According provided by SMC PENTAX-M 1: 3.5 135mm ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN many thanks to Alexander Zhigadlo.
SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan
SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan is a very compact 135-era film camera for Pentax cameras. The lens uses manual focus, on original Pentax cameras automatic aperture control is possible (automatic setting at the time of shooting).
The 'M' prefix in the name of the SMC PENTAX-M lens denotes a new generation of lenses with the Pentax K mount. The lenses of the new (for those times) line differed from their predecessors in more compact dimensions.
History
There is a huge family of Takumar / Pentax class lenses 135/3.5:
- Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1953-1957, diagram 5/3, model in silver / metal case
- Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1957-1961, diagram 5/4, model 324 and 43240
- Auto-Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1959-1963, schematic 5/4, model 343
- Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1961-1966, diagram 5/4, model 353 and 43530
- Super-Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1963-1965, schematic 5/4, model 354 and 43540
- Super-Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1965-1971, scheme 4/4, model 43541
- Super-Multi-Coated-Takumar 135 / 3.5, 1971-1975, schematic 4/4, model 43542
- SMC Pentax 135 / 3.5, 1975-1977, schematic 4/4, model 23440
- SMC Pentax-M 135 / 3.5, 1977-1986, scheme 5/5, model 23460
Later the 135 / 3.5 line evolved into the Takumar / Pentax line 135/2.8:
- SMC Pentax-A 135 / 2.8, 1983-1989, schematic 4/4, model 23497
- Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.8, 1984-1987, schematic 4/4, model 23437
- SMC Pentax-F 135 / 2.8 IF, 1987-1991, schematic 8/7, model 23417
- SMC Pentax-FA 135 / 2.8 IF, 1991-2000, schematic 8/7, model 23427
Takumar / Pentax lens line is located separately 135/2.5:
- Super-Takumar 135 / 2.5, 1965-1971, schematic 5/4, model 43801
- Super-Multi-Coated-Takumar 135 / 2.5, 1971-1972, schematic 5/4, model 43802
- Super-Multi-Coated-Takumar 135 / 2.5, 1972-1975, schematic 6/6, model 43812
- SMC Pentax 135 / 2.5, 1975-1985, schematic 6/6, model 23840 (two sub-versions with different spelling of the lens name)
- Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5, 1980-1988, schematic 4/4, model 23830
And there's another Pentax lens on the side. 135/1.8:
- SMC Pentax-A * 135 / 1.8, 1984-1989, schematic 7/6, model 23530
Basic information about the SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan
| Review Instance Name | SMC PENTAX-M 1: 3.5 135mm ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN 6646025 LENS MADE IN JAPAN |
| Designed by | for film cameras with Pentax K mount |
| Front Filter Diameter | 49 mm |
| Focal length | 135 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 1 x |
| Number of aperture blades | 8 pieces, matte, when closed at F / 5.6 and an intermediate value between F / 5.6 and F / 3.5, the petals form a hole with notches. On other values (except F / 3.5), the petals form a regular octagon |
| Tags | focusing distance in meters and feet, bayonet mount mark, aperture value, DOF scale for F / 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, red line for working in the infrared spectrum |
| Diaphragm | from F / 3.5 to F / 32. There are marks on the aperture ring for F / 3.5, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, you can also set one intermediate value between each pair of numbers (there is no intermediate value between F / 22 and F / 32). On cameras with Pentax K mount, automatic iris control is available |
| MDF | 1,5 m, maximum magnification ratio 1: 9 |
| The weight | 270 g |
| Optical design | 5 elements in 5 groups (the diagram is shown below, the image is clickable). Lenses are coated with a special proprietary multi-coating PENTAX SMC (Super Multi Coating - 'Super Multi Coating')
|
| Lens hood | telescopic, built-in, metal with a decorative ring for a comfortable grip. The hood is firmly fixed when unfolded. |
| Manufacturer country | LENS MADE IN JAPAN |
| Period | presumably from 1977 to 1986 |
The lens is perfectly assembled. The lens came to my review in a stylish wardrobe trunk with velor interior trim. The focus ring is rubberized and rotates 220 degrees. During focusing, the frame rim lengthens, but the front lens does not rotate. Focusing occurs by moving the entire lens block relative to the frame of the housing.
The lens is sharp enough on F / 3.5, but I have seen much sharper 135-tki. If you cover the aperture to F / 5.6, the lens becomes very sharp. SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm well tolerates back and side light, has a simple bokeh, nice color reproduction and moderate contrast. A noticeable drawback is the excess of chromatic aberration. In general, as usual, from a small maximum aperture of F / 3.5 I would like a little better sharpness indicators.
I used the lens on the camera without any problems Sony a7 using the Pentax K (PK) to Sony E adapter. Source files can be downloaded at this link (35 photos in '.ARW' format, 792 Mb). Part of the photo was shot in APS-C mode (crop with Kf = 1.5x, for those who want to understand how the lens works on crop).
Oh yes, I think the SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan and CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 (from the previous review) technologically better than the Soviet MS Jupiter-37AM 3,5 / 135but I like Jupiter-37 drawing more.
CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 and SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan
Catalog of modern Pentax lenses can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.com.
Results
SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan is a compact, pleasant lens. It can be a good portrait photographer, creative lens, when used on cropped cameras, it can also act as a 'short' telephoto lens.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
The question of comparison with Jupiter 37A is open, the author carefully conceals his opinion. (Apparently Kiev flea markets Arkady pay extra for advertising antique optics :))
Overview as always on top, beautiful photos! Thanks from all readers!
So it’s very interesting to me that you read the review or are kidding. Well, it’s not so, comrade.
C'mon, in this review everything is indicated both on the Yu-37 and on the previous Kenon. Just read it carefully.
I'm sorry, I joked unsuccessfully.
Yes, Ernostars merge in front of the Sonnars according to the drawing.
Yuriy75 Are you all the time so not attentive !? And you blame the man for something.
Not good and not beautiful.
Very boring lens, no words.
I would like to see a review and hear your opinion on the Nikon 70-200mm f / 2.8 VR II lens
send it to Arkady for review and he will gladly do it.
I liked the review!
And in it I got an answer to my curiosity.))
Keep it up!!!
dya ... not Jupe, not Jupe ...
Summer, heat - it's time 135-current
Yu 37 A, especially the MC version, drives. It has one "drawback" - it's painfully cheap.)
I once had a Takumar 135 3.5, nice focusing, then I bought a CZ Sonnar 135 3,5 Mc to replace it, it was just fabulous, the bokeh, the back was excellent, for sunsets it was the same, then I bought a Canon 70-200 F4 and I was disappointed, it gives very ugly glare when shooting a sunset, the only thing is sharpness and constructiveness at a height. And of course my ideal 135-k is Sonnar 135 3.5 ms
Sonnar did not have the honor to use, but purely from the drawing - my favorites are Jupiters. And helios.
And I am from Tahir-11 white trudge))
“Oh yes, I think the SMC Pentax-M 1: 3.5 135mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan and CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 (from the previous review) are technologically better than the Soviet MC Jupiter-37AM 3,5 / 135, but I personally like the Jupiter-37 drawing better. ”
This is the very phrase that you always want to see in a review, namely a comparison, because any thing can be described as you like, but everything is learned in comparison. Thanks to Arkady for giving a comparative analysis with analogs, so most "professionals" find it easier to navigate the models, of course, it is sometimes difficult to give an unambiguous assessment of the optics, for example, everyone likes bokeh differently, but the assessment of sharpness, contrast, resistance to direct and lateral light sources , the opportunity to catch hares can be given. And when this is also given in comparison, it is generally wonderful. Personally, I did not shoot with such a lens, but from the review it is clearly clear to me that it is more technologically advanced than the Yu-37, which I was shooting with, although I still did not understand about the sharpness on the open OH / Yu-37, which one would be sharper? it would be very cool if there were photos of the WORLD on different focal points, if the object is zoom, and on different “darks”, it would be possible to compare the raves of the WORLD, see the sharpness in the center and around the edges, see distortions and, say, compare with the raves of your lens, I think that would help many people when buying another lens.
PS Thanks to the author for a good review.
I think it will be too much with the worlds, but the author’s opinion is more valuable to us. Sometimes self-hypnosis helps cooler than drugs. I think the main attitude in any business. Sorry if I offended anyone.
By 135 kams I have an old love !!! Tair-11 is still intact. From Kiev-19 he moved to Nikon D7100. The quality is as always on top. Generally a convenient size…. Both a portrait portrait and a small one ... but already a telephoto camera ...
Good day!
Thanks for the great review, Arkady!
I read it with pleasure and agree with you about the Ju-37 - I also got used to it :)
So I think, is it worth it to buy the MS version over time or not?
And as a pentaxist, it would be interesting to compare them of course. Moreover, their price tags are similar.
Looking forward to new reviews! Good luck to you!
The MS version does not say much better than non-MS. You need to watch with tests of specific samples.
As for the takumars and pentaxes, these are all Ernostars, they give a more “triplet-like” picture, and the old non-MC Ernostars may have poor contrast. Ernostar has more than 8 glass-air surfaces, while the zonnar has no more than six. That is why old white Jupiter-9 can have quite good contrast in the absence of normal enlightenment.
This Nex gives a disgusting picture, doesn’t anyone see it, everything in the photo with children is very colorful, my 20d canon gives much more pleasant colors and the picture is neutral like a bw film
You are probably paid extra so that in every review with sony a7 (ILCE-7, they removed the name NEX from this camera) there is a comment about the godly color. Calm down and continue shooting at 20d in b / w mode)
To be fair - in the review of the old shoe 135, the colors were completely unnatural. I hope this was just an annoying mistake. Here the colors are beautiful and natural.
Not really Arkady in the previous review, the colors were more saturated, in this they are more natural. Is this a property of the previous lens or camera settings?
In the previous review, the camera jeep is in 'DEEP' mode in this review with the 'Portraint' setting.
Got it
I suggest a friend throw in a new monitor so that he can perceive colors normally, otherwise he can only view the photo in b / w))
Maybe it's just that the "game" mode is turned on in the engine settings, which increases the brightness and saturation of colors, it is probably worth switching to the "standard" or "text" mode. :)
monitor
Tell me, if I install such a lens through an adapter on a Kenon crop, will the jumper interfere with the mirror?
It’s funny.
Yes, yes, yes, it will throw up a little when walking. The way out is just a tripod and no mirrors. Especially after midnight !!! I recommend covering everything that is with rags and burning candles without turning around. And yes, the most important thing - more onions!
I have such a question, tell me why there is a white-yellow convex mark on the lens body, where the hyperfocal distance scale is, a little further to the side, above the number 32 (you can see it clearly in the upper picture)
it is available on all old lenses, but somehow I didn’t notice on new ones
This is a common bayonet mount label. You need to match this mark and the mark on the camera mount, then rotate the lens until it clicks.
I have two "old" manual lenses, yeah, everything is as usual, you combine two red dots, where the camera and lens mount itself is, and this convex mark ... it does not coincide at all with the red currents, this is ... I am not catching up) ... for what? if there is one red dot on the lens, and the other (reciprocal) on the camera mount ... I can't understand why, you can certainly not bother, but it's still interesting ... I've just rotated the lens again, no ... it doesn't match ...
I wrote to you for yellow, I can’t understand what it is about
Well, yellow, spherical, so voluminous, in the upper photo it is clearly visible, where there is a scale with hyperfocal marking
this yellow drop-dot does not match the red mount marks
maybe you need it to install (remove) the lens in order to rest your finger on it? something has never used it ... yes, probably for this ... if so, then it is located on the uncomfortable side
This is a sticky lens for mounting the lens. It can be found by touch in the dark, usually it is white or yellow or green (depending on the lens series, A, M, L) so that it can be clearly seen in poor lighting. Also to the touch of the old film cameras (not new), the button for fixing the bayonet was searched. It was necessary to combine this white point with the position of the latch. Later, this protruding point was removed, since the main mark (usually red) is usually enough for everyone.
Thank you)) and I think, well, they won’t just do it
as Krylov said - and the chest just opened))
Good day! Thanks for the review! Tell me, please, what kind of adapter is needed for this lens on a Canon 600d camera. I read about the chip (focusing on infinity), I want to order on Ali, but I do not know the correct name of the adapter. Thanks)
Any PK-EOS.