Your photos are really nice. I appreciate that you review lenses that we don't have to give up eating to afford. I have both lenses and my results were similar. Maybe its because I've been shooting with Zuiko lenses for many years, but I find the Olympus lenses more pleasing. Here, i found the colors much nicer from the Zuiko. The Takumar certainly has a more vintage look that could be useful. Thanks for posting, I'm sure this was a lot of work.
Thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it! Although the Tak was nice I must admit I was a bit underwhelmed by it - mind you, it's a much older lens than the Zuiko, and the yellowing didn't help colour rendition. I'll come back to it in a while after more use, and perhaps I'll discover its strengths. Thanks for watching!
I'm a bit late to the party, but it's worth noting that most Zuikos are quite easily "declicked" if you have the tools and the gumption to open them up. Not very far below the mount there is a tiny ball bearing that clicks into detents in the aperture ring to make the click stops. I have seen a couple with different click mechanisms (later ones with "made in japan" markings on the front or a chrome collar at the mount, IIRC), but usually all you have to do to remove the click stops is remove that BB. "Re-clicking" them is just as simple - just pop the BB back in.
I just got the Olympus 50mm f1.4. The early version with the silver nose. It also has thorium in the glass. Also recently acquired a Konica 50mm F1.4 with thorium. That makes a total of 5 radioactive lenses in my possession. Might be time to invest in a thick metal container lol. Cheers and happy 2022!
I remember that chess board from "The Prisoner" TV show! When I first saw your photo it reminded me of the show, but I bet I have not seen an episode (a rerun) since the 1970s. I've assembled a small set of Olympus OM lenses (a 28, 50 and 100mm) to use with a digital mirrorless camera. I never had direct experience with Olympus lenses prior to this and have been positively impressed by them. They are nicely built pieces of equipment. My only criticism of the lenses is that the "throw" or amount of rotation required to focus seems to be rather small compared to other lenses I use. When relying on focus peaking some might find it difficult to focus using older digital cameras or those without better focus peaking systems. I would like to try a Pentax lens. I have heard from others that color rendition is very good. Thanks for your video!
I love both these lenses!! I totally agree with your appraisal of their performance, although I am a Pentax man myself. The best word I've found to describe the Takumar lenses is 'understated', both in performance and design. 'Restrained' works as well. Their colours are not as shouty or loud as the Olympus, but have their own subtlety and are more beautiful for it, in my opinion. May I ask why you have not - or at least as far as I have seen - recommended any Pentax cameras in your videos? Apart from faulty light-meters being a common issue, I consider the Spotmatic F superior to the OM series: just as capable and beautifully made (although slightly larger), but able to mount any M42 lens. For me, the ability to use all the Takumars, as well as a vast array of Soviet and East German glass is a massive advantage. Also, is it possible that the Pentax in this video turned out slightly inferior in optical performance to the Zuiko because it was a comparison between the last version of the Olympus lens and an earlier Takumar? It may have been a closer call if it was a Super-Multi-Coated version or the rebodied SMC lens... Either way they are both fantastic lenses! Thank you very much for the wonderful content, it has been such a help in looking for ways to expand my photography.
Great video on the two little wonders. Jewel-like, in both appearance and capabilities, is an apt description for these two 50s. Legendary, in fact. I'm more familiar with the Takumar than Zuiko but have seen outstanding samples taken by both.
So, I own both of these lenses now. I think your A"B comparision photos really point out how you need to work with the contrast and brightness more. These should be white balanced and then focused manually using software and a large computer screen when shooting. I think you will get better results. However, all that being said, I like the video. It caused me to add the Olympus to my collection. Plus, you need to be very careful not to scratch the rear coating on the Super Takumar.
I have an 8 element version of the Super Takumar on it's way to me. I enjoyed your photos from Portmerion, Wales. I spent a few night there about 25 years ago, such a lovely place. Thanks for your videos.
Similarly, I was a little underwhelmed when using the Takumar 50mm 1.4 compared to the Zuiko equivalent. However I found some of the other Takumar lenses, particularly the 55mm 1.8 and f2 surprisingly rewarding to use. Obviously this is purely subjective. Lovely discourse Mr Zen.
This is a handy comparison! The yellowing in your copy of the Super Takumar looks pretty advanced. After I de-yellowed mine with an LED lamp, I got images that were sharper and more contrasty from it. Colors are still a little warm, even with no visible yellowing, so I think it's just how this lens shoots.
I must clean this one up, it's still sitting on the shelf all yellow and radioactive! It would be interesting to see how it performs with clear glass...
I had the same experience before and after de-yellowing mine. Be aware that when the condition is advanced the contrast suffers a lot with resolution. I have all versions, 8 element, and the 2 seven element that comes next. They were truly superbs.And, the 8 element is not superior. I have tried two of them with same result, amazing rendition though.
I would like to see some reviews on these lenses: FUJINON EBC SW 28mm f3.5 FUJINON 55mm f1.8 FUJINON 55mm f2.2 For me, they seem to produce the best images. I seem to end up using the 28mm when rolling through all my vintage lenses.
I have the Zuiko and Pentax lenses above, and I find the Olympus lens is better for landscapes (reproduces blues and greens really well), and the Pentax is better for portraiture (because of the yellower, and slightly softer, rendition). I also use the Pentax lens on a couple of old Ricoh KR-10 Super bodies for low light B&W landscapes, and the Pentax lenses are great for that too, as the slightly lower contrast benefits the higher contrast of night photography. (The Ricoh's also have a 16 second timed shutter speed). Ideally, you match your equipment to what you photograph.
Great comparision. I like warmer colours of takumar, but sharpness and contrast of zuiko is awesome. I think that the best option for me could be using zuiko with some yellow filter to make takumar colours effect.
@@zenography7923 if I remember correctly I paid 100$ off Amazon for an absolute mint condition copy. The images look so contrasty and saturated whenever I shoot with it
I'm a big fan of Olympus Zuiko lenses and your video confirmed for me that the Oly lens came out on top. The old OM1 body may be redundant (at least for the moment) but the lenses (especially the 24mm f2.8) continue to perform extremely well on my Olympus OMD with an adapter. Thanks for the video and your observations.
@Zenography . Olympus OM Zuiko lenses were build for film camera’s. Like an OM1. So in this digital age they should be used on a “full frame” digital camera. For example a Sony A7. Not on an Olympus OMD with the micro 4/3 sensor. I have tried it on an OMD-EM10. Did not like it.
The Tak is my best lens, was certainly worth leaving a UV torch on it in a cupboard for a couple of batteries to lessen the yellowing. I have tried other Taks and they seem inconsistent. All need stopping down a bit. Not tried the Olympus.
I've heard it said that the yellowing of the Takumar also makes the lens lose about 1/2 stop of light. I have two 'on the boil' on my UV lamp as I type this!
@Maya Hou No hard feelings ;-) Be careful that your UV light source is not too warm, this can cause issues with the grease inside. Some people use a small lamp from Ikea called "Jansjo". Good luck.
Lovely video. Duly subscribed. I have a spot inside one of my Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 lenses. May be a fungus spot. Is it easy to fix? I think I have two of these anyway. Maybe I'm wrong because I bought too many old OM secondhand film cameras around 2001 and now I've gone digital, very late, since 2014 or so. The adaptors are a great asset to allow use of these beautiful vintage lenses on new cameras.
I've never opened a Zuiko lens but they don't look too difficult, at least as far as the front element goes. The rear is a little more complex as it houses the control mechanism for the aperture. Where's the fungus in your lens? The best place is the front, easily cleanable by removing the front element.
The SMC 50mm f/1.4 Super Tak is the first vintage lens I've ever owned. It was love at first sight for me. I have noticed that it's a very cold lens, compared to say the Super Takumar 35mm f/2. It may be because my lens does not suffer from the yellowing.
I love to use the old Zuiko lenses. The construction and design are gorgeous. What adapters do you use to fit them to a digital camera? Fotodiox? I have one and it seems good, to an OMD EM10ii.
Hi Dave. I started using Olympus OM lenses on a EM10 as well but did not like the crop-factor and the colors. My advice, try a SonyA7 and you will like your lenses much more.
I found using the Pentax 55mm 1.8 easier to nail focus wide open compared to the takumar1.4 i had to spend twice as long getting the focus i wanted but when i did what a wonderful lens . I have the Takumar 1.4 seven blade , the Pentax 55mm 1.8 and the Pentax 50mm 2.0 all three are wonderful lenses. Since i shoot with Pentax cameras they make the most since for me .
Enjoyed the video as always. 2 cool lenses add to these the Minolta MD and the Canon FD and you have 4 excellent 50mm f1.4 lenses with strengths and weaknesses one over the other.
8:4 Your lens blur bokeh on the Olympus is blurred edges but the Pentax circles have bright edges. I really like the edges on your photo from the Pentax there but I really love the Zuilo 85mm f/2 which has very gently blurred out of focus edges which just merge into mixed colours. I would love a 100mm f/2 but the 85 is super.
Hi Zenography, thanks a lot for this brilliant review! What is your opinion of the M42 mount? A friend of mine considers it inferior to the bayonet mount, he used a Ricoh camera back in the film days and said, it was sometimes fiddle to change the lenses and the mount was inaccurate. Best wishes, Ralf
Super-Takumar lenses were made with Thorium-based radioactive glass, so their yellow color. Then came the SMC Takumar lenses made of non-radioactive glass with special coatings.
12:07 then 12:14... Looks like you took some steps closer to the scene, not an even comparison... Focus point and Everything is closer to infinity, making more of the image sharper with the Zuiko, yes? -Hence, the 'softer image' with the closer elements... oh well.. Great lenses! (Both) -Thanks, will purchase whatever I can find in good condition... Love this!
Nicely timed review, sir, thank you - I'm currently looking for one of these two lenses for my Sony A7. I wonder if the higher contrast of the Zuiko might be due to multicoating? (Oh, and I might have to dig out my DVD set of The Prisoner again ;-)
It could be due to the multi coating; it's a more modern lens too. I've heard much that is good about the Tak, but I think I prefer the Olympus. Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 thank you! I had mine (black version like in video) together with another konica 58mm 1,4 (someone told me is radioactive) wrapped in aluminum film and inside omega stainless steel developing tank, but it looks is no necesary for this black nose!. And thank you very much for all your interesting videos!
I'll echo a previous comment and say it's great to review legacy lenses that are both affordable and of good quality. Nice of you to mention the Tak as being radioactive although as you say it has no effect on health! I recall them ALWAYS being yellow though, even when new.
@@zenography7923 yes, as I remember it the SMC coating was yellow but it's going back a long way since I sold them new! I was very fortunate to work for a main dealer who sold all the big brands, Nikon Canon Pentax Olympus Hasselblad and Leica. Funnily enough (and you will like this) TOE who were the UK importers for all Russian cameras were easily the best of the lot to deal with. That's Technical & Optical Equipment btw
With the different picture profiles on a modern digital camera, how does one judge the color rendering on a vintage lens? I mean, is the "standard" profile on a modern dslr or mirrorless camera going to BEST portray the color characteristics of these vintage lenses? My Panasonic mirrorless picture profiles seem quite different, color-wise, from one to another. I use mostly Canon FD.
Well, there are of course standard colours used by graphic designers and others, and camera designers must refer to some sort of standard when setting colour profiles. But as you say, colours do change between different cameras, and to quite a large extent too. It was the same with film - each type has its own take on colour representation and render them differently. It's possibly the same with the eye too - people may well perceive colours differently. So what is 'true' colour? I'll leave that one for the philosophers.
Wow! Thorium. Yes I think you can get colour centres in the glass from ionizing radiation. Sometimes we would get grey areas in the glass when working in the lighting industry. I wonder why neither of these lenses had f/22.
I suppose it wasn't thought necessary. After all, how often do we actually use it? I'm not sure if I've ever used f22 even once, apart from trying to make sunstars that is!
I had both versions of these lenses the Takumar 8 element everyone raves about,and the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 that cam on an OM2n with Motor Drive, for $40.00 at auction... I Bought the Takumar for close to $200.00 with the shipping, and was thrilled to get it... Until I compared the Photos I got with my Sony A7rIII from Both lenses... I know I go against the Grain but I prefer the images from the Zuiko. I had also taken the Yellow out of the Takumar, with UV light, after discovering they were Too Warm for me. I do not like Adjusting things in Software, and prefer images right out of the camera. I kept shooting and Testing in all kinds of situations, trying to find a reason to like that more expensive lens, but never was able to do so. For My Personal Taste, I prefer the Zuiko ... Sold the Takumar, and made a $20.00 profit, as I listed it as cleared with UV light. Very Happy with my Zuiko 50mm f-1.4 lens... Thanks for this fine comparison video.
The difference could be a expected result of the roughly ten years or more difference between the year these lenses were designed. By the late 1970's the rare elements were not longer produced as radioactive materials was not exactly in vogue, even though the optical properties was better with higher refraction with less dispersion.
Agreed; treat the Takumar under UV light to relax the effects of the natural radioactive decay within the thoriated glass...this will reduce the yellowish coloring and increase by about 1 stop the effective light gathering. I have this lens, as well as the Tak 55/1.8...both are very nice vintage lenses. Nikkor's are also very nice (I have two vintage 50/1.4's). The Hexanon 50/1.7 and pancake 40/1.8 are also excellent. Just wish I could find a focal reducer for the Konika Hexanon mounts. If I had that...I would use 40/1.8 the most on my M4/3 Olympus. The Hexanon's are sharp. Of course, the Canon's, Helios's, Jupiter's, Industar's...they are all special in their own way. I have them all and really enjoy discovering new pics with each.
@@zenography7923 Had another binge on legacy lenses the past few months and obtained some wonderful examples. An immaculate Auto-Sear 55/1.4 Tomioka in M42 mount, a near perfect Jupiter 11 135/4 in M39 w/M42 adapter, a Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, a near mint 1957 Jupiter 3 50/1.5 in M39, a 1953 Zorki 3 with another wonderful Jupiter (red) 8 that I swapped out with another Jupiter (red) 8 because the one on the camera was so fine an example for use, a really nice Nikkor 55/1.2 that I have been using the past weeks with a Viltrox FR that I got for a low price on eBay, and lastly a Canon 58/1.2 FL again near mint. I also got some very nice Contax mount examples of Helios 103 53/1.8 and Jupiter 8m 50/2 with the necessary adapters for MFT. I have to stop the binge now...it got a bit out of hand. Enough to keep me busy for next few years, I suppose.
Hello I am waiting for a Super Takumar 50mm 1.4 from Japan and want to ask you how many days I must leave the lens in the sun to get rid of the yellowish on the lens thank you.
I understand it can take up to a month - in strong sunlight. There's a lot of info here: www.photo.net/discuss/threads/super-takumar-lenses-becoming-yellowish-in-time.139772/ Hope that helps!
Just remember that, while the original Super Takumar could outperform the later one in certain situations, the later ones increasingly got a way better coating with subsequent releases, meaning they are more contrasted, less prone to glow and to chromatic aberrations.
Hello there, I've been watching your videos, and I'd like to get a russian film camera. What would you recommend between KIEV 4 and Zorki 4? I'm thinking about lenses too... is there more options about getting M39 mount or contax mount lenses? Best regards!!
I'd definitely go for the Zorki, all things considered. There are many, many more lenses available for it, both Russian and other manufacturers, and its a very capable camera (as is the Kiev).
I own two of the Takumar SMC versions which are quite nice and would probably have far better color rendering. Your version would probably do better if you eliminated the yellowing best as possible. Nice reference between the two lenses. They are both great.
Hi Flora, as far as I'm aware, the 8 element 1.4 Takumar is radioactive; I think you should be fine travelling with it as the radioactivity is very small, and most of it will likely be blocked by your lens cap - at least according to what I've read on this subject. Enjoy that lens!
The Pentax isn't as sharp as the fd 1.4 or the olympus 1.4. The fd gives outstanding colour rendering - again, there isn't much in it between Canon and Olympus. The Pentax gives nice colours too, but somehow it's not my favourite f1.4.
I really love the Zuiko's quality and versatility, but it seems much more flatter than the Pentax, if that makes sense. Like the Pentax better portrays a 3D perspective of objects, making things seem more lively.
I prefer the Olympus Zuiko 50mm F/1.4 I use to own one and also the Pentax M 50mm F/1.4 equivalent. I sold them both and purchased a Pentax M 50mm F/1.2 and loved it. I have since sold it and purchased a Pentax SMC-A 50mm F/1.2 and this is my favourite 50mm so far. The Pentax M 50mm F/1.2 is not that far behind
I got myself a 55mm f2 Takumar for cheap on ebay and measured its radioactivity. It was around 100x of the environmental radiation, so youd probably dont want to place it next to your bed. The smoothest bokeh lens i own, but I find that it has a bit too much CA, at some point it gets distracting. I also think the 55mm doesnt share the same lens design as the 50mm .
@@sunesnigel True. I have the older Auto Takumar eight element 50mmf1.4 and that lens is absolutely amazing. In fact t it's the best lens I've ever used on any camera system.
I have the Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 Radioactive ==> 2250 CPM hot hot hot. This is the hottest CPM of all my lenses. I just use a standard white balance. Works fine. The Olympus colors look interesting. I might have to get one.
I have the Takumar and like it. However, I can see from your video here that the Olympus has more vivid colors. Who made the glass on the Olympus lens? It is something how different it is from the Takumar. On your photos, how much of the differences could just be your white balance and your exposure settings? Did I see your student ID photos in another one of your videos? I remember those days here in California, but you seem to have had much more fun that us over here. Of course we had the military draft here. We were more serious. :-) Jim
Nice video. The Takumar 50 1.8 is a sleeper. It is sharper at 1.8 than the bigger brother in this video at 1.4. The 1.4 can only close to f2 (where the aperture shape is noticeable) at that range (anybody know why, it seem common the 50mm vintage lenses can't click half stop between 1.4 and 2.0). You get really nice bokeh at 1.8, and you get the added bonus of the focusing not as critical as at 1.4.
@@zenography7923 Perhaps you can do a series on 50mm 1.8. This "odd" f1.8 seem to be one which many companies made for the 50mm. I have wondered why, seem f1.7 should be more common.
I have OM-1 with a 50mm 1.8, have been looking for a second body and a 1.4 lens. Couple of months back found a local private sale, went to the guy house and when I checked the camera shutter and film advance locked up #%#@#$%$. Ok maybe the 1.4 lens is OK, no luck full of fungus. The guy was nice and he gave me the camera which is nice since the flash shoe was fine and all the bottom screw on caps were there.
I have heard some people talking smack about the Zuiko f1.4 if the SN is below 1 million. I am not sure what they are talking about yet. I have not used this lens much so far. What is the history of the first 1.1 million that is so different. Mine is around 800,000 and MultCoated. I like the color rendering. What could they be unhappy about? Your lens is under 1 million in fact. I have other f1.4 lenses Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 Auto Chinon MultiCoated 55mm f1.4 and the Olympus Zuiko MC auto-s 50mm f/1.4 Black Nose. There must be some history here. Also, in your video sometimes, not always, there is vignetting in the upper left corner. Are you using a filter or lens hood sometimes? Something is doing it, but only in the upper left and not always.
I have to tell you, I don't see a problem with mine. I just took it out and shot a few photos. It works like it should. Unless I just don't know what to look for. Unless it is like one of these women in a suspense film where you don't find out that they are really crazy until after 6 years or so when they let their guard down. Maybe that is it. I don't know.... I just don't know what to look for. There is no vignetting. Someone with more experience has to clue me in here.
in the images above you can see the Takumar lens is labeled Super Takumar . . . . not SMC Takumar . The Zuiko is labeled MC , The two lenses are a completely unfair comparison as, the Takaumar is not multi coated. The takumar Wins ! The judge is very stoned.
I have the original 8 element Olympus Zuiko 50mm 1.4 and find it better in all aspects to my Super Takumar 7 element 50mm 1.4 The colour and Bokeh look nicer on film, haven't used them on digital cameras.
I did have the silver nose zuiko and I think it was marginally nicer than the black nose. I was initially underwhelmed by the Tak, but it's grown on me since, despite a bit of softness.
@@zenography7923 sold photo in the 70s and 80s. From zenith e to linhoff and everything in between. We pushed stuff to its limits. In house we had a darkroom with focomats and 8by 10 durst.. we used to shoot a newspaper full frame then enlarge the crap out of the neg. Panatomic x . Edge sharpness, pincushion and barrel distortion all showed up. Zuiko was a great performer.
The act of showing lenses only at full aperture is to undersell the virtues of each lens. Critical focus is important and many of your examples didn’t have critical focus. The lenses are designed to be focused at full aperture and stopped down more often than not, for exposure. At f4 to f16 we would really see the resolution and microcontrast of these lenses. Both lenses would be bitingly sharp and have way more 3D pop. I can’t understand anyone taking general scenes and throwing away so much quality. The Takumar was originally designed to beat the Zeiss Planar. I’d love to see what results you get once the lens has been cleared of its yellow cast. No doubt both lenses are great but, not at f1.4 on an overcast day in Wales. I am not sure that you were doing either design justice. Please revisit this pair with a more realistic test.
Your photos are really nice. I appreciate that you review lenses that we don't have to give up eating to afford. I have both lenses and my results were similar. Maybe its because I've been shooting with Zuiko lenses for many years, but I find the Olympus lenses more pleasing. Here, i found the colors much nicer from the Zuiko. The Takumar certainly has a more vintage look that could be useful. Thanks for posting, I'm sure this was a lot of work.
Thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it! Although the Tak was nice I must admit I was a bit underwhelmed by it - mind you, it's a much older lens than the Zuiko, and the yellowing didn't help colour rendition. I'll come back to it in a while after more use, and perhaps I'll discover its strengths. Thanks for watching!
I like the yellowing effect. Makes the photos warm & vintage.
It works well for some shots, and you can always do custom white balance!
It's the radioactivity (thoriated glass). The yellowing goes away with extended exposure to sun- or UV light.
I'm a bit late to the party, but it's worth noting that most Zuikos are quite easily "declicked" if you have the tools and the gumption to open them up. Not very far below the mount there is a tiny ball bearing that clicks into detents in the aperture ring to make the click stops. I have seen a couple with different click mechanisms (later ones with "made in japan" markings on the front or a chrome collar at the mount, IIRC), but usually all you have to do to remove the click stops is remove that BB. "Re-clicking" them is just as simple - just pop the BB back in.
You are a Photographic Historian, for sure. I am learning a lot.
Thank you!
I just got the Olympus 50mm f1.4. The early version with the silver nose. It also has thorium in the glass. Also recently acquired a Konica 50mm F1.4 with thorium. That makes a total of 5 radioactive lenses in my possession. Might be time to invest in a thick metal container lol. Cheers and happy 2022!
Love the images from the Village.
I remember that chess board from "The Prisoner" TV show! When I first saw your photo it reminded me of the show, but I bet I have not seen an episode (a rerun) since the 1970s.
I've assembled a small set of Olympus OM lenses (a 28, 50 and 100mm) to use with a digital mirrorless camera. I never had direct experience with Olympus lenses prior to this and have been positively impressed by them. They are nicely built pieces of equipment. My only criticism of the lenses is that the "throw" or amount of rotation required to focus seems to be rather small compared to other lenses I use. When relying on focus peaking some might find it difficult to focus using older digital cameras or those without better focus peaking systems.
I would like to try a Pentax lens. I have heard from others that color rendition is very good. Thanks for your video!
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it. Hope you're enjoying those Zuikos!
My oh my, just got the Zuiko 1.4 and it is delicious! Thank you, thank you! Namaste.
Enjoy that Zuiko, it is indeed delicious!
I love both these lenses!! I totally agree with your appraisal of their performance, although I am a Pentax man myself. The best word I've found to describe the Takumar lenses is 'understated', both in performance and design. 'Restrained' works as well. Their colours are not as shouty or loud as the Olympus, but have their own subtlety and are more beautiful for it, in my opinion.
May I ask why you have not - or at least as far as I have seen - recommended any Pentax cameras in your videos? Apart from faulty light-meters being a common issue, I consider the Spotmatic F superior to the OM series: just as capable and beautifully made (although slightly larger), but able to mount any M42 lens. For me, the ability to use all the Takumars, as well as a vast array of Soviet and East German glass is a massive advantage.
Also, is it possible that the Pentax in this video turned out slightly inferior in optical performance to the Zuiko because it was a comparison between the last version of the Olympus lens and an earlier Takumar? It may have been a closer call if it was a Super-Multi-Coated version or the rebodied SMC lens...
Either way they are both fantastic lenses!
Thank you very much for the wonderful content, it has been such a help in looking for ways to expand my photography.
Great video on the two little wonders. Jewel-like, in both appearance and capabilities, is an apt description for these two 50s. Legendary, in fact. I'm more familiar with the Takumar than Zuiko but have seen outstanding samples taken by both.
So, I own both of these lenses now. I think your A"B comparision photos really point out how you need to work with the contrast and brightness more. These should be white balanced and then focused manually using software and a large computer screen when shooting. I think you will get better results.
However, all that being said, I like the video. It caused me to add the Olympus to my collection. Plus, you need to be very careful not to scratch the rear coating on the Super Takumar.
I have the Takumar 50mm f/1.4. I really like it. The build quality is great, and the photos it renders are quite nice.
I have an 8 element version of the Super Takumar on it's way to me. I enjoyed your photos from Portmerion, Wales. I spent a few night there about 25 years ago, such a lovely place. Thanks for your videos.
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying the videos. And that 8 element Tak sounds lovely - mine's the 7!
Have both of those lenses and adore them both for different reasons...
You can't go wrong with these lenses except your focus.
portmeirion @ 1:15 Really enjoyed my stay there, took my M3 which I had at the time with an old Summicron 50mm
M3 plus Summicron - you're lucky, a lovely little kit!
Be seeing you 👁👌
Similarly, I was a little underwhelmed when using the Takumar 50mm 1.4 compared to the Zuiko equivalent.
However I found some of the other Takumar lenses, particularly the 55mm 1.8 and f2 surprisingly rewarding to use.
Obviously this is purely subjective.
Lovely discourse Mr Zen.
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
I have the zuiko 50mm f1.4 and it's one of my favorite lens. Love the color it produces.
Me too, one of my favourite lenses!
This is a handy comparison! The yellowing in your copy of the Super Takumar looks pretty advanced. After I de-yellowed mine with an LED lamp, I got images that were sharper and more contrasty from it. Colors are still a little warm, even with no visible yellowing, so I think it's just how this lens shoots.
I must clean this one up, it's still sitting on the shelf all yellow and radioactive! It would be interesting to see how it performs with clear glass...
I had the same experience before and after de-yellowing mine. Be aware that when the condition is advanced the contrast suffers a lot with resolution. I have all versions, 8 element, and the 2 seven element that comes next. They were truly superbs.And, the 8 element is not superior. I have tried two of them with same result, amazing rendition though.
Very nice review. Beautiful images and good comparison
I'm a lover of Olympus Zuiko lenses and have a many of them
I would like to see some reviews on these lenses:
FUJINON EBC SW 28mm f3.5
FUJINON 55mm f1.8
FUJINON 55mm f2.2
For me, they seem to produce the best images.
I seem to end up using the 28mm when rolling through all my vintage lenses.
I have the Super Takumar 50 1.4 - love it : )
Hope you're enjoying it!
I have the Zuiko and Pentax lenses above, and I find the Olympus lens is better for landscapes (reproduces blues and greens really well), and the Pentax is better for portraiture (because of the yellower, and slightly softer, rendition).
I also use the Pentax lens on a couple of old Ricoh KR-10 Super bodies for low light B&W landscapes, and the Pentax lenses are great for that too, as the slightly lower contrast benefits the higher contrast of night photography. (The Ricoh's also have a 16 second timed shutter speed).
Ideally, you match your equipment to what you photograph.
Absolutely, couldn't agree more.
Great comparision. I like warmer colours of takumar, but sharpness and contrast of zuiko is awesome. I think that the best option for me could be using zuiko with some yellow filter to make takumar colours effect.
Or maybe add yellowing to taste with your favorite post processing software. Lots of control that way.
My nikkor 50mm 1.4AI on my D700 produces some of the most amazing images I've seen from a vintage lens
Would love to try this lens!
@@zenography7923 if I remember correctly I paid 100$ off Amazon for an absolute mint condition copy. The images look so contrasty and saturated whenever I shoot with it
I really hope you get your mits on a Topcor RE-AUTO 58mm f1.4, it's incredible.
Thanks for a really beautiful video. Just curious to know. Is photography your passion or profession or both? Probably both.
Love the bokeh my Zuiko 50 1.4 produces, at times to me the bokeh looks comparable to my EF50 1.2L, which is quite interesting to know 😊
I'm a big fan of Olympus Zuiko lenses and your video confirmed for me that the Oly lens came out on top. The old OM1 body may be redundant (at least for the moment) but the lenses (especially the 24mm f2.8) continue to perform extremely well on my Olympus OMD with an adapter. Thanks for the video and your observations.
@David Cooper , try it on a Sony A7 (mark 1). You will love it!
I've heard great things about the 24mm, would like to try one one day...
@Zenography . Olympus OM Zuiko lenses were build for film camera’s. Like an OM1. So in this digital age they should be used on a “full frame” digital camera. For example a Sony A7. Not on an Olympus OMD with the micro 4/3 sensor. I have tried it on an OMD-EM10. Did not like it.
The Tak is my best lens, was certainly worth leaving a UV torch on it in a cupboard for a couple of batteries to lessen the yellowing. I have tried other Taks and they seem inconsistent. All need stopping down a bit. Not tried the Olympus.
Would help if the shots where identical and you focused on same point both times.Would only require mounting to a tripod and switching lenses !!
Vodoo Agreed!
I've heard it said that the yellowing of the Takumar also makes the lens lose about 1/2 stop of light. I have two 'on the boil' on my UV lamp as I type this!
