Your reviews are the best within the vintage lens sector. Calm focused and insightful I can always expect to learn something new and see lucid examples of your ideas and criticisms. Thank you so much.
Not as sharp as Sony GM but it is a fine bit of glass for sure. I have one and do love it. Good for that perfect bokeh. Add some extension tubes and your good to go.
Excellent review! Your narration is pleasant to listen to. Beautiful series of photographs. I own this lens myself, and couldn't agree more with what you said. I have yet to try it out with portraiture. Not exactly an easy thing to do with a APS-C camera such as yours, but I enjoy using it with wildlife and astrophotography via a 3X teleconverter.
I like it for birds in my backyard. I can just sit and relax. I set the iso to 1600 so I don't have to worry about a blurry shutter as much. In my opinion, the weight helps with the stabilization. I'm not sure how to explain it. It could be my stance or something
Your images are wonderful! The call-out in your overview video peaked my interest for this lens I haven't heard much about, so I'm glad you made a separate video just for it. Interesting and inspiring as always.
I have the Takumar 135, 3.5 & Pentax 135 3.5 M lens as well as the Pentax 150mm 3.5 M lens with the built in hood . I would love to get the 200mm takumar lens
I got one of these in excellent condition in a big used log of nikon F2’s for next to nothing on ebay. I had bought the lot for the 55mm 1.3 pre-ai, and din’t even know about this lens. Now I think I’ll get an adapter and try it!
Just pick up one to give me some length and with the idea of the shallow depth in the medium range. It is a beast and will be challenging to use with my dog (along for the ride) as a distraction ;-) One thing I've found with my first impressions is that a tripod or Leitz table tripod [as a shoulder stock, and the built-on lens tripod mount] is needed without in-camera stabilization. Very sharp with the camera fixed. It is very near mint condition, glass looks great, and I'm using a collapable rubber hood I had laying around, and the price was right. These old Takumar lenses seem to be the best affordable way to expand the 'view' adapted to my Leica SL. Thanks for the excellent reviews and very inspiring photography!
Thank you. Yes. you really do need a very solid hold/base or tripod for this lens. Even with in-camera stabilization I struggle except on the brightest days and fasted speeds. Thank goodness summer is nearly here in the UK!
@@Simonsutak My first outing with the lens was disappointing. I almost wondered if there was something amiss even in the visually excellent condition it came to me in. The second day was overcast, and I didn't have high hopes but wanted to see if a tripod would bring out that sharpness and character I'd hoped for. Looking at the not-that-many exposures I made, I can say it summed the afternoon up very well; some beachside flowers and bokeh, an eagle in mid-flight near a Japan stone Toji gate, some shrine stone figures (yes, I'm in Japan), trees/leaves, my dog on the beach..., It is not an easy lens to use (weight/bulk/long focus throw), it takes some time and thought, but does its work rather well if you can work with it. At the $50us it was a bargain, and I'm looking forward to getting to know it better. Hope you have a great and photographically productive summer.
Nice review. I have just purchased one of these babies and am waiting for it to arrive. Asahi made some wonderful lenses back in the day. I'm still shooting my 1966 Spotty and am just now getting into using this vintage glass with my Canon EOS. Thanks....
This format and delivery of yours, I find utterly compelling. How you conjured it up, I have no idea - it's almost hypnotic. The images and commentary are so well matched, making *your* case, that the overall impression is one of great integrity. The comments show the high degree to which you have deservedly earned people's confidence and trust. Thank you for your quality - from a cabin in a swamp in a rain-forest in New Zealand.
Nice content in this video, I feel that your description of this lens will also fit my Komura 200 F3,5. Very similar looking, 16 Bladed design, manual preset ring at the front. I also really like that I can choose the focus depth, without impacting the look of the Bokeh, It will always stay butter smooth, even at F11.
wonderful review,i have the takamar 200 f4 which i purchased new when i was 29 years old ( now I'm 76) and loved using it on a series of 3 spotmatics which i actually wore out. its still in great condition. my favourite takumar is the 55 mm f1.8 which I use on my lumix G9. I also have 4 panasonic leica lenses for my G9 and this 55mm f1.8 takamar is just as sharp as my panasonic leica lenses, except for the f1.8 setting, but the 1.8 has a wonderful softness that is great under the right circumstances. really enjoy your excellent site..... zenon . zen . billings in the niagara falls canada region.
As ever another great video review, I enjoyed very much, It really helps us beginner photographers alike. I will be out tonight to shoot the moon with my Takumar. Thanks once again Simon.
Simon, your content is of the very highest quality, most fitting for the glass you review. Having earned my photography chops in the mid 70's and having enjoyed the absolute pleasure associated with shooting 35mm, medium and large format glass ever since, yes even with the digital cameras of today, I find your insights to be not only compelling for new users of vintage glass but completely spot on for those of us having spent many hours peering through them. Much to be learned on this channel, thank you.
Love the content and am a subscriber. As an amateur digital photographer I found this lens almost unusable, just my experience and no disrespect to the engineers who produced this. But, wide open focussed at 10m (30 ft) the DoF is around 30cm (11 in) , nailing focus requires such small increments of focus throw you are wanting to stop down and use a zone/ hyper focal approach or miss pin sharp focus despite several Goldilocks attempts. And when stopped down the metering issues mentioned really kicked in for me. The image in the viewfinder appearing excessively dark. So focus wide open then stop down for the shot. I’m not sure if this was how the lens was designed to be used, but I couldn’t get many useable wildlife or sports shots with this lens so I let it go to new user. That 135mm Takumar is a keeper though, I use it a lot. Sharp when you need it, the colours and oof elements open up slow shutter options as well.
Yes, it is a bit of a beast, especially wide open with that narrow depth of field. And even if you nail the focus, if you're using it hand-held, it's a top heavy lens on the camera, so the movement from its weight can mess the photo. It's definitely not a lens for faster moving wildlife and fast moving sports. But I still love it!!
Share your view on going monochrome with this one. Dramatically different rendering on offer from R, G and B channels when mono-mixing. Makes the process feel a bit like having a real darkroom. Because it's so sharp, it suffers a teleconverter very well, making for a handy 400mm f/8 for some good daylight wildlife or zoo shots. Actually still manages to isolate subject from background very well used like this, and you still get the lovely colour rendering. Great review, thanks
As I mentioned in the video...it's not a lens that owners seem to use a lot...(and neither did I before I started these videos!). There's always another, smaller lens calling my name!
1:25 - ahh, not actually correctly put - "Takumar" did not "produce" any lenses. Asahi-Pentax produced Takumar Lenses. I have the 120mm f2.8 M42 mount, and it's spectacular. Thinking about doing a "Cinema Kit" buy up to match the usual focal lengths, and the 200's definitely on the list now.
It's good because the second ring is click-less and this is good for videos, and also quickly seeing the result of changing the aperture. And by limiting the range, you can set the lens to it's sweet spots...say, between f3.5 and f8.
Thank you. You could check out the Meyer-Optik Gorlitz 200mm f4, 15 blades version (or Pentacon version). www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/meyer-optik-g-rlitz-orestegor-200mm-f4.html.
The last thing I need is more GAS I already regret my exceedingly excessive foray into model trains which like a harem is an attractive but to be regretted nuisance upon which time is better spent on other things. Yet the vortex is strong. I shall endeavor to be my own master than be mastered by things. Damn Sirens damn them all! Now I must diet. Yet, lenses are so small and harmless, NO NO I shall not succumb to the succubus. I have subscribed anyway. Great yet regrettable all at once.
Have you ever used the Nisi 77mm diopter? I think it would pair well with this lens...bring in the minimum focus quite a bit...losing infinity of course. But the lens could prove a worthy up close contender.
Are you sure that the banding issue is not caused by the processing software or maybe lower bit depth/quality raw files that are maybe only 12bit? Anyways great review as always and the narration is always a joy to listen to.
Hi, thanks for the question. Yes, you're right the banding is generally being caused by the post-processing of the files. The point I was trying to make is that - given the same file types and software - I find the images from this lens tend to not to be able handle as much post processing "stress" as some other old lenses (not all old lenses, there are many with much inferior resolution). It's just something I notice when doing the post processing. So I tend to shoot raw only with this lens now as better quality raw files = better quality results.
I have had this lens and a near identical 200 f3.5 of the same era. The Takumar I got rid of, the other I kept. Vivitar telephotos in m42 can be great performers.
It is a boekeh monster but I don't like the quality of the images. I ended up with a vintage Nikor 300mm lens that is way better quality wise that is now my most favorite Vintage 300mm lens. I am also in love with the 135mm Nikor as well. Both are crystal clear and sharp. Maybe it would be better if I were shooting B&W.
If you mean the tripod "collar" on the lens, it was sold with the lens new. Most of the second hand lenses I've seen for sale on the internet have this included.
Is that a focal reducer your using at 3:53 ? How does it perform? I've got the a6600 and want to get the full view on some of my old lenses (now including the Takumar 200mm f3.5!)
Just added one of these to my bag - arriving on friday. The only other vintage lens I have is a Carl Zeiss 135mm f3.5, which I don't use as often as I thought I might. Looking forward to this arriving though as I love photographing flowers and it seems to render very well... fingers crossed 😁
I know is not the same but in my compact camera I use much the 200mm equivalent focal length. I wonder if it is due the weight and, well, focal lengths seems to render different according to the size of sensor or film.
Many thanks. I haven't try this on Nikon and there are some issues with some M42 lenses on some Nikons. So I hope someone else can tell you whether or not this will work on our camera.
HI Simon, I have just bought one of these on the back of your review. Thankfully bought in the UK but for approx what it would have cost me to import one from Japan... Anyway I wanted to ask about the DoF markings on top, when attached to my camera they are a few degrees off to the side, pretty much the same as in your photo with the lens on the Sony.... So does this affect shooting at all? I ask because infinity focus seems to be pretty soft (shooting Isle of Wight across the Solent)... or does this mean infinity focus is not actually possible?
Hi, interesting question. On reflection, I don't have issues with infinity focus with this lens or other lenses where the markings don't align centrally - and a number of my M42 lenses don't align precisely. If the distance from the lens to the sensor increased too much (i.e the lens does not screw far enough into the adapter), then this could impact infinity focus, but not one of my M42 lenses have this issue. (But I am aware that some people with other cameras to mine - Pentax and Sony - can have issues with infinity focus with some lenses. Unfortunately this not something I can test with my lenses/camera gear). Some of my lenses focus beyond infinity, so I have to focus them manually and not rely on the infinity setting. Over time I get to know the adjustment required on the lens before taking a photo. I would say that the Takumar 200mm is a lens that benefits from being stopped down for infinity shots, and from shots taken with a very steady/solid base. The shake reduction on my FF camera is not enough to always compensate for even minor shakes, and the images look pretty soft as a result. My lens is definitely sharp (for a film era lens) stopped down and secure. So all I can suggest is that if you try the camera/lens on a tripod and you still can't get an in-focus lock a subject at infinity, then it might be worth trying a different adapter.
P.S. If you haven't seen my album of photos with the lens , it's here: www.flickr.com/photos/95859572@N06/47131567302/in/album-72157696097654780/ ..including some infinity shots taken on the South Coast, and one of a high flying jet, that demonstrate how sharp this old lens can be - if you click on the images and zoom in.
I've been looking at two types of lenses - the orestor lenses.. a 100mm and a 135mm and the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm. Prices vary, one being more costly and some being more difficult to find but I'm curious what each gives in terms of character that is specific to the lens. Like this Takumar, I'm looking for something interesting. Do you have and use these lenses? Are they worth the purchase?
Hi, yes I've sort of used the Orestor 135mm, with 15 blades. I have the Pentacon version, and I like it a lot! Sharp, lovely bokeh. I definitely think it is worth getting if you can find a good value one in good condition. Prices seem all over the place - in the UK from £50 to over £100, so best to wait for a good price. The Sonnar is highly regarded. I'd get the Zebra version. But you can't beat all those blades in the Oreston. (Or the 100mm, which I haven't tried, but I prefer the 135mm focal length).
@@Simonsutak I have quite an array of 50mm & 55mm - I’ve gone to some effort to research lens elements/groups to classify lineages and types. Still working on finishing that up, but you start to see patterns of bokeh based on type. I’ve mostly stayed away from wide angle with only a couple exceptions because I tend to use them for near far fully focused situations and my modern Nikkors do a great job at that. I’m not picking up older lenses as substitutes for expensive lenses but rather because they provide something new lenses cannot - unique character. I have managed to find a few 80, 85, 100 and 135. Lenses. I wanted to do a test where I really look at differences.. just how different are the flavours? For instance, how different is a 135 Sonnar from a 135 Orestor? I happen to own a 135 Pentax k.. from my early history. Are those two different from the Pentax? Curious what you have found.
Your reviews are the best within the vintage lens sector. Calm focused and insightful I can always expect to learn something new and see lucid examples of your ideas and criticisms. Thank you so much.
Not as sharp as Sony GM but it is a fine bit of glass for sure. I have one and do love it. Good for that perfect bokeh. Add some extension tubes and your good to go.
Excellent review! Your narration is pleasant to listen to. Beautiful series of photographs. I own this lens myself, and couldn't agree more with what you said. I have yet to try it out with portraiture. Not exactly an easy thing to do with a APS-C camera such as yours, but I enjoy using it with wildlife and astrophotography via a 3X teleconverter.
Thank you! I've not used it much for astrophotography...but its on my list!
I like it for birds in my backyard. I can just sit and relax. I set the iso to 1600 so I don't have to worry about a blurry shutter as much. In my opinion, the weight helps with the stabilization. I'm not sure how to explain it. It could be my stance or something
Vintage lenses to my eyes look better than modern lenses. They impart a wonderful character to images that can be rather beguiling.
Two observations arise from the cat photos: 1 you have good focusing skills or are very patient and 2 you must have a large house!
Your images are wonderful! The call-out in your overview video peaked my interest for this lens I haven't heard much about, so I'm glad you made a separate video just for it. Interesting and inspiring as always.
Thank you!
One of my best lenses. I use it for landscapes or in the theater when shooting away from the stage.
I’ve been photographing for 30+ years but learned several new things from this video. You have an enthusiastic new subscriber!
I have the Takumar 135, 3.5 & Pentax 135 3.5 M lens as well as the Pentax 150mm 3.5 M lens with the built in hood . I would love to get the 200mm takumar lens
I much prefer the 200mm to the 135/3.5, but the size/weight difference is huge!
I got one of these in excellent condition in a big used log of nikon F2’s for next to nothing on ebay. I had bought the lot for the 55mm 1.3 pre-ai, and din’t even know about this lens. Now I think I’ll get an adapter and try it!
This is one of the most down to earth lens reviews ever. Thank you!
My friend up the road has this lens, it's been on my want list for quite sometime. Guess I'll have to rob him later. Cheers Simon!
You can still get them pretty cheap on Ebay.
@@cypherdk85 Cheaper if I knock over my mates house one night :D
Kidnap him and ask for lens ransom 😂
I love the Takumars 💘 Your reviews are also well done.
Just pick up one to give me some length and with the idea of the shallow depth in the medium range. It is a beast and will be challenging to use with my dog (along for the ride) as a distraction ;-) One thing I've found with my first impressions is that a tripod or Leitz table tripod [as a shoulder stock, and the built-on lens tripod mount] is needed without in-camera stabilization. Very sharp with the camera fixed. It is very near mint condition, glass looks great, and I'm using a collapable rubber hood I had laying around, and the price was right. These old Takumar lenses seem to be the best affordable way to expand the 'view' adapted to my Leica SL. Thanks for the excellent reviews and very inspiring photography!
Thank you. Yes. you really do need a very solid hold/base or tripod for this lens. Even with in-camera stabilization I struggle except on the brightest days and fasted speeds. Thank goodness summer is nearly here in the UK!
@@Simonsutak My first outing with the lens was disappointing. I almost wondered if there was something amiss even in the visually excellent condition it came to me in. The second day was overcast, and I didn't have high hopes but wanted to see if a tripod would bring out that sharpness and character I'd hoped for. Looking at the not-that-many exposures I made, I can say it summed the afternoon up very well; some beachside flowers and bokeh, an eagle in mid-flight near a Japan stone Toji gate, some shrine stone figures (yes, I'm in Japan), trees/leaves, my dog on the beach..., It is not an easy lens to use (weight/bulk/long focus throw), it takes some time and thought, but does its work rather well if you can work with it. At the $50us it was a bargain, and I'm looking forward to getting to know it better. Hope you have a great and photographically productive summer.
Nice review. I have just purchased one of these babies and am waiting for it to arrive. Asahi made some wonderful lenses back in the day. I'm still shooting my 1966 Spotty and am just now getting into using this vintage glass with my Canon EOS. Thanks....
Great! Hope you enjoy this lens as much as I do.
this is an excellent channel. The kind we need to go back to true content. Your videos helped me making my choices in my own work. Congrats.
This format and delivery of yours, I find utterly compelling. How you conjured it up, I have no idea - it's almost hypnotic. The images and commentary are so well matched, making *your* case, that the overall impression is one of great integrity. The comments show the high degree to which you have deservedly earned people's confidence and trust. Thank you for your quality - from a cabin in a swamp in a rain-forest in New Zealand.
Nice content in this video, I feel that your description of this lens will also fit my Komura 200 F3,5.
Very similar looking, 16 Bladed design, manual preset ring at the front.
I also really like that I can choose the focus depth, without impacting the look of the Bokeh, It will always stay butter smooth, even at F11.
wonderful review,i have the takamar 200 f4 which i purchased new when i was 29 years old ( now I'm 76) and loved using it on a series of 3 spotmatics which i actually wore out. its still in great condition. my favourite takumar is the 55 mm f1.8 which I use on my lumix G9. I also have 4 panasonic leica lenses for my G9 and this 55mm f1.8 takamar is just as sharp as my panasonic leica lenses, except for the f1.8 setting, but the 1.8 has a wonderful softness that is great under the right circumstances. really enjoy your excellent site.....
zenon . zen . billings in the niagara falls canada region.
Wow
Another open and honest review Simon. Thanks so much for sharing.
As ever another great video review, I enjoyed very much, It really helps us beginner photographers alike. I will be out tonight to shoot the moon with my Takumar. Thanks once again Simon.
Thank you!
Simon, your content is of the very highest quality, most fitting for the glass you review. Having earned my photography chops in the mid 70's and having enjoyed the absolute pleasure associated with shooting 35mm, medium and large format glass ever since, yes even with the digital cameras of today, I find your insights to be not only compelling for new users of vintage glass but completely spot on for those of us having spent many hours peering through them. Much to be learned on this channel, thank you.
Thank you! So good to read this.
Love the content and am a subscriber. As an amateur digital photographer I found this lens almost unusable, just my experience and no disrespect to the engineers who produced this. But, wide open focussed at 10m (30 ft) the DoF is around 30cm (11 in) , nailing focus requires such small increments of focus throw you are wanting to stop down and use a zone/ hyper focal approach or miss pin sharp focus despite several Goldilocks attempts. And when stopped down the metering issues mentioned really kicked in for me. The image in the viewfinder appearing excessively dark. So focus wide open then stop down for the shot. I’m not sure if this was how the lens was designed to be used, but I couldn’t get many useable wildlife or sports shots with this lens so I let it go to new user. That 135mm Takumar is a keeper though, I use it a lot. Sharp when you need it, the colours and oof elements open up slow shutter options as well.
Yes, it is a bit of a beast, especially wide open with that narrow depth of field. And even if you nail the focus, if you're using it hand-held, it's a top heavy lens on the camera, so the movement from its weight can mess the photo. It's definitely not a lens for faster moving wildlife and fast moving sports. But I still love it!!
Share your view on going monochrome with this one. Dramatically different rendering on offer from R, G and B channels when mono-mixing. Makes the process feel a bit like having a real darkroom. Because it's so sharp, it suffers a teleconverter very well, making for a handy 400mm f/8 for some good daylight wildlife or zoo shots. Actually still manages to isolate subject from background very well used like this, and you still get the lovely colour rendering. Great review, thanks
Thank you for your kind words! I must try the lens with a teleconverter (and tripod!). It's been sitting unused since I made this video...
I have this lens and i never use it. thanks for posting your review. I think i'll give mine a try
As I mentioned in the video...it's not a lens that owners seem to use a lot...(and neither did I before I started these videos!). There's always another, smaller lens calling my name!
And, what about jupiter 37A, - another little blade-sharp 'hero' = ) ?
interesting topic to compare since you knows helios ones
I like this lens and the clean soft colors it produces. Bokeh is great!
Yes, the colors are excellent, "clean soft colors" is a good description.
I love this channel because he always has the sony a6000 in his videos
Thanks. Lucky I don’t feature my Pentax K-01!
1:25 - ahh, not actually correctly put - "Takumar" did not "produce" any lenses. Asahi-Pentax produced Takumar Lenses.
I have the 120mm f2.8 M42 mount, and it's spectacular. Thinking about doing a "Cinema Kit" buy up to match the usual focal lengths, and the 200's definitely on the list now.
Yes, I changed/corrected my description in videos after this. It was one of my first ever videos posted on RUclips.
So ... the preset acts as an f -stop limiter? Why or how is that good to have?
It's good because the second ring is click-less and this is good for videos, and also quickly seeing the result of changing the aperture. And by limiting the range, you can set the lens to it's sweet spots...say, between f3.5 and f8.
Too bad I can't find a nice copy with the case for less than several hundred...
Amazing,new subscriptor
Another informative and interesting review. As always. Any other 200mm’s worth checking out to adapt?
Thank you. You could check out the Meyer-Optik Gorlitz 200mm f4, 15 blades version (or Pentacon version). www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/meyer-optik-g-rlitz-orestegor-200mm-f4.html.
Does anyone know where I can find a hood for this lens? Would love to be able to find the original one
The last thing I need is more GAS I already regret my exceedingly excessive foray into model trains which like a harem is an attractive but to be regretted nuisance upon which time is better spent on other things. Yet the vortex is strong. I shall endeavor to be my own master than be mastered by things. Damn Sirens damn them all! Now I must diet. Yet, lenses are so small and harmless, NO NO I shall not succumb to the succubus. I have subscribed anyway. Great yet regrettable all at once.
Everyone needs a hobby. Keeps you out of trouble!
@@blainecovert8374 Maybe the hobby gets you into new trouble. ;)
@@blainecovert8374 I've always heard that a "husband without hobbies; cheats on his wife"
Have you ever used the Nisi 77mm diopter? I think it would pair well with this lens...bring in the minimum focus quite a bit...losing infinity of course. But the lens could prove a worthy up close contender.
No - I'll take a look at this. Thank you.
The lens is so good i would like to have second one. Its a winner.
Are you sure that the banding issue is not caused by the processing software or maybe lower bit depth/quality raw files that are maybe only 12bit? Anyways great review as always and the narration is always a joy to listen to.
Hi, thanks for the question. Yes, you're right the banding is generally being caused by the post-processing of the files. The point I was trying to make is that - given the same file types and software - I find the images from this lens tend to not to be able handle as much post processing "stress" as some other old lenses (not all old lenses, there are many with much inferior resolution). It's just something I notice when doing the post processing. So I tend to shoot raw only with this lens now as better quality raw files = better quality results.
Screen resolution may also cause this, not having enough DR.
Hi
Can you attach this lens to a Pentax k-3ii or you need an adapter
Thank you
Yes, you need a K-mount to M42 mount adapter. If you can it's better to get an original Pentax made adapter.
Another excellent review...thanks!
Thank you!
Vivitar has a similar lens from the same decade with 18 blades in T mount. I wonder how it compares? A poor man's Takumar?
Have a look on the 'Pentax Forums' lens page, you should find a review.
I have had this lens and a near identical 200 f3.5 of the same era. The Takumar I got rid of, the other I kept. Vivitar telephotos in m42 can be great performers.
It is a boekeh monster but I don't like the quality of the images. I ended up with a vintage Nikor 300mm lens that is way better quality wise that is now my most favorite Vintage 300mm lens. I am also in love with the 135mm Nikor as well. Both are crystal clear and sharp. Maybe it would be better if I were shooting B&W.
Are there other Takumar lenses with 18 blades apeture ring?
The 300mm f4 has 18 blades.
Now I want one!
Which is that adapter with the tripod support?
If you mean the tripod "collar" on the lens, it was sold with the lens new. Most of the second hand lenses I've seen for sale on the internet have this included.
@@Simonsutak what kind of collar fits on it? I have a vivitar tx 200 mm with m42 to E adapter on my 6500 and want to find one for stills.
How does this lens compare to the CONTAX Zeiss 200mm F3.5?
Plus, you can roll out a pizza with it....
A pizza with serrated edges!
Is that a focal reducer your using at 3:53 ? How does it perform? I've got the a6600 and want to get the full view on some of my old lenses (now including the Takumar 200mm f3.5!)
Just added one of these to my bag - arriving on friday. The only other vintage lens I have is a Carl Zeiss 135mm f3.5, which I don't use as often as I thought I might. Looking forward to this arriving though as I love photographing flowers and it seems to render very well... fingers crossed 😁
I know is not the same but in my compact camera I use much the 200mm equivalent focal length. I wonder if it is due the weight and, well, focal lengths seems to render different according to the size of sensor or film.
I really enjoy all your videos, I got into vintage lenses because of you. Thank you for the hard work!
I’ve got this one cheap as chips… I do find it hard to get focus on this one, nice images though
I have wanted this lens for years, but I don’t really need it. Your pictures are lovely though.
I walk around town and hand hold with my Spotmatic. Not really that bad. I get stunningly sharp and contrasty images.
Thank you for this review!!!!! By the way what filters do you recommend us to use in this lens ???? Thanks in advance !!!!!
I don't use filters with this lens myself, so I can't recommend one. The key thing is to use a good deep hood - that makes a significant difference.
Good review, thank you. Do you know if one can find an adapter ring to allow the screw-in to be fitted to a Nikon 7200 camera?
Many thanks. I haven't try this on Nikon and there are some issues with some M42 lenses on some Nikons. So I hope someone else can tell you whether or not this will work on our camera.
Do you know if this can be adapted for use on M43 systems? Thanks for a most interesting insight
There are lots of M42 to Micro Four Thirds adapters.
Does it go onto a Pentax 6x7?
HI Simon, I have just bought one of these on the back of your review. Thankfully bought in the UK but for approx what it would have cost me to import one from Japan... Anyway I wanted to ask about the DoF markings on top, when attached to my camera they are a few degrees off to the side, pretty much the same as in your photo with the lens on the Sony.... So does this affect shooting at all? I ask because infinity focus seems to be pretty soft (shooting Isle of Wight across the Solent)... or does this mean infinity focus is not actually possible?
Hi, interesting question. On reflection, I don't have issues with infinity focus with this lens or other lenses where the markings don't align centrally - and a number of my M42 lenses don't align precisely. If the distance from the lens to the sensor increased too much (i.e the lens does not screw far enough into the adapter), then this could impact infinity focus, but not one of my M42 lenses have this issue. (But I am aware that some people with other cameras to mine - Pentax and Sony - can have issues with infinity focus with some lenses. Unfortunately this not something I can test with my lenses/camera gear).
Some of my lenses focus beyond infinity, so I have to focus them manually and not rely on the infinity setting. Over time I get to know the adjustment required on the lens before taking a photo.
I would say that the Takumar 200mm is a lens that benefits from being stopped down for infinity shots, and from shots taken with a very steady/solid base. The shake reduction on my FF camera is not enough to always compensate for even minor shakes, and the images look pretty soft as a result. My lens is definitely sharp (for a film era lens) stopped down and secure. So all I can suggest is that if you try the camera/lens on a tripod and you still can't get an in-focus lock a subject at infinity, then it might be worth trying a different adapter.
P.S. If you haven't seen my album of photos with the lens , it's here:
www.flickr.com/photos/95859572@N06/47131567302/in/album-72157696097654780/
..including some infinity shots taken on the South Coast, and one of a high flying jet, that demonstrate how sharp this old lens can be - if you click on the images and zoom in.
I've been looking at two types of lenses - the orestor lenses.. a 100mm and a 135mm and the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm. Prices vary, one being more costly and some being more difficult to find but I'm curious what each gives in terms of character that is specific to the lens. Like this Takumar, I'm looking for something interesting. Do you have and use these lenses? Are they worth the purchase?
Hi, yes I've sort of used the Orestor 135mm, with 15 blades. I have the Pentacon version, and I like it a lot! Sharp, lovely bokeh. I definitely think it is worth getting if you can find a good value one in good condition. Prices seem all over the place - in the UK from £50 to over £100, so best to wait for a good price. The Sonnar is highly regarded. I'd get the Zebra version. But you can't beat all those blades in the Oreston. (Or the 100mm, which I haven't tried, but I prefer the 135mm focal length).
@@Simonsutak I have quite an array of 50mm & 55mm - I’ve gone to some effort to research lens elements/groups to classify lineages and types. Still working on finishing that up, but you start to see patterns of bokeh based on type. I’ve mostly stayed away from wide angle with only a couple exceptions because I tend to use them for near far fully focused situations and my modern Nikkors do a great job at that. I’m not picking up older lenses as substitutes for expensive lenses but rather because they provide something new lenses cannot - unique character. I have managed to find a few 80, 85, 100 and 135. Lenses. I wanted to do a test where I really look at differences.. just how different are the flavours? For instance, how different is a 135 Sonnar from a 135 Orestor? I happen to own a 135 Pentax k.. from my early history. Are those two different from the Pentax? Curious what you have found.
i have mine and its my go to portrait lens
Напоминает Юпитер-21А или Юпитер-21М.
This lens is a tank barrel 🤣
Where can i find such quality checked takumar lenses online ?
eBay.
Amazing video 😍
Can I use it with my Nikon d5300
I'm sorry, I really don't know for sure. Perhaps someone else reading this knows.
@@Simonsutak :( you can't, I tried anyway