answers: 39

  1. Sergei
    19.02.2017

    I have a super-multi-coated Takumar 1,4 50 mm, I read on the net that the yellowing of the enlightenment is “cured” under ultra-violet light. It will be necessary to try it somehow)) I did not get up on Canon due to the fact that the adapter rests on the diaphragm leