smooth focusing, well built and sharp optics when stopped down. Lovely to use really and a nice, compact size.
Just a correction, it does have lens coatings, as can be seen by looking at it but it doesn’t have the superior Super Multi Coated coatings of the later lenses.
Christopher, thanks for a great vintage review. I appreciate your reviews a lot, while also, I am a vintage lens collector. And I love, and laugh, at the lens flareing parts of your review, as I shoot stills and video a lot, I often find that many people are in search of "character" in the flare. When I see the flare in this 55mm I, and many others, Leo how it sets itself apart from modern glass. Part of that is because, they dont make anything like this anymore! Lost, are the old ways. I love sharp and accurate lens when I buy modern, but if I buy vintage, I want a good reason. And character is that reason. Something that stands out. Thanks for all your videos. I wish you were in the USA so I could loan you all my 70+ vintage lenses to play with! Let me know if you ever swing by Texas.
Very interesting video, I’m very surprised at how well the lens does as often those older lenses are very soft wide open. Chris the market for vintage lenses is huge these days, a series covering popular vintage lenses would go down well and would be very interesting seeing how they stack up on a modern body.
@@Twobarpsi Too late! but yeah it'll push them higher, it'd be super interesting mentally comparing them to all his other modern lens reviews. I think there'd be a few sharp surprises in the Leica and Zeiss vintage optics, I'd love to see them take the test image on.
I have many variants of this lens. I like to experiment with them but there are nothing that special.Couldn't help but notice you are reading the bible in it's archaising form of Modern Greek. I salute you, I even find this type of Greek hard and I'm Greek. Condolences for your dad Chris, mine passed in 2019. They are in a better place, keep the memories of them always alive!
One of my fav film-era lenses. The relative lack of quality falloff in the corners is a big plus compared to most of its contemporaries. It gives a different look to modern lenses, and I use it whenever I want a break from übersharpness. I like its out-of-focus look too…it's got character.
Thanks, great to see a vintage lens review! This might be the first version of Super-Takumar but before that was Auto-Takumar, with its distinctive lever on side. Auto-Takumar is not radioactive. All the variants (Auto, Super, SMC) have 6 elements in 5 groups and I believe the Super and SMC versions are really the same, but the Auto variant is slightly different. Oh and Auto variant has 10 aperture blades. These all are great lenses with good amount of "3D pop" and they are sharp. However I think the Auto-Takumar 55mm f/2 is overall (resolution, pop, weight, bokeh) the best, in my humble opinion of course. Cheers!
Thanks for sharing this, Chris. You have reminded us that most lenses never really ‘die’. I just purchased this Takumar model (it is March 2024)… along with a few others (f1.4s, f2s, f2.2s…) 😊.
So great to see you reviewing a vintage lens! These are often sought after not for their sharpness but for their interesting color rendition and bokeh characteristics. Sharp, soap-bubbly bokeh allow for some interesting creative options in certain lighting scenarios too. Subjective stuff really.... "subjective objectives" shall we say? I'm pleased to see it's sharp as it is on a 45MP sensor though. I wasn't quite expecting it to be that sharp. Thanks so much for sharing this and I hope you do more vintage lens reviews!
It's great to see a vintage lens featured here. I have a copy of this lens from my Aunt in my closet that I had almost forgotten about, but before even finishing this video I ordered an adapter to put it on my camera. Hopefully after some cleaning it will earn its place as one of the vintage lenses in my camera bag.
You might be surprised with some other legacy lenses. The Leica Elmar 5cm f/3.5 is a dandy and sharp little lens, for instance. Always glad when you surprise us with reviews like this.
i think you should do more legacy glass ....it gets a bit boring for us R mount folk when we only ever see E mount lenses reviews these days..so hit the like button if you agree
I've owned and tested multiple versions of these Pentax 50mm and 55mm lenses, your 55mm lens is not radioactive. Pentax didn't add the thorium glass to the 55mm lenses until the late Super Takumar version with the hill-valley/scalloped focus ring design. The focus ring on your copy is an early flat knurled design. The thorium glass versions also have a bad tendency to yellow over time, though it's possible to treat the lens to clear the yellowed glass element. A simple Geiger counter can be bought online for cheap and is a good tool to have around when dealing with vintage lenses. There were many changes throughout the life of these Pentax m42 lenses and a lot of conflicting information out there. Before the SMC/Super-Multi-Coated lenses, Pentax used single coated glass that usually reflected gold when holding it to a light. SMC glass reflected more blue and was clearer, and was also one of the best multi coating techs of the time and in some cases is still good by todays standards. A fun fact about this lens - it's the same as the 55mm f/1.8, it has a small baffle to fix the aperture to f/2 at wide open.
@@philtaylor194 That is the most famous radioactive Pentax but it is not the only one. Thoriated glass was widely used as an inexpensive way to get certain quality glass back then.
Interesting. In the 50mm-ish range I have the f1.4 SMC Takumar, and at f2.0 it has a little color fringing while this one doesn't (non-longitudinal). While modern glass certainly outperforms wide open, I really like the Takumar line's color rendition. It's understated, warm, and pastel-like, great for skin tones.
Nice to see a vintage lens, and a Takumar no less! I have a collection of Super-Multi-Coated generation of Takumar lenses (early 70's) and they are a joy to use!
Thank you Chris, love this kinda content! Vintage lenses on big, new megapixel cameras! I actually have a Pentax Asahi Super Takumar 55mm and my Canon R5 will be here soon. Can't wait!
Takumars are great! SMC Takumars are better for sure. Quite well for a piece of your father's junk... I believe this model is single coated, instead of multi coated as more modern versions. Pentax was amazing, it is a pity it isn't doing very well in the modern digital era. Loving the retro reviews, hope other viewers too so you keep it going! Cheers!
I wish I had Christopher to narrate and review everything in my life. New girl I am interested in at the coffee shop? Cut to a 9 minute Christopher Frost review taking into account all her positives and negatives in a calm and unbiased way while a B-roll plays of her doing mundane tasks at home and work.
Thanks for this review. I requested it because I own it and love the feel of this vintage lens. I have modern mirrorless lenses but from time time to time I grab it and experience a different feel.
There’s an earlier version labeled Auto Takumar with no lens coatings. The Super Takumar you reviewed does have a lens coating, just not as much as the Super-Milti-Coated version. & focusing is not complicated, as you say, just a matter of turning the focusing ring in one direction or the other.
This is awesome! Vintage lenses to compare to modern. I would love a series, from Takumar to canon fd and Minolta, Nikon etc that would be insane! There are a lot of hidden gems especially with macro lenses and portrait lenses
Excellent review Chris. In my humble opinion I feel that this is a true art lens. Take her out during sunrise or sunset and experiment, see the beauty of the flares and the true creativity of this piece of glass...
great to see you review one of the old gals, i love the M42 fast primes, when you work the bokeh you can get some really unique renders from these lenses i'd have a hard time letting my 50mm Pentacon ƒ1.8 go, love that lens to be honest the lens you tested did really well considering the camera it was on, i see far worse from modern lenses you have tested
You should review more vintage lenses. This is a very informative review, and I especially enjoyed the chapters "intro" and "design". Although - I would not refer to the lens as "junk". :)
"Kept it away from my groin..." Very sensible. And pretty funny, actually. You definitely have a flair for that UK humor we Yanks so love! We need a nickname for you. (Possible choices: "Roger the Shrubber", "Dennis Moore" or...."Loretta?".)
I have several of these Takumar lenses in different focal lengths and generations. The Super Takumars were the first iteration, followed by the Super-Multi-Coated versions and finally the SMC versions. I don't own any of the Super Takumars, but I do have two of the SMC, a 55mm f2 and a 50mm f1.4 (radioactive). The remainder of my collection are all S-M-C and consist of 28mm, 35mm, 105mm, 135mm and 200mm. I use them on a Sony A99i and find focussing very easy with the focus assist and focus zoom options available. Although if I was only given a choice of one lens it would have to be my Minolta AF 35mm f2, which is a beauty.
I have a few of these Lenses, yes the Radio active coating was Thorium and used on the side that’s closest to the Film. They are safe to use today but back then the inspection method was not and they stopped using it. Images are good but I find that a low Mega pixel count actually produces better results like a Fuji XT1 if you use it on a FF with 24M the images tend to be more blurry than on the APS-C 🙂
Chris I have the Takumar 50mm1.4 and the Pentax 55mm 1.8 K mount lens both great legacy lenses thanks for the review I was always wondering how they perform versus newer autofocus lenses
i bought this 2 years ago & i have taken a few nice photos with it even some portraits the lens flare is crazy & i find the bokeh very busy with certain backgrounds but i still loved it it was something special about it
I love these vintage lenses, I even use them (a 2.0 and a 1.4 version) on my Hasselblad X1D. They render images in a way I find very pleasing and less clinical than modern lenses. But of course it is not for use in any situation.
Been getting into this type of lens lately. Got a few Pentacons, a couple of Industars and a few different examples of the Helios44. Find them pretty rewarding to use and although the results aren't perfect, they add character that's hard to replicate with a modern lens or editing. Cheers for feeding the habit, I'm off to eBay.
It would be a neat idea to take a few old lenses such as this and show your audience how they can be fixed up with some editing. Sharpness, contrast, vignetting etc.. compared to the test chart without any. Some vintage lenses can easily do an enlargement about the size of a two page magazine spread and you really can't tell if you use a high megapixel camera. Going larger you can but then if they edited properly can go even bigger.
I don't mind the double-gauss flares and kind of unusual bokeh. It gives a very unique look that you can't really get anywhere else. I have a Mamiya-Sekor 50mm f/2 that uses a similar optical formula and it's fun to use on my EOS RP. However, I bought a Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 SSC somewhat recently and that has kind of taken the Mamiya's place most of the time.
6 month ago I startet out with vintage lenses. Its such a Joy to use those old manual lenses. I use Them most for flower photography and for portraits. I use My 55mm f. 1.8 SMC takumar for flower and My 50mm f. 1.4 Super Takumar for portraits. Its fun to take your time before taking a picture.
@@messylaura I think I have enough vi tage lenses ariound 50mm as I also have 3 differentt Helios 44 lenses. I have a Pentacon 135mm f 2.8 and that is also a Nice portrait lense and surprising little and light.
I hope we will se some more of these. I love legacy lenses, sometimes sharpness and contrast aren`t most important things to look after. Maybe an Minolta MC 58 1.2 or Contax Zeiss T* 50mm 1.4 and many more.
Great review, keep the vintage lenses coming. I urge a small amount of caution with the radioactivity, it’s around 1 chest x-ray per hour near the lens surface which is not a lot but could add up if it’s near you all the time. I’d just keep it stored away when not in use, and not to be played with by children.
I have a newer K mount 50mm f/1.4 Pentax-M lens that I picked up about 15 years ago for $10. I used it recently on my 40D, and was surprised by how sharp it actually is. Sadly the K-EF adapter I have doesn't lock onto the EF-RF adapter, so I need to get a new adapter to use it with my R5. I've got a few other K mount lenses, including my favorite portrait lens, a 135mm f/2 (or is it 2.8?), so it's not a bad investment for some fun.
Thanks a lot for giving us a test of a vintage lens with comparision to modern ones. I personally own lots of manual lenses (zuiko, rockor) from late 70s to 90s and to my experience these are on the same level with my 2 modern samyang lenses or even better (especially at chromatic aberations). Would be nice if you could test some newer manual lenses with better coatings from the 80s/90s. Love your channel
I really like that you test close up image quality At what point does image quality get better as a function of distance? What does that ‘curve’ look like? Speaking generally of course not for this specific lens.
Nice that you reviewing old vintage lenses. Question. I have the same lens and love it. But some say its radioactive? Is it radioactive and is it dangerous? 😮
I use a Takumar SMC 55mm f1.8 , with a nice bokeh transition. The single coated Takumar's 135mm f3.5, and 35mm f3.5 are great lenses for Ultraviolet photography. I also use a Takumar 150mm f4 and a 28mm f3,5 SMC for Infrared.
This lens doesn't pre-date lens coatings, it was single coated. As far as bokeh is concerned, this lens is a much better performer than most Nikkors I have seen, and is quite smooth overall. Compares well with Zeiss lenses. So you are wrong there as well.
I have the very same lens and a radiation detector…I can confirm they are highly radioactive. And that’s why exactly bought the lens so I can test my radiation equipment, it emits gamma too don’t ever break one in a room. 😬
Vintage review what a good idea! I stopped using vintage lenses, focus is a pain, exposure not always reliable, operation slow. To much work for me. But I understand it’s fun.
This lens has a coating ! Single coating. The Super multi coated or SMC have a more efficient coating. f2 and f1.8 are the same lens. the f2 has an internal ring to stop it down at f2 . The f2 version was launched only for marketing purpose ( kit lens of Spotmatic 500). There is K mount version actually : SMC 55mm f1.8. This lens has a Thorium treatment on one element ( radioactive) . I think that the K version is not radioactive.
The old Pentax lenses are lovely on digital camera bodies. I still use the 50mm f1.7 SMC one I got with my Pentax ME Super back in 1981. I've since bought the 50mm f4 SMC Macro which is amazingly sharp, although only 1:2 ratio so not strictly macro if you want to split hairs. Both are compact and well-built. The f4 max aperture on the latter is no problem as you can up the ISO on modern clean sensors. As I use Sony bodies, I have focus peaking for manual lenses, so auto focus is not really necessary and you soon learn to dispense with it. (Check out Zenography on YT for lots of manual lens reviews).
its probably good in the corners as it is designed as a F1.8 lens so the only difference between the F1.8 version and the F2 is the F2 lens will only go as wide as F2 so in fact, its stopped down 1/3 of a stop when wide open...i guess it was cheaper to make 1 lens for both the F1.8 and F2..i have a lot of legacy 50/55mm lenses,i often like the lower contrast look that's pretty hard to replicate in software ..if folk wants a cheap legacy 50 that is sharp at F2 i can recommend the Canon FDn 50 F1.4 but my favorite cheap 50 is the Fujinon 55 F1.8 it matches the Canon 50 for sharpness at F2 (the canon may be sharper at F5.6) but renders nicer and better Bokeh
@@77appyi Sorry I forgot that there were different versions. The one that I picked up was a MD version. I did a comparison between it and the Super Takumar 50mm F/1.4 rare 8 element version. I found the colors and bokeh to be a bit more pleasing than the Takumar, but I'll still keep the Takumar as I do appreciate the history, build quality, and compactnesss. If I had to pick a favorite 50 from my vintage collection it would have to be the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm F/ 1.8 rare 8 aperture blade zebra. Have you ever tried using that lens before?
I was under the impression that the f1.4 version was the radioactive one. The 1.4 glass turns yellow with time , but this hasn't. This would have been the standard for the cheaper Spotmatic SP500. The lens had a baffle on this model to make it f2, the same glass was used for the f1.8 on the more expensive Spotmatic and ES2 models. SMC designation went on later versions, but yes, this version should have an amber coating. It continued in production until the K and M series in the later 70s, gaingva rubberised diamond grip at the end
Not expected but warmly received video:) Well the retro lens prices skyrocketed in the last 10 years, mostly because of the usual snobism and hype around sometimes snake oil and supposed but never really seen characteristics, so yeah sometimes worth the thought that buying even cheapo chinese lenses which have most of the time may better coatings is a way better bang for the buck. Though for me back then at first legacy lenses came as a necessity when they were still dirt cheap, since then as I usually shooting for myself and the love of photographing I mostly put away my more modern lenses I use for work or critical shots. With these legacy lenses (or some newer manual ones), its more fun the whole experience, as Im more involved, and its a bit more testing sometimes as I have to work around quirks or imperfections of my favoutite manual ones, like the minolta md 50 f2, or the jupiter 21m:)
Radioactive lens...both 50mm and 55mm are legendary. While they are not razor sharp, the color rendering is mesmerizing... I own a couple of them..Also Tomioka made excellent lens. The granddaddy is 55mm f1.2. I also love the Cooke triplets, the 50mm f2. 9 Trioplan and 100mm f2.8 are made by Meyer Optik Gorlitz .
If you want an amazing lens to try? Try the Rollei HFT 50mm f1.8 Planar. It is a vintage lens that has prevented me from buying the Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8. I would LOVE for you to enjoy and test this lens.
I love the old Pentax lenses. I have a bunch. A couple of 50mm (f2.0, f1.8, f.1.7 (YES. 1.7. What where they thinking!)), 28mm 2.8 (yes 28mm, weird) and a 135mm. They all have this super nice build quality. Very smooth focus rings. Metal housing. Even though they are optically flawed I just can't resist their charm :)
@@philtaylor194 I really like it. It gives that "just a touch wider" feeling than a 35mm without a lot of distortion like a fish eye. After getting the Pentax 28mm I instantly bought the Sony 28mm f2.0 to have an autofocus option (useful on a gimbal and video in general) but when out taking pictures I often grab the Pentax. It has the weird bokeh and the weird softness that quite often just works =)
I think some test on vintage telephoto lens will be more helpful. Simply because the modern ones are way more expensive. I personally own some of them and they certainly saved me lots of money 💰
They are slightly radioactive, don't eat them, thorium oxide is used as a coating on the glass elements and is the reason for that brownish tint to the glass.
mjah... I like the bokeh of these old lenses much more than the modern ones. The image-corrected modern lenses lack character and don't inspire me at all. But that's a subjective thing.
The colors a very nice, kinda soft and unique. The images look very nice. The bokeh looks good to me in of the images, but I agree not always. I love vintage lenses, the colors are great. But Pentax colors are not really my first choice, as they don’t match my style, really enjoy other peoples photos.
The optics for the the smc takumar f1.4 8 element and 7 element version are a hut different. The difference in image is minimal though. An 8 element version will run $200 minimum.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
Regarding the coating, this lens is coated, but it's single coated. In some of the lens clips you can see the lens reflects a slight orange in the front group. The SMC upgrade was for multi-layer coatings. The primary difference between the Super-Takumar and SMC was an improvement from 98% light transmission to 99.something %.
I came here to say that, too. Coatings were improved over time, but all Takumars were coated.
My favourite lens is the 50 f1.4 super takumar, it performs really well for a 60s lens, but pretty much any modern glass will easily out perform it. The appeal of these lenses is the subjective image quality, the colour, bokeh, the skin tones. On film they look fantastic, some of my favourite pictures I've ever taken.
Also the rear element of the super takumars contain thorium, so they are radioactive, but a pretty small amount, I measured it with a gieger counter once and you'd have to be holding the glass against your skin for a year to get a dose worth worrying about. If the lens is further than a couple centimetres away from you then it's practically nothing.
I have same lens in excellent condition and I love it. Bokeh and colours are so good
If in the unlikely event the glass were to get shattered and then it would be different. So I understand at least that it would become an extremely hazardous. There are so many that are not radioactive, its easy to avoid them. Also if your eye ball is looking directly at a source of radioactivity it only has the gubbins inside your camera to stop any particles from hitting possibly the most sensitive part of your body.
I was always wondering whether you'd review this lens. I've got the SMC f1.8 version (and it is radioactive because it contains Thorium, but nothing to worry about unless you eat it) and I quite enjoy using the lens. Smooth focusing, well built and sharp optics when stopped down. Lovely to use really and a nice, compact size.
Do you think Thorium might damage the sensor if you leave it on the camera for several days?
Just a correction, it does have lens coatings, as can be seen by looking at it but it doesn’t have the superior Super Multi Coated coatings of the later lenses.
you can clearly see them at 1:37
Christopher, thanks for a great vintage review. I appreciate your reviews a lot, while also, I am a vintage lens collector. And I love, and laugh, at the lens flareing parts of your review, as I shoot stills and video a lot, I often find that many people are in search of "character" in the flare. When I see the flare in this 55mm I, and many others, Leo how it sets itself apart from modern glass. Part of that is because, they dont make anything like this anymore! Lost, are the old ways. I love sharp and accurate lens when I buy modern, but if I buy vintage, I want a good reason. And character is that reason. Something that stands out. Thanks for all your videos. I wish you were in the USA so I could loan you all my 70+ vintage lenses to play with! Let me know if you ever swing by Texas.
You should do some reviews on vintage minolta manual lenses, like the legendary 250mm f/5.6, 80-200 f/4.5, 75-150 f/4, 24-50 f/4, 50mm 1.2, etc....
Actually some really surprising resolution! Great to see how far lens coatings have come these days.
Very interesting video, I’m very surprised at how well the lens does as often those older lenses are very soft wide open.
Chris the market for vintage lenses is huge these days, a series covering popular vintage lenses would go down well and would be very interesting seeing how they stack up on a modern body.
And drive the prices up!! Shhhhh!
@@Twobarpsi Too late! but yeah it'll push them higher, it'd be super interesting mentally comparing them to all his other modern lens reviews. I think there'd be a few sharp surprises in the Leica and Zeiss vintage optics, I'd love to see them take the test image on.
@@Twobarpsi Like what media division did to FD glass.
One of the greatest vintage lenses that I have in my collection.. Superb!
I have many variants of this lens. I like to experiment with them but there are nothing that special.Couldn't help but notice you are reading the bible in it's archaising form of Modern Greek. I salute you, I even find this type of Greek hard and I'm Greek. Condolences for your dad Chris, mine passed in 2019. They are in a better place, keep the memories of them always alive!
One of my fav film-era lenses. The relative lack of quality falloff in the corners is a big plus compared to most of its contemporaries. It gives a different look to modern lenses, and I use it whenever I want a break from übersharpness. I like its out-of-focus look too…it's got character.
Thanks, great to see a vintage lens review! This might be the first version of Super-Takumar but before that was Auto-Takumar, with its distinctive lever on side. Auto-Takumar is not radioactive. All the variants (Auto, Super, SMC) have 6 elements in 5 groups and I believe the Super and SMC versions are really the same, but the Auto variant is slightly different. Oh and Auto variant has 10 aperture blades. These all are great lenses with good amount of "3D pop" and they are sharp. However I think the Auto-Takumar 55mm f/2 is overall (resolution, pop, weight, bokeh) the best, in my humble opinion of course. Cheers!
hope we can see more vintage on the channel! 🤗
I have a 55/1.8 and it has been my go to lense forever
Thanks for sharing this, Chris. You have reminded us that most lenses never really ‘die’. I just purchased this Takumar model (it is March 2024)… along with a few others (f1.4s, f2s, f2.2s…) 😊.
So great to see you reviewing a vintage lens! These are often sought after not for their sharpness but for their interesting color rendition and bokeh characteristics. Sharp, soap-bubbly bokeh allow for some interesting creative options in certain lighting scenarios too. Subjective stuff really.... "subjective objectives" shall we say? I'm pleased to see it's sharp as it is on a 45MP sensor though. I wasn't quite expecting it to be that sharp.
Thanks so much for sharing this and I hope you do more vintage lens reviews!
It's great to see a vintage lens featured here. I have a copy of this lens from my Aunt in my closet that I had almost forgotten about, but before even finishing this video I ordered an adapter to put it on my camera. Hopefully after some cleaning it will earn its place as one of the vintage lenses in my camera bag.
You might be surprised with some other legacy lenses. The Leica Elmar 5cm f/3.5 is a dandy and sharp little lens, for instance. Always glad when you surprise us with reviews like this.
More vintage lens reviews plz!! 😍 Loved this one, had many variants of takumar, so cool to see it on your channel mate 👍😃
i think you should do more legacy glass ....it gets a bit boring for us R mount folk when we only ever see E mount lenses reviews these days..so hit the like button if you agree
I just love how tiny these vintage lenses are. It's the reason I'm happy to keep buying them and carrying them around the world.
Loved seeing you review this vintage lens Chris, and loved seeing how well it performed!
I've got two of these.
Amazing lenses. I'm so glad you've put this in the spotlight.
I've owned and tested multiple versions of these Pentax 50mm and 55mm lenses, your 55mm lens is not radioactive. Pentax didn't add the thorium glass to the 55mm lenses until the late Super Takumar version with the hill-valley/scalloped focus ring design. The focus ring on your copy is an early flat knurled design. The thorium glass versions also have a bad tendency to yellow over time, though it's possible to treat the lens to clear the yellowed glass element. A simple Geiger counter can be bought online for cheap and is a good tool to have around when dealing with vintage lenses. There were many changes throughout the life of these Pentax m42 lenses and a lot of conflicting information out there. Before the SMC/Super-Multi-Coated lenses, Pentax used single coated glass that usually reflected gold when holding it to a light. SMC glass reflected more blue and was clearer, and was also one of the best multi coating techs of the time and in some cases is still good by todays standards.
A fun fact about this lens - it's the same as the 55mm f/1.8, it has a small baffle to fix the aperture to f/2 at wide open.
I thought only some versions of the 1.4 used Thorium.
@@philtaylor194 That is the most famous radioactive Pentax but it is not the only one. Thoriated glass was widely used as an inexpensive way to get certain quality glass back then.
Interesting. In the 50mm-ish range I have the f1.4 SMC Takumar, and at f2.0 it has a little color fringing while this one doesn't (non-longitudinal). While modern glass certainly outperforms wide open, I really like the Takumar line's color rendition. It's understated, warm, and pastel-like, great for skin tones.
Nice to see a vintage lens, and a Takumar no less! I have a collection of Super-Multi-Coated generation of Takumar lenses (early 70's) and they are a joy to use!
Thank you Chris, love this kinda content! Vintage lenses on big, new megapixel cameras! I actually have a Pentax Asahi Super Takumar 55mm and my Canon R5 will be here soon. Can't wait!
Takumars are great! SMC Takumars are better for sure. Quite well for a piece of your father's junk... I believe this model is single coated, instead of multi coated as more modern versions. Pentax was amazing, it is a pity it isn't doing very well in the modern digital era. Loving the retro reviews, hope other viewers too so you keep it going! Cheers!
I wish I had Christopher to narrate and review everything in my life. New girl I am interested in at the coffee shop? Cut to a 9 minute Christopher Frost review taking into account all her positives and negatives in a calm and unbiased way while a B-roll plays of her doing mundane tasks at home and work.
Thanks for this review. I requested it because I own it and love the feel of this vintage lens. I have modern mirrorless lenses but from time time to time I grab it and experience a different feel.
There’s an earlier version labeled Auto Takumar with no lens coatings. The Super Takumar you reviewed does have a lens coating, just not as much as the Super-Milti-Coated version. & focusing is not complicated, as you say, just a matter of turning the focusing ring in one direction or the other.
This is awesome! Vintage lenses to compare to modern. I would love a series, from Takumar to canon fd and Minolta, Nikon etc that would be insane! There are a lot of hidden gems especially with macro lenses and portrait lenses
The groin comment almost made me spit out my drink!! Good one!
Love your videos.
Excellent review Chris. In my humble opinion I feel that this is a true art lens. Take her out during sunrise or sunset and experiment, see the beauty of the flares and the true creativity of this piece of glass...
I've got one, bought from a camera shop in Akihabara years ago. it has character and i love it!
great to see you review one of the old gals, i love the M42 fast primes, when you work the bokeh you can get some really unique renders from these lenses
i'd have a hard time letting my 50mm Pentacon ƒ1.8 go, love that lens
to be honest the lens you tested did really well considering the camera it was on, i see far worse from modern lenses you have tested
The pentacon is an absolute gem 💎🔥
You should review more vintage lenses. This is a very informative review, and I especially enjoyed the chapters "intro" and "design". Although - I would not refer to the lens as "junk". :)
"Kept it away from my groin..." Very sensible. And pretty funny, actually. You definitely have a flair for that UK humor we Yanks so love! We need a nickname for you. (Possible choices: "Roger the Shrubber", "Dennis Moore" or...."Loretta?".)
I have several of these Takumar lenses in different focal lengths and generations. The Super Takumars were the first iteration, followed by the Super-Multi-Coated versions and finally the SMC versions. I don't own any of the Super Takumars, but I do have two of the SMC, a 55mm f2 and a 50mm f1.4 (radioactive). The remainder of my collection are all S-M-C and consist of 28mm, 35mm, 105mm, 135mm and 200mm. I use them on a Sony A99i and find focussing very easy with the focus assist and focus zoom options available. Although if I was only given a choice of one lens it would have to be my Minolta AF 35mm f2, which is a beauty.
I have a few of these Lenses, yes the Radio active coating was Thorium and used on the side that’s closest to the Film. They are safe to use today but back then the inspection method was not and they stopped using it. Images are good but I find that a low Mega pixel count actually produces better results like a Fuji XT1 if you use it on a FF with 24M the images tend to be more blurry than on the APS-C 🙂
Oh man I love adapting vintage lenses, this video was very welcome
More vintage lenses! More vintage lenses! You're the only one I'll trust when reviewing these old lenses and put all the internet myths to rest.
Always love the vintage reviews.
keep the vintage lens reviews coming. tyvm.
Chris
I have the Takumar 50mm1.4 and the Pentax 55mm 1.8 K mount lens both great legacy lenses thanks for the review I was always wondering how they perform versus newer autofocus lenses
Love vintage lenses and I absolutely love this review .thank you.
i bought this 2 years ago & i have taken a few nice photos with it even some portraits the lens flare is crazy & i find the bokeh very busy with certain backgrounds but i still loved it it was something special about it
I love these vintage lenses, I even use them (a 2.0 and a 1.4 version) on my Hasselblad X1D. They render images in a way I find very pleasing and less clinical than modern lenses. But of course it is not for use in any situation.
Very good review
Been getting into this type of lens lately. Got a few Pentacons, a couple of Industars and a few different examples of the Helios44. Find them pretty rewarding to use and although the results aren't perfect, they add character that's hard to replicate with a modern lens or editing. Cheers for feeding the habit, I'm off to eBay.
This is a different beast from the Iron Curtain stuff, comparable with Nikkors of that era.
I have a super Takuma 24mm f3.5, a wide angle vintage lens. it's light and super fun to use it. UNFORTUNATELY, only center is razor sharp.
I never thought I'd see you review a lens as old as me! Too funny. Thanks!
It would be a neat idea to take a few old lenses such as this and show your audience how they can be fixed up with some editing. Sharpness, contrast, vignetting etc.. compared to the test chart without any. Some vintage lenses can easily do an enlargement about the size of a two page magazine spread and you really can't tell if you use a high megapixel camera. Going larger you can but then if they edited properly can go even bigger.
It has image stabilisation - it's just also manual and called your hands/arms.
Great review, go on with my more Takumar Lenses
I don't mind the double-gauss flares and kind of unusual bokeh. It gives a very unique look that you can't really get anywhere else. I have a Mamiya-Sekor 50mm f/2 that uses a similar optical formula and it's fun to use on my EOS RP. However, I bought a Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 SSC somewhat recently and that has kind of taken the Mamiya's place most of the time.
6 month ago I startet out with vintage lenses. Its such a Joy to use those old manual lenses. I use Them most for flower photography and for portraits. I use My 55mm f. 1.8 SMC takumar for flower and My 50mm f. 1.4 Super Takumar for portraits. Its fun to take your time before taking a picture.
try the 50mm ƒ1.8 Pentacon, another fab lens for flowers and true bokeh not just dof blur
@@messylaura I think I have enough vi tage lenses ariound 50mm as I also have 3 differentt Helios 44 lenses. I have a Pentacon 135mm f 2.8 and that is also a Nice portrait lense and surprising little and light.
I hope we will se some more of these. I love legacy lenses, sometimes sharpness and contrast aren`t most important things to look after. Maybe an Minolta MC 58 1.2 or Contax Zeiss T* 50mm 1.4 and many more.
Great review, keep the vintage lenses coming. I urge a small amount of caution with the radioactivity, it’s around 1 chest x-ray per hour near the lens surface which is not a lot but could add up if it’s near you all the time. I’d just keep it stored away when not in use, and not to be played with by children.
I have one of these radioactive bad boys. An absolutely gorgeous image maker despite its unsexy specs and appearance.
I have a newer K mount 50mm f/1.4 Pentax-M lens that I picked up about 15 years ago for $10. I used it recently on my 40D, and was surprised by how sharp it actually is. Sadly the K-EF adapter I have doesn't lock onto the EF-RF adapter, so I need to get a new adapter to use it with my R5. I've got a few other K mount lenses, including my favorite portrait lens, a 135mm f/2 (or is it 2.8?), so it's not a bad investment for some fun.
Thanks a lot for giving us a test of a vintage lens with comparision to modern ones. I personally own lots of manual lenses (zuiko, rockor) from late 70s to 90s and to my experience these are on the same level with my 2 modern samyang lenses or even better (especially at chromatic aberations). Would be nice if you could test some newer manual lenses with better coatings from the 80s/90s. Love your channel
I really like that you test close up image quality At what point does image quality get better as a function of distance? What does that ‘curve’ look like? Speaking generally of course not for this specific lens.
I follow your channel and I know you don’t review cinema lenses , but would love you’re reviews on the Dulens mini primes
Nice that you reviewing old vintage lenses. Question. I have the same lens and love it. But some say its radioactive? Is it radioactive and is it dangerous? 😮
I use a Takumar SMC 55mm f1.8 , with a nice bokeh transition. The single coated Takumar's 135mm f3.5, and 35mm f3.5 are great lenses for Ultraviolet photography. I also use a Takumar 150mm f4 and a 28mm f3,5 SMC for Infrared.
wow i wasn’t expecting this review
Bravo, finally an old lens 🥳! Please test a Tokina ATX- 90 2.5 „Bokina“ some day 😍.
0:45 Если положить эту линзу на подоконник она из желтой станет прозрачной или поменяет цвет.
This lens doesn't pre-date lens coatings, it was single coated. As far as bokeh is concerned, this lens is a much better performer than most Nikkors I have seen, and is quite smooth overall. Compares well with Zeiss lenses. So you are wrong there as well.
I have the very same lens and a radiation detector…I can confirm they are highly radioactive. And that’s why exactly bought the lens so I can test my radiation equipment, it emits gamma too don’t ever break one in a room. 😬
You should do more more reviews on these classic lenses
Vintage review what a good idea!
I stopped using vintage lenses, focus is a pain, exposure not always reliable, operation slow. To much work for me. But I understand it’s fun.
This lens has a coating ! Single coating. The Super multi coated or SMC have a more efficient coating.
f2 and f1.8 are the same lens. the f2 has an internal ring to stop it down at f2 . The f2 version was launched only for marketing purpose ( kit lens of Spotmatic 500). There is K mount version actually : SMC 55mm f1.8.
This lens has a Thorium treatment on one element ( radioactive) . I think that the K version is not radioactive.
The old Pentax lenses are lovely on digital camera bodies. I still use the 50mm f1.7 SMC one I got with my Pentax ME Super back in 1981. I've since bought the 50mm f4 SMC Macro which is amazingly sharp, although only 1:2 ratio so not strictly macro if you want to split hairs. Both are compact and well-built. The f4 max aperture on the latter is no problem as you can up the ISO on modern clean sensors. As I use Sony bodies, I have focus peaking for manual lenses, so auto focus is not really necessary and you soon learn to dispense with it. (Check out Zenography on YT for lots of manual lens reviews).
its probably good in the corners as it is designed as a F1.8 lens so the only difference between the F1.8 version and the F2 is the F2 lens will only go as wide as F2 so in fact, its stopped down 1/3 of a stop when wide open...i guess it was cheaper to make 1 lens for both the F1.8 and F2..i have a lot of legacy 50/55mm lenses,i often like the lower contrast look that's pretty hard to replicate in software ..if folk wants a cheap legacy 50 that is sharp at F2 i can recommend the Canon FDn 50 F1.4 but my favorite cheap 50 is the Fujinon 55 F1.8 it matches the Canon 50 for sharpness at F2 (the canon may be sharper at F5.6) but renders nicer and better Bokeh
Hi, have you ever tried the Minolta 50mm F/1.4?
@@princeharbinger which one?
@@77appyi Sorry I forgot that there were different versions. The one that I picked up was a MD version. I did a comparison between it and the Super Takumar 50mm F/1.4 rare 8 element version. I found the colors and bokeh to be a bit more pleasing than the Takumar, but I'll still keep the Takumar as I do appreciate the history, build quality, and compactnesss. If I had to pick a favorite 50 from my vintage collection it would have to be the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm F/ 1.8 rare 8 aperture blade zebra. Have you ever tried using that lens before?
I have some vintage lenses from the 60s and will probably buy an adapter to use on my Canon EFS mount camera!
Nice review, Christopher. How did you find using it on the R5 in terms of manual focusing it?
I was under the impression that the f1.4 version was the radioactive one. The 1.4 glass turns yellow with time , but this hasn't. This would have been the standard for the cheaper Spotmatic SP500. The lens had a baffle on this model to make it f2, the same glass was used for the f1.8 on the more expensive Spotmatic and ES2 models. SMC designation went on later versions, but yes, this version should have an amber coating. It continued in production until the K and M series in the later 70s, gaingva rubberised diamond grip at the end
I picked one up a while ago froma thrift store. It's the f/1.8 55mm, I think it was made 1970s. Super crisp lens
Not expected but warmly received video:)
Well the retro lens prices skyrocketed in the last 10 years, mostly because of the usual snobism and hype around sometimes snake oil and supposed but never really seen characteristics, so yeah sometimes worth the thought that buying even cheapo chinese lenses which have most of the time may better coatings is a way better bang for the buck.
Though for me back then at first legacy lenses came as a necessity when they were still dirt cheap, since then as I usually shooting for myself and the love of photographing I mostly put away my more modern lenses I use for work or critical shots. With these legacy lenses (or some newer manual ones), its more fun the whole experience, as Im more involved, and its a bit more testing sometimes as I have to work around quirks or imperfections of my favoutite manual ones, like the minolta md 50 f2, or the jupiter 21m:)
Radioactive lens...both 50mm and 55mm are legendary. While they are not razor sharp, the color rendering is mesmerizing... I own a couple of them..Also Tomioka made excellent lens. The granddaddy is 55mm f1.2. I also love the Cooke triplets, the 50mm f2. 9 Trioplan and 100mm f2.8 are made by Meyer Optik Gorlitz .
If you want an amazing lens to try? Try the Rollei HFT 50mm f1.8 Planar. It is a vintage lens that has prevented me from buying the Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8. I would LOVE for you to enjoy and test this lens.
i'd like to see more of this pentax vintage lenses on modern cameras like the canon r5 from your perspective.
I love the old Pentax lenses. I have a bunch. A couple of 50mm (f2.0, f1.8, f.1.7 (YES. 1.7. What where they thinking!)), 28mm 2.8 (yes 28mm, weird) and a 135mm. They all have this super nice build quality. Very smooth focus rings. Metal housing. Even though they are optically flawed I just can't resist their charm :)
Until very late in the M42 series, 28mm was the widest they did apart from the 17 f4 fisheye
@@philtaylor194 I really like it. It gives that "just a touch wider" feeling than a 35mm without a lot of distortion like a fish eye. After getting the Pentax 28mm I instantly bought the Sony 28mm f2.0 to have an autofocus option (useful on a gimbal and video in general) but when out taking pictures I often grab the Pentax. It has the weird bokeh and the weird softness that quite often just works =)
Usually the ones with a kind of dark yellow tint to the glass are the ones that are somewhat radioactive. I have one and it's a sharp lens.
I think some test on vintage telephoto lens will be more helpful. Simply because the modern ones are way more expensive. I personally own some of them and they certainly saved me lots of money 💰
They are slightly radioactive, don't eat them, thorium oxide is used as a coating on the glass elements and is the reason for that brownish tint to the glass.
mjah... I like the bokeh of these old lenses much more than the modern ones. The image-corrected modern lenses lack character and don't inspire me at all. But that's a subjective thing.
Deepest sympathies on the loss of your father.
Looks like a cool lens, though I have no use for any other ~55mm lenses because I love my Voigtlander 58mm f1.4 :)
The colors a very nice, kinda soft and unique. The images look very nice. The bokeh looks good to me in of the images, but I agree not always. I love vintage lenses, the colors are great. But Pentax colors are not really my first choice, as they don’t match my style, really enjoy other peoples photos.
The optics for the the smc takumar f1.4 8 element and 7 element version are a hut different. The difference in image is minimal though. An 8 element version will run $200 minimum.
Awesome! My Takumar is radioactive, i had it tested.
I notice there's an aperture pin on the back of this lens, how did you handle it? Thank you.
I have asahi takumar 55mm f1.8 with 8 blades. I couldn't find a match on you tube.
Which RF/Pentax adaptor are you using? I assume it is working well.
I have a 55mm f1. 8 super Takumar.
The best Bokeh and colour rendition of all my lens.
I owe this lens and a Spotmatic F. At first, I was surprised how good it can be.
MORE vintage lens reviews PLEEEEEASE!!