The 50mm f1.4 is ghosty and halo-y on a speedbooster. I have that same problem so I got a 55 and it works like a charm. Also, my 50mm works fine on my canon DSLR.
How do you manage the activated pixels from radiation? Or do you see it as some sort of „film look“ when radiation introduce white blinking pixels? At least on my R7 when noise reduction is off and in some capturing modes the introduced noise by the radiation can get annoying, luckily its fine for downsampled 4k and still ok at 4k60 uncropped. What i really love the most about the 50mm 1.4 SMC Takumar: Wide open it introduce amazing looking flares and a very creamy look, stopped down to F/2 basically most of the flares and „glimmer/creamy look“ is gone and its even sharper than a Canon EF 50 1.4 @F/2.8 i had for a while. I feel the 50 1.4 Takumar is somewhat 2 lenses in once.
I’ve never actually noticed this on mine. None of the Pentax have thorium. Some (but not all) of the super Takumar do. Intrigued tho. Maybe it has something to do with the specific camera?
@@joshkiddfilms1295 my Canon R7s sensor is sensitive to it, mainly white dots/„scratches“ appear and very very rarely even blue dots in the video Its by far not even close to as noisy as if you would hold your camera at the firemans boot in the jupiter factory in chernobyl but still radioactivity is clearly visible in the videos
@@joshkiddfilms1295 and yes most of them are radioactive, watch one of my latest short clips the SMC Takumar 50 1.4, serial number 5.655.555 from about 1969-1972 i measured with 7,2 microSievert/h (0,1 yS/h is background). This 7,2yS/h are not even realistic since thorium is a alpha emitter and my geiger counter only detects beta, gamma and x-ray properly so its definately above 7,x yS/h
I like the video very much, however just one correction. Takumar is not a "division" of Asahi Optical (now Pentax - now owned by Ricoh). Takumar is the name that Asahi Optical gave to its lenses, notably but not exclusively those for its own SLR cameras. Named after the Japanese-American portrait painter, Takuma Kajiwara (梶原啄磨, Kajiwara Takuma), whose brother Kumao Kajiwara founded Asahi Optical.
Thank you for clarifying. But Asahi Optical also made the Pentax K mounts as well right? And those couldn’t be more different than the Takumar, so what was the determining factor? The camera body it was being made for ?
@@joshkiddfilms1295 - Hi Josh, Yes Asahi Optical started in 1919. They developed the SLR after WW2 and used the M42 standard mount, which became so prevalent that it just became known as the Pentax mount. They bought the name Pentax from Zeiss (whose own camera brand was Contax) for their new SLR. During this time they used Takumar as the brand name for their M42 lenses. From that base, they added their lens coatings - one of the first to do single coatings, then multiple coatings. During this time Pentax SLR camera dominated the market like Canon does today. The Pentax brand name became so popular, that Asahi Optical changed their name to be Pentax. --- continued in your next question.
@@joshkiddfilms1295 -- continued from the previous question. Yes, in the mid 70s after buying the Pentax name from Zeiss, the sort of secret (non public) partnership/cooperation continued. Zeiss and Pentax co-designed the Pentax K mount, along with a number of lenses - the SMC Pentax 28mm F2 is the same as the Zeiss Contax 28mm f2 "Hollywood" lens. Also, the SMC Pentax 15mm F3.5 and several more came out of the cooperation. The transition (reasons) from the M42 to the K mount is laid out here --- www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/the-evolution-of-the-pentax-m42-mount.html Anyway, Zeiss wanted to move their camera manufacturing from Germany to Japan to control costs and were looking to extend the partnership. Something occurred - and Zeiss went to Yashica camera to do their Contax cameras. The Contax C/Y mount is essentially the K mount with thicker flanges and a tad longer registration distance - so that it would not fit on Pentax cameras. Also, the Contax T* coatings started out as the SMC coating from Pentax. For most of the 70's and 80's all the camera company lens coatings were licensed from Pentax.
big thanks for this video was exactly what I was looking for, just picked up super takumar 50 1.4 and 28 3.5 for my bmpcc6K. Have not received them yet and was worried that I chose the wrong version. what is the difference between auto 55 1.8 super takumar, and the other super takumar 55 1.8
I own a number of Takumar and Pentax lenses . I have four Pentax DSLR cameras. I have Takumar 35mm3.5 , Takumar 50mm1.4, Takumar 135mm3.5. Pentax K mount lenses 28mm M lenses , 50mm 2.0 ,55mm1.8 ,100mm2.8 M lenses , 135mm3.5 M lens, 150mm 3.5 M lens . I like the Pentax M lenses as they are small lenses and multi coated .