@Maya Hou No hard feelings ;-) Be careful that your UV light source is not too warm, this can cause issues with the grease inside. Some people use a small lamp from Ikea called "Jansjo". Good luck.
Lovely video. Duly subscribed. I have a spot inside one of my Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 lenses. May be a fungus spot. Is it easy to fix? I think I have two of these anyway. Maybe I'm wrong because I bought too many old OM secondhand film cameras around 2001 and now I've gone digital, very late, since 2014 or so. The adaptors are a great asset to allow use of these beautiful vintage lenses on new cameras.
I've never opened a Zuiko lens but they don't look too difficult, at least as far as the front element goes. The rear is a little more complex as it houses the control mechanism for the aperture. Where's the fungus in your lens? The best place is the front, easily cleanable by removing the front element.
The SMC 50mm f/1.4 Super Tak is the first vintage lens I've ever owned. It was love at first sight for me. I have noticed that it's a very cold lens, compared to say the Super Takumar 35mm f/2. It may be because my lens does not suffer from the yellowing.
Hope you're enjoying those Taks! Thanks for watching.
I love to use the old Zuiko lenses. The construction and design are gorgeous. What adapters do you use to fit them to a digital camera? Fotodiox? I have one and it seems good, to an OMD EM10ii.
I shoot on full frame so there's no need for a focal reducer - just a simple so called 'dumb' adaptor.
Hi Dave. I started using Olympus OM lenses on a EM10 as well but did not like the crop-factor and the colors. My advice, try a SonyA7 and you will like your lenses much more.
I found using the Pentax 55mm 1.8 easier to nail focus wide open compared to the takumar1.4 i had to spend twice as long getting the focus i wanted but when i did what a wonderful lens . I have the Takumar 1.4 seven blade , the Pentax 55mm 1.8 and the Pentax 50mm 2.0 all three are wonderful lenses. Since i shoot with Pentax cameras they make the most since for me .
Enjoyed the video as always. 2 cool lenses add to these the Minolta MD and the Canon FD and you have 4 excellent 50mm f1.4 lenses with strengths and weaknesses one over the other.
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
is that port miriam from the prisoner series at the beginning? great video again.
Yes, Port Merion it is! Well spotted!
Some other good contenders you could include in your next comparison are; the Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.4, the Canon 50mm f/1.4 S.S.C.
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll keep them in mind!
8:4 Your lens blur bokeh on the Olympus is blurred edges but the Pentax circles have bright edges. I really like the edges on your photo from the Pentax there but I really love the Zuilo 85mm f/2 which has very gently blurred out of focus edges which just merge into mixed colours. I would love a 100mm f/2 but the 85 is super.
That Zuiko 85 is one of the nicest lenses I've ever used, and thoroughly deserves its reputation!
Hi Zenography, thanks a lot for this brilliant review! What is your opinion of the M42 mount? A friend of mine considers it inferior to the bayonet mount, he used a Ricoh camera back in the film days and said, it was sometimes fiddle to change the lenses and the mount was inaccurate. Best wishes, Ralf
The 8-elements version is the best 50mm i've ever used.
I have also this 7-element version which is very good on it's own.
I should very much like to try the 8 element version - maybe one day!
Super-Takumar lenses were made with Thorium-based radioactive glass, so their yellow color. Then came the SMC Takumar lenses made of non-radioactive glass with special coatings.
The SMC is radioactive too
12:07 then 12:14... Looks like you took some steps closer to the scene, not an even comparison...
Focus point and Everything is closer to infinity, making more of the image sharper with the Zuiko, yes?
-Hence, the 'softer image' with the closer elements... oh well.. Great lenses! (Both)
-Thanks, will purchase whatever I can find in good condition... Love this!
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying the channel!
Nicely timed review, sir, thank you - I'm currently looking for one of these two lenses for my Sony A7. I wonder if the higher contrast of the Zuiko might be due to multicoating? (Oh, and I might have to dig out my DVD set of The Prisoner again ;-)
It could be due to the multi coating; it's a more modern lens too. I've heard much that is good about the Tak, but I think I prefer the Olympus. Thanks for watching!
This Olympus Zuiko 1.4 is the radioactive lens maden with thorium glass ?
As I understand it, only the early, silver nose version is radioactive - the later black nose versions are not.
@@zenography7923 thank you! I had mine (black version like in video) together with another konica 58mm 1,4 (someone told me is radioactive) wrapped in aluminum film and inside omega stainless steel developing tank, but it looks is no necesary for this black nose!. And thank you very much for all your interesting videos!
I'll echo a previous comment and say it's great to review legacy lenses that are both affordable and of good quality. Nice of you to mention the Tak as being radioactive although as you say it has no effect on health! I recall them ALWAYS being yellow though, even when new.
That's interesting, perhaps the yellow was there from the start?
@@zenography7923 yes, as I remember it the SMC coating was yellow but it's going back a long way since I sold them new! I was very fortunate to work for a main dealer who sold all the big brands, Nikon Canon Pentax Olympus Hasselblad and Leica. Funnily enough (and you will like this) TOE who were the UK importers for all Russian cameras were easily the best of the lot to deal with. That's Technical & Optical Equipment btw
With the different picture profiles on a modern digital camera, how does one judge the color rendering on a vintage lens? I mean, is the "standard" profile on a modern dslr or mirrorless camera going to BEST portray the color characteristics of these vintage lenses? My Panasonic mirrorless picture profiles seem quite different, color-wise, from one to another. I use mostly Canon FD.
Well, there are of course standard colours used by graphic designers and others, and camera designers must refer to some sort of standard when setting colour profiles. But as you say, colours do change between different cameras, and to quite a large extent too. It was the same with film - each type has its own take on colour representation and render them differently. It's possibly the same with the eye too - people may well perceive colours differently. So what is 'true' colour? I'll leave that one for the philosophers.
Wow! Thorium. Yes I think you can get colour centres in the glass from ionizing radiation. Sometimes we would get grey areas in the glass when working in the lighting industry. I wonder why neither of these lenses had f/22.
I suppose it wasn't thought necessary. After all, how often do we actually use it? I'm not sure if I've ever used f22 even once, apart from trying to make sunstars that is!
I had both versions of these lenses the Takumar 8 element everyone raves about,and the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 that cam on an OM2n with Motor Drive,
for $40.00 at auction... I Bought the Takumar for close to $200.00 with the shipping, and was thrilled to get it...
Until I compared the Photos I got with my Sony A7rIII from Both lenses...
I know I go against the Grain but I prefer the images from the Zuiko. I had also taken the Yellow out of the Takumar, with UV light, after discovering
they were Too Warm for me. I do not like Adjusting things in Software, and prefer images right out of the camera.
I kept shooting and Testing in all kinds of situations, trying to find a reason to like that more expensive lens, but never was able to do so.
For My Personal Taste, I prefer the Zuiko ... Sold the Takumar, and made a $20.00 profit, as I listed it as cleared with UV light.
Very Happy with my Zuiko 50mm f-1.4 lens... Thanks for this fine comparison video.
Thank you for your great work.
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying the channel!
The difference could be a expected result of the roughly ten years or more difference between the year these lenses were designed.
By the late 1970's the rare elements were not longer produced as radioactive materials was not exactly in vogue, even though the optical properties was better with higher refraction with less dispersion.
I think that's probably the reason, yes. Both are nice in their own way, but on balance I prefer the Zuiko.
Agreed; treat the Takumar under UV light to relax the effects of the natural radioactive decay within the thoriated glass...this will reduce the yellowish coloring and increase by about 1 stop the effective light gathering. I have this lens, as well as the Tak 55/1.8...both are very nice vintage lenses.
Nikkor's are also very nice (I have two vintage 50/1.4's). The Hexanon 50/1.7 and pancake 40/1.8 are also excellent. Just wish I could find a focal reducer for the Konika Hexanon mounts. If I had that...I would use 40/1.8 the most on my M4/3 Olympus. The Hexanon's are sharp.
Of course, the Canon's, Helios's, Jupiter's, Industar's...they are all special in their own way. I have them all and really enjoy discovering new pics with each.
Hope you're enjoying those lenses! Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 Had another binge on legacy lenses the past few months and obtained some wonderful examples. An immaculate Auto-Sear 55/1.4 Tomioka in M42 mount, a near perfect Jupiter 11 135/4 in M39 w/M42 adapter, a Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, a near mint 1957 Jupiter 3 50/1.5 in M39, a 1953 Zorki 3 with another wonderful Jupiter (red) 8 that I swapped out with another Jupiter (red) 8 because the one on the camera was so fine an example for use, a really nice Nikkor 55/1.2 that I have been using the past weeks with a Viltrox FR that I got for a low price on eBay, and lastly a Canon 58/1.2 FL again near mint. I also got some very nice Contax mount examples of Helios 103 53/1.8 and Jupiter 8m 50/2 with the necessary adapters for MFT.
I have to stop the binge now...it got a bit out of hand. Enough to keep me busy for next few years, I suppose.
Excellent video
great have you seen the zuiko 50 1:1.2
I'd love to get my hands on one of these! Maybe someday...
Hello I am waiting for a Super Takumar 50mm 1.4 from Japan and want to ask you how many days I must leave the lens in the sun to get rid of the yellowish on the lens thank you.
I understand it can take up to a month - in strong sunlight. There's a lot of info here: www.photo.net/discuss/threads/super-takumar-lenses-becoming-yellowish-in-time.139772/
Hope that helps!
Just remember that, while the original Super Takumar could outperform the later one in certain situations, the later ones increasingly got a way better coating with subsequent releases, meaning they are more contrasted, less prone to glow and to chromatic aberrations.
So far, this is the only Tak I've tested; was a little underwhelmed at first, but on further acquaintance, it's a gorgeous lens!
Hello there, I've been watching your videos, and I'd like to get a russian film camera. What would you recommend between KIEV 4 and Zorki 4? I'm thinking about lenses too... is there more options about getting M39 mount or contax mount lenses?
Best regards!!
I'd definitely go for the Zorki, all things considered. There are many, many more lenses available for it, both Russian and other manufacturers, and its a very capable camera (as is the Kiev).
I own two of the Takumar SMC versions which are quite nice and would probably have far better color rendering. Your version would probably do better if you eliminated the yellowing best as possible. Nice reference between the two lenses. They are both great.
tried them all, even the summilux: the contax planar is by far the best of all.
Dear Sir, Can you please tell me if the Super Takumar 50 1.4 , 8 element is radioactive or not? If yes , can I travel with it? many thanks
Hi Flora, as far as I'm aware, the 8 element 1.4 Takumar is radioactive; I think you should be fine travelling with it as the radioactivity is very small, and most of it will likely be blocked by your lens cap - at least according to what I've read on this subject. Enjoy that lens!
@@zenography7923 Thank you very much for your reply.
Wich camera do you use, because don't the cameras themselves affect the colour most?
Different sensors certainly render colour differently, but lenses do too! I use a sony a7 by the way.
How do these lenses compare to the Canon FD 50mm f1.4 SSC?
The Pentax isn't as sharp as the fd 1.4 or the olympus 1.4. The fd gives outstanding colour rendering - again, there isn't much in it between Canon and Olympus. The Pentax gives nice colours too, but somehow it's not my favourite f1.4.
At 4:30, I suddenly lost interest in the Takumar because nothing intrigues me more than a classic Lotus Esprit.
The original underwater car!
I really love the Zuiko's quality and versatility, but it seems much more flatter than the Pentax, if that makes sense. Like the Pentax better portrays a 3D perspective of objects, making things seem more lively.
How does your Takumar perform in B&W images?
Very nicely actually, seems to come into its own with bw - maybe it's the radiation induced yellow tint!
I'm lucky..i have the 8 element version - it is a sublime lens...
I prefer the Olympus Zuiko 50mm F/1.4 I use to own one and also the Pentax M 50mm F/1.4 equivalent. I sold them both and purchased a Pentax M 50mm F/1.2 and loved it. I have since sold it and purchased a Pentax SMC-A 50mm F/1.2 and this is my favourite 50mm so far. The Pentax M 50mm F/1.2 is not that far behind
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
I got myself a 55mm f2 Takumar for cheap on ebay and measured its radioactivity. It was around 100x of the environmental radiation, so youd probably dont want to place it next to your bed. The smoothest bokeh lens i own, but I find that it has a bit too much CA, at some point it gets distracting. I also think the 55mm doesnt share the same lens design as the 50mm .
I've always found he Pentax-M 50 1.4 to be superior to the SMC Takumar 50 1.4. I have the Olympus f.zuiko 50 1.8 and I love it as well.
I don't know if it matters but it's worth noting he did not have the SMC version of the Takumar.
@@sunesnigel True. I have the older Auto Takumar eight element 50mmf1.4 and that lens is absolutely amazing. In fact t it's the best lens I've ever used on any camera system.
I have the Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 Radioactive ==> 2250 CPM hot hot hot.
This is the hottest CPM of all my lenses. I just use a standard white balance. Works fine.
The Olympus colors look interesting. I might have to get one.
If you do, I don't think you'll regret it!
I have the Takumar and like it. However, I can see from your video here that the Olympus has more vivid colors. Who made the glass on the Olympus lens? It is something how different it is from the Takumar. On your photos, how much of the differences could just be your white balance and your exposure settings?
Did I see your student ID photos in another one of your videos? I remember those days here in California, but you seem to have had much more fun that us over here. Of course we had the military draft here. We were more serious. :-)
Jim
Nice video. The Takumar 50 1.8 is a sleeper. It is sharper at 1.8 than the bigger brother in this video at 1.4. The 1.4 can only close to f2 (where the aperture shape is noticeable) at that range (anybody know why, it seem common the 50mm vintage lenses can't click half stop between 1.4 and 2.0). You get really nice bokeh at 1.8, and you get the added bonus of the focusing not as critical as at 1.4.
That 1.8 sounds nice - haven't used it yet, but maybe someday!
@@zenography7923 Perhaps you can do a series on 50mm 1.8. This "odd" f1.8 seem to be one which many companies made for the 50mm. I have wondered why, seem f1.7 should be more common.
I have OM-1 with a 50mm 1.8, have been looking for a second body and a 1.4 lens. Couple of months back found a local private sale, went to the guy house and when I checked the camera shutter and film advance locked up #%#@#$%$. Ok maybe the 1.4 lens is OK, no luck full of fungus. The guy was nice and he gave me the camera which is nice since the flash shoe was fine and all the bottom screw on caps were there.
Almost forgot picked up a minty Om-1 and 1.4 50mm lens off of Facebook Market place for $60 US didn't even try to talk him down.
Now that was quite a find!
I guess you got some useful parts at least!
thanks
Thank you!
Enjoyed. Subscribed Thanks for sharing
And thank you!
@@zenography7923 You're welcome
I have heard some people talking smack about the Zuiko f1.4 if the SN is below 1 million. I am not sure what they are talking about yet. I have not used this lens much so far. What is the history of the first 1.1 million that is so different. Mine is around 800,000 and MultCoated. I like the color rendering. What could they be unhappy about? Your lens is under 1 million in fact.
I have other f1.4 lenses
Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4
Auto Chinon MultiCoated 55mm f1.4
and the Olympus Zuiko MC auto-s 50mm f/1.4 Black Nose.
There must be some history here.
Also, in your video sometimes, not always, there is vignetting in the upper left corner. Are you using a filter or lens hood sometimes? Something is doing it, but only in the upper left and not always.
I have to tell you, I don't see a problem with mine. I just took it out and shot a few photos. It works like it should. Unless I just don't know what to look for. Unless it is like one of these women in a suspense film where you don't find out that they are really crazy until after 6 years or so when they let their guard down. Maybe that is it. I don't know....
I just don't know what to look for. There is no vignetting. Someone with more experience has to clue me in here.
in the images above you can see the Takumar lens is labeled Super Takumar . . . . not SMC Takumar . The Zuiko is labeled MC , The two lenses are a completely unfair comparison as, the Takaumar is not multi coated. The takumar Wins ! The judge is very stoned.
This 2 lenses can not compared well. Because the Olympus is much newer and has multicoating that helps much with Its Performance.
I know what you mean but they can be compared for what they are and that's their differences and the effect it has on the final image before editing
I have the original 8 element Olympus Zuiko 50mm 1.4 and find it better in all aspects to my Super Takumar 7 element 50mm 1.4
The colour and Bokeh look nicer on film, haven't used them on digital cameras.
I did have the silver nose zuiko and I think it was marginally nicer than the black nose. I was initially underwhelmed by the Tak, but it's grown on me since, despite a bit of softness.
отлично!
Perhaps you should have compared the Zuiko to a Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR instead.
Zuikos are beautifull lenses.
I couldn't agree more!
@@zenography7923 sold photo in the 70s and 80s. From zenith e to linhoff and everything in between. We pushed stuff to its limits. In house we had a darkroom with focomats and 8by 10 durst.. we used to shoot a newspaper full frame then enlarge the crap out of the neg. Panatomic x . Edge sharpness, pincushion and barrel distortion all showed up. Zuiko was a great performer.
The act of showing lenses only at full aperture is to undersell the virtues of each lens. Critical focus is important and many of your examples didn’t have critical focus. The lenses are designed to be focused at full aperture and stopped down more often than not, for exposure. At f4 to f16 we would really see the resolution and microcontrast of these lenses. Both lenses would be bitingly sharp and have way more 3D pop. I can’t understand anyone taking general scenes and throwing away so much quality. The Takumar was originally designed to beat the Zeiss Planar. I’d love to see what results you get once the lens has been cleared of its yellow cast. No doubt both lenses are great but, not at f1.4 on an overcast day in Wales. I am not sure that you were doing either design justice. Please revisit this pair with a more realistic test.
ah, Portmerion
As Homer Simpson said, 'I am not a number! Oh, wait, I'm number Five...'
Your pictures is Horrible,no contrast, no sharpness.Photos sans intréret,sans contraste,sans définition.Zéro oooo....
Ｇｏｏｄ ｖｉｄｅｏfrom japan
I like the Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 8s