I’m tossing up between investing in canon FD (probably FDn) or Super takumar / SMC lenses. Looks wise, how are they different in your opinion? I’m looking for a mic of clean (least chromatic aberration possible) but still gets that vintage unique look. Compatibility isn’t a problem for me because I’m on Sony system. Easy to adapt!
Regular FD and super Takumar are fairly similar. I think the Takumar have more Interesting flaring, but both share a similar textured look. I don’t think you can really go wrong with either, I have and use both.
Hi there! Yes I still have my 85 1.8 k mount. It’s a wonderful lens and my go to lens for my anamorphic setup. It’s pretty different than the super Takumar tho. It’s very smooth with solid contrast and sharpness, whereas the Takumar is softer and lower contrast with more texture
I would say fairly easy. The m42 is just a screw on metal ring...the K mount is also a metal ring that just has a locking mechanism. Ive been using the K to EF for years with no issues with any EF mounts. The only time this presented a problem was on my .64 metabones EF mount. It didnt seem to like the K mount adapters for some reason
Hi, Josh! Thank you for your videos! Very good channel! Subscribed! Is it possible to use SMC Pentax M (PK mount) with Viltrox Ef M2ii and BMPCC4k, using PK to EOS ring adapter?
Hi! its hard to say for sure. I tend to have no issues with the pentax conversion rings on normal EF mounts like the pocket 6k, but was having some issues with the speed boosters and using the pentax that way,..im not sure specifically if it would work with the viltrox. I remember having issues with the metabones
Great video you have made there. I have the 85mm 1.9 and love it and have just bought the 50 1.4 Takumar but I'm keen to know if the smc 50 1.4 k mount is a sharper lens to get as the samples you've shown look sharp and really nice?
I find the Pentax aren’t necessarily sharper per se, but they are just kind of smoother and less textured. Almost more vanilla and basic if you will, which can be a good or a bad thing really depending on what you are trying to achieve. I really like the Pentax as taking lenses for anamorphics, but character wise they don’t have a ton
Oh ok, that is useful info, thank you. I now just need to think of a good vintage wider lens that has character but doesn't look low quality! Any fast suggestions are appreciated as a new direction for me to look at@@joshkiddfilms1295
Thank you! I like Takumar more narrative based stuff, or anything I want more of vintage or textured vibe on. The Pentax look much more modern and are great for most modern applications.
Hey there. Yes they are full frame as they were originally designed for 35mm film. Both the m42 and Pentax k mounts have simple non glass adapters to convert them to L or E or even EF.
I don’t have it anymore although it was a fantastic lens. Sold it awhile back to help pay for something else I can’t remember off the top of my head. I have since added the 35 tho and I think it’s a bit sharper.
Super helpful! Thanks for this, now I want sets of both lol Question, for the Pentax smc did you get k mounts of m42, I’m seeing mostly k mounts online.
Hi Josh, not kept up with you for a year or so, trust you are all well. Am getting a Takumar 6x7 150mm for my BMPCC range, do you foresee any probs ? I already have different brands 135mm, but with the bigger glass think the crop factor will have a chromatic aberration benefit ie less curvature, and better edge definition, and with speed booster may give the usual one stop benefit. I don't think there will be any vignetting but am taking a punt and have bought plus converter to EF. Have you ever tried the 6x7 ? My collection of vintage lenses will pay even more dividends soon as there is a new product that allows autofocus of manual lenses now out and will be expanded to use as a stand alone product that is size of a cigarette packet and sits on top of your camera. Hoping to get as soon as it hits the general market place. Makes obsolete camera auto focus systems that hunt in low light, makes nonsense of buying autofocus lenses which may eventually dissapear. The new technology will soon be built into all DSLR's and so even current state of the art camera bodies with their contrast based autofocus systems or similar will drop hugely in value. It really is the future of fail proof focussing. Am sure you have your eye on this innovation ?
I haven't ever used the 6X7 stuff but I am tracking with you about how it should exhibit less curvature being that its pulling more from the center of the glass due to the higher coverage area. Are you talking about Lidar for the AF?
@@joshkiddfilms1295 The centre of a larger lens Glass I think theoretically is less curvature so IMHO think has benefit. I apply same logic to adding eg x0.47 very large diameter WA addons for any lens. Whenever I bought specific WA lens for my old cameras I found total loss of sharpness at the edges of the video frame. I bought three huge 83mm ( x.64 from memory ) WA lenses that I used on my BMPCC using various lenses and found the extra width appreciable, and with negligible edge softness. These WA lens addons were for Broadcast Cameras so I believed the glass would be high quality optics free of impurities in their manufacture and was right, That's probably why they retailed at around $ 700 , even lens hood was massive at $ 259. Last one I bought with missing lens hood which was a bummer but at least have 3 of these attachments. Yes the Linar gadget is on advance order only, and supplies imminent, but this first model is gimbal companion only, and specific to a gimble user. I want the next model which will be stand alone, but think it will need a Phone app to mimic the gimbal LCD display for it's settings use. You can save focussing gear travel specifics for several lenses, and some neat graphics showing focus animation, and lens focus pulls can be preset and saved too. I suspect the next model may be similar priced at $499 or dearer
Really excited to see this! Just got my Super Takumars in last week! Have you compared the different Pentax SMC lenses. I've received conflicting opinions on which model is the best.
Awesome! I’ve had a few other Pentax smc lenses than in this video. I haven’t really found a bad one, but these ones I talk about are fantastic. The 30 2.8 was another one i had and it was great as well.
Thanks for sharing your experience! I was wondering what option (if any) you grab for your wide establishing shots on wedding days? Also, do you just roll with one of the lens sets on wedding days, or do you use both? How do you narrow your decision of which set to use, if only one? Thanks!
Currently I mainly use the 35 and 50 takumars on my varicam 35 for most of the day, but I also carry an s1h in a holster with the 28mm Pentax that I use for establishing and wider shots
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Sweet! Sounds like you pull it off as a one man show on wedding days? I always felt like I needed at least one assistant. Is there a reason you dropped the bmpcc's from the line up? I was thinking of grabbing some and starting back weddings. I took a couple years off from doing them.
I haven’t shot the super Takumar. I have one but it’s all gazed out so it’s hard to tell really how good it is, but I would think they’d be fairly similar. Coatings should be close
Hi Josh, that for the video and the good work. If I may ask, you seem to have 2 versions of the 85mm Pentax SMC Takumar (f1.9 and f1.8). Have you noticed any significant differences between the two lenses? Thanks
So i have the super Takumar 85 1.9 and a Pentax SMC 85 1.8 k mount. They are very different. The Pentax has much more coatings one every surface and has more contrast and pop. The super Takumar is softer wide open and has more of a textured look to it. Both great but the Takumar i would say is a bit more filmic whereas the Pentax slightly more modern looking
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Thanks a lot. I am trying to decide between the cheaper Takumar 85mm f1.9, and the SMC Takumar 85mm 1.8. But I can't find any decent comparisons of the two online.
@@blackrose5774 I’ve only used a few of the SMC Takumars, but to my eyes they didn’t really look that different than the super Takumar ones and paired pretty nicely. I don’t think you can really go wrong either way. The 85 1.9 has the hexagonal type bokeh which is really unique and cool looking though. Not sure if the 1.8 is the same way
Say, can you tell me if your Canon FDs are FD or FDn? I read the only real difference is FD is metal and FDn is plastic and the mounts are different,, but image quality is the same?
I had FDn. Most of them are basically plastic. The FD-L are built much more robustly wirh mainly Metal. Image quality differences between ssc and fdn should be very minimal. Both used the same coatings
@@khaleel898 I really like them so far. The form factor just makes shooting and rigging it up a lot easier. Being able to stick a big npf on the back that lasts six hours is pretty clutch for events.
The 50mm f1.4 is ghosty and halo-y on a speedbooster. I have that same problem so I got a 55 and it works like a charm. Also, my 50mm works fine on my canon DSLR.
Cool! I don’t really see the halo when I’m not using a speedbooster. 🙂
Thanks for all the information, Josh. I subscribed to your channel! Love your work!
The test at the end of the video is super interesting! 😊
Your footage looks amazing. Crazy what you achieve with vintage glass.
Thanks so much!
Great video. I own only minolta lenses but thought about selling them and diving into pentax
Thanks. Minolta are great but like FD can be a pain to adapt to EF. The Pentax are a great solution for that
I got the 50mm, 135mm and 100mm macro. They are all great for my fuji.
Awesome! Love that
I have been thrilled with my Super Takumar so far taking photos, I'm looking forward to doing videos with it.
Love that! They are great.
How do you manage the activated pixels from radiation? Or do you see it as some sort of „film look“ when radiation introduce white blinking pixels? At least on my R7 when noise reduction is off and in some capturing modes the introduced noise by the radiation can get annoying, luckily its fine for downsampled 4k and still ok at 4k60 uncropped.
What i really love the most about the 50mm 1.4 SMC Takumar: Wide open it introduce amazing looking flares and a very creamy look, stopped down to F/2 basically most of the flares and „glimmer/creamy look“ is gone and its even sharper than a Canon EF 50 1.4 @F/2.8 i had for a while.
I feel the 50 1.4 Takumar is somewhat 2 lenses in once.
I’ve never actually noticed this on mine. None of the Pentax have thorium. Some (but not all) of the super Takumar do. Intrigued tho. Maybe it has something to do with the specific camera?
@@joshkiddfilms1295 my Canon R7s sensor is sensitive to it, mainly white dots/„scratches“ appear and very very rarely even blue dots in the video
Its by far not even close to as noisy as if you would hold your camera at the firemans boot in the jupiter factory in chernobyl but still radioactivity is clearly visible in the videos
@@joshkiddfilms1295 and yes most of them are radioactive, watch one of my latest short clips the SMC Takumar 50 1.4, serial number 5.655.555 from about 1969-1972 i measured with 7,2 microSievert/h (0,1 yS/h is background). This 7,2yS/h are not even realistic since thorium is a alpha emitter and my geiger counter only detects beta, gamma and x-ray properly so its definately above 7,x yS/h
I like the video very much, however just one correction. Takumar is not a "division" of Asahi Optical (now Pentax - now owned by Ricoh). Takumar is the name that Asahi Optical gave to its lenses, notably but not exclusively those for its own SLR cameras. Named after the Japanese-American portrait painter, Takuma Kajiwara (梶原啄磨, Kajiwara Takuma), whose brother Kumao Kajiwara founded Asahi Optical.
Thank you for clarifying. But Asahi Optical also made the Pentax K mounts as well right? And those couldn’t be more different than the Takumar, so what was the determining factor? The camera body it was being made for ?
To be fair all I am really saying is that Takumar and Pentax both were made from Asahi, which is now Pentax.
@@joshkiddfilms1295 - Hi Josh, Yes Asahi Optical started in 1919. They developed the SLR after WW2 and used the M42 standard mount, which became so prevalent that it just became known as the Pentax mount. They bought the name Pentax from Zeiss (whose own camera brand was Contax) for their new SLR. During this time they used Takumar as the brand name for their M42 lenses. From that base, they added their lens coatings - one of the first to do single coatings, then multiple coatings. During this time Pentax SLR camera dominated the market like Canon does today. The Pentax brand name became so popular, that Asahi Optical changed their name to be Pentax. --- continued in your next question.
@@joshkiddfilms1295 -- continued from the previous question. Yes, in the mid 70s after buying the Pentax name from Zeiss, the sort of secret (non public) partnership/cooperation continued. Zeiss and Pentax co-designed the Pentax K mount, along with a number of lenses - the SMC Pentax 28mm F2 is the same as the Zeiss Contax 28mm f2 "Hollywood" lens. Also, the SMC Pentax 15mm F3.5 and several more came out of the cooperation. The transition (reasons) from the M42 to the K mount is laid out here --- www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/the-evolution-of-the-pentax-m42-mount.html Anyway, Zeiss wanted to move their camera manufacturing from Germany to Japan to control costs and were looking to extend the partnership. Something occurred - and Zeiss went to Yashica camera to do their Contax cameras. The Contax C/Y mount is essentially the K mount with thicker flanges and a tad longer registration distance - so that it would not fit on Pentax cameras. Also, the Contax T* coatings started out as the SMC coating from Pentax. For most of the 70's and 80's all the camera company lens coatings were licensed from Pentax.
@@ioio5993 this is a wealth of knowledge! Thanks so much very fascinating
Excellent video, as per usual!
Thanks man!
Many thanks for your valuable inside info !!
Glad I could help!
I've been looking to get the pentax ashai 35mm f3.5 to use on my fujifilm x-t1.. loving the look of vintage lenses!
Great video mate!
Thanks so much! They are gems!
@@joshkiddfilms1295 update... just bought it! Will let you know how I go!
big thanks for this video was exactly what I was looking for, just picked up super takumar 50 1.4 and 28 3.5 for my bmpcc6K. Have not received them yet and was worried that I chose the wrong version. what is the difference between auto 55 1.8 super takumar, and the other super takumar 55 1.8
Tbh not entirely sure. I don’t think they used thorium on the auto so it tends to have less of a yellow cast in my experience.
I own a number of Takumar and Pentax lenses . I have four Pentax DSLR cameras. I have Takumar 35mm3.5 , Takumar 50mm1.4, Takumar 135mm3.5. Pentax K mount lenses 28mm M lenses , 50mm 2.0 ,55mm1.8 ,100mm2.8 M lenses , 135mm3.5 M lens, 150mm 3.5 M lens . I like the Pentax M lenses as they are small lenses and multi coated .
Nice! They are great lenses. :)
I’m tossing up between investing in canon FD (probably FDn) or Super takumar / SMC lenses. Looks wise, how are they different in your opinion? I’m looking for a mic of clean (least chromatic aberration possible) but still gets that vintage unique look. Compatibility isn’t a problem for me because I’m on Sony system. Easy to adapt!
Regular FD and super Takumar are fairly similar. I think the Takumar have more Interesting flaring, but both share a similar textured look. I don’t think you can really go wrong with either, I have and use both.
Hey Josh, you made a video about Pentax k/85mm/1.8. Did you keep it, How does it compare to the Super Takumar 85 1.9? Thanks
Hi there! Yes I still have my 85 1.8 k mount. It’s a wonderful lens and my go to lens for my anamorphic setup. It’s pretty different than the super Takumar tho. It’s very smooth with solid contrast and sharpness, whereas the Takumar is softer and lower contrast with more texture
Thanks for putting this together
Of course glad it was helpful!
Such a great breakdown! Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
Good stuff! Just picked up a Pentax Takumar SMC 35mm 3.5f. absolutely loving it. Looking at SMC 50mm & 135mm.
Awesome! Congrats!
How easy is it to adapt these to Canon EF cameras? I know M42 is fairly simple to adapt to EF but how about K Mount?
I would say fairly easy. The m42 is just a screw on metal ring...the K mount is also a metal ring that just has a locking mechanism. Ive been using the K to EF for years with no issues with any EF mounts. The only time this presented a problem was on my .64 metabones EF mount. It didnt seem to like the K mount adapters for some reason
Awesome vid, thanks man!
Thanks!
Hi, Josh! Thank you for your videos! Very good channel! Subscribed! Is it possible to use SMC Pentax M (PK mount) with Viltrox Ef M2ii and BMPCC4k, using PK to EOS ring adapter?
Hi! its hard to say for sure. I tend to have no issues with the pentax conversion rings on normal EF mounts like the pocket 6k, but was having some issues with the speed boosters and using the pentax that way,..im not sure specifically if it would work with the viltrox. I remember having issues with the metabones
@@joshkiddfilms1295 thank you!
Great video you have made there. I have the 85mm 1.9 and love it and have just bought the 50 1.4 Takumar but I'm keen to know if the smc 50 1.4 k mount is a sharper lens to get as the samples you've shown look sharp and really nice?
I find the Pentax aren’t necessarily sharper per se, but they are just kind of smoother and less textured. Almost more vanilla and basic if you will, which can be a good or a bad thing really depending on what you are trying to achieve. I really like the Pentax as taking lenses for anamorphics, but character wise they don’t have a ton
Oh ok, that is useful info, thank you. I now just need to think of a good vintage wider lens that has character but doesn't look low quality! Any fast suggestions are appreciated as a new direction for me to look at@@joshkiddfilms1295
Nice and helpful video! Do you bring both sets to a gig? What jobs would you choose which set for?
Thank you! I like Takumar more narrative based stuff, or anything I want more of vintage or textured vibe on. The Pentax look much more modern and are great for most modern applications.
Thank you so much for the Comp.
Do you have a recommendation for an M42 sharp zoom lens?
The Takumar zooms aren’t great. You’d be better off getting in the contax zeiss like and using a c/y Ef adapter ring
@@joshkiddfilms1295 thank you very much, your experiences and tips are very valuable
hi hi Josh, are they FF? Can they be adapted to E or L mount FF? Thanks.
Hey there. Yes they are full frame as they were originally designed for 35mm film. Both the m42 and Pentax k mounts have simple non glass adapters to convert them to L or E or even EF.
Great video. Vintage glass is pretty cool. You just have to get good at manual focusing. What camera body do use most with the lenses?
Thanks! My A cam is a zcam F6.
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Thanks.
I love the smc pentax and super takumar
Yes great lenses!
You still use that 30mm 2.8? Loved the way that looked
I don’t have it anymore although it was a fantastic lens. Sold it awhile back to help pay for something else I can’t remember off the top of my head. I have since added the 35 tho and I think it’s a bit sharper.
Yes what camera are we looking at? :)
Test shots at the end are on zcam f6. Shot of me is Zcam s6. Examples when I am going through the lenses are pocket 4k, 6k, and zcam.
Super helpful! Thanks for this, now I want sets of both lol Question, for the Pentax smc did you get k mounts of m42, I’m seeing mostly k mounts online.
All my Pentax SMC are original K mounts. The Takumar tend to be M42
great to learn about pentax lenses.
Glad to hear that!
Hi Josh, not kept up with you for a year or so, trust you are all well. Am getting a Takumar 6x7 150mm for my BMPCC range, do you foresee any probs ? I already have different brands 135mm, but with the bigger glass think the crop factor will have a chromatic aberration benefit ie less curvature, and better edge definition, and with speed booster may give the usual one stop benefit. I don't think there will be any vignetting but am taking a punt and have bought plus converter to EF. Have you ever tried the 6x7 ? My collection of vintage lenses will pay even more dividends soon as there is a new product that allows autofocus of manual lenses now out and will be expanded to use as a stand alone product that is size of a cigarette packet and sits on top of your camera. Hoping to get as soon as it hits the general market place. Makes obsolete camera auto focus systems that hunt in low light, makes nonsense of buying autofocus lenses which may eventually dissapear. The new technology will soon be built into all DSLR's and so even current state of the art camera bodies with their contrast based autofocus systems or similar will drop hugely in value. It really is the future of fail proof focussing. Am sure you have your eye on this innovation ?
I haven't ever used the 6X7 stuff but I am tracking with you about how it should exhibit less curvature being that its pulling more from the center of the glass due to the higher coverage area. Are you talking about Lidar for the AF?
@@joshkiddfilms1295 The centre of a larger lens Glass I think theoretically is less curvature so IMHO think has benefit. I apply same logic to adding eg x0.47 very large diameter WA addons for any lens. Whenever I bought specific WA lens for my old cameras I found total loss of sharpness at the edges of the video frame. I bought three huge 83mm ( x.64 from memory ) WA lenses that I used on my BMPCC using various lenses and found the extra width appreciable, and with negligible edge softness. These WA lens addons were for Broadcast Cameras so I believed the glass would be high quality optics free of impurities in their manufacture and was right, That's probably why they retailed at around $ 700 , even lens hood was massive at $ 259. Last one I bought with missing lens hood which was a bummer but at least have 3 of these attachments. Yes the Linar gadget is on advance order only, and supplies imminent, but this first model is gimbal companion only, and specific to a gimble user. I want the next model which will be stand alone, but think it will need a Phone app to mimic the gimbal LCD display for it's settings use. You can save focussing gear travel specifics for several lenses, and some neat graphics showing focus animation, and lens focus pulls can be preset and saved too. I suspect the next model may be similar priced at $499 or dearer
Really excited to see this! Just got my Super Takumars in last week! Have you compared the different Pentax SMC lenses. I've received conflicting opinions on which model is the best.
Awesome! I’ve had a few other Pentax smc lenses than in this video. I haven’t really found a bad one, but these ones I talk about are fantastic. The 30 2.8 was another one i had and it was great as well.
Is it possible to use old Olympus OM Zuiko on this Z CAM? There are adapters but i can't find any info or samples.Have you tried Zuiko lenses?
I believe so. If not through the Ef mount through the mft. I haven’t tried any yet but I want to
Thanks for sharing your experience! I was wondering what option (if any) you grab for your wide establishing shots on wedding days? Also, do you just roll with one of the lens sets on wedding days, or do you use both? How do you narrow your decision of which set to use, if only one? Thanks!
Currently I mainly use the 35 and 50 takumars on my varicam 35 for most of the day, but I also carry an s1h in a holster with the 28mm Pentax that I use for establishing and wider shots
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Sweet! Sounds like you pull it off as a one man show on wedding days? I always felt like I needed at least one assistant. Is there a reason you dropped the bmpcc's from the line up? I was thinking of grabbing some and starting back weddings. I took a couple years off from doing them.
AUTO TAKUMAR 55 VS SMC SUPER TAKUMAR 55 1.4 ? what can you say about it?
I haven’t shot the super Takumar. I have one but it’s all gazed out so it’s hard to tell really how good it is, but I would think they’d be fairly similar. Coatings should be close
Hi Josh thanks for the awesome video, I was wondering if you've purchased most of your Tak/Pentax lenses on Ebay from Japan or here in the states?
I got them all from eBay. I try to find really clean copies usually
Hi Josh, that for the video and the good work. If I may ask, you seem to have 2 versions of the 85mm Pentax SMC Takumar (f1.9 and f1.8). Have you noticed any significant differences between the two lenses? Thanks
So i have the super Takumar 85 1.9 and a Pentax SMC 85 1.8 k mount. They are very different. The Pentax has much more coatings one every surface and has more contrast and pop. The super Takumar is softer wide open and has more of a textured look to it. Both great but the Takumar i would say is a bit more filmic whereas the Pentax slightly more modern looking
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Thanks a lot. I am trying to decide between the cheaper Takumar 85mm f1.9, and the SMC Takumar 85mm 1.8. But I can't find any decent comparisons of the two online.
@@blackrose5774 I’ve only used a few of the SMC Takumars, but to my eyes they didn’t really look that different than the super Takumar ones and paired pretty nicely. I don’t think you can really go wrong either way. The 85 1.9 has the hexagonal type bokeh which is really unique and cool looking though. Not sure if the 1.8 is the same way
Is the topic canon lenses or Pentax takumar lenses ??
This video talks about Pentax/Takumar mainly. I have another that talks about FD
Which lens was at 7:11 ? Dancing Girl. Thanks.
I believe that was the 55 1.8 auto Takumar
Say, can you tell me if your Canon FDs are FD or FDn? I read the only real difference is FD is metal and FDn is plastic and the mounts are different,, but image quality is the same?
I had FDn. Most of them are basically plastic. The FD-L are built much more robustly wirh mainly Metal. Image quality differences between ssc and fdn should be very minimal. Both used the same coatings
@@joshkiddfilms1295 Thanks! I have some FDns on order now. Great to know from experience that the image quality is the same.
Fantastic! You will love them.
What camera did you use to test out those lenses from 13.50?? It looks like a full frame camera.
Zcam F6
@@joshkiddfilms1295 is it worth buying ZCam ??
@@khaleel898 I really like them so far. The form factor just makes shooting and rigging it up a lot easier. Being able to stick a big npf on the back that lasts six hours is pretty clutch for events.
Good video
Thanks!
is that a Nord lead?? what camera??
Yes. The nord is my wife’s. Haha. Test footage at the end shot on zcam F6
Pentax / Takumar is Asahi Optical. It's all one company or was.
I realize that. All i am really saying here is Pentax (Asahi) made Takumar
OR JUST BUY A LENS ADAPTER DUDE?.....
not sure what you mean?
You have gained weight... lol... great video
uhhhhhh
Haha thanks. Still working off that Quarantine 15. 😄
The earlier Takumars & Auto Takumars are the least coated lenses, not the later Super-Takumars.
Yea the early takumars are super Takumar. Maybe you thought I was talking about SMC version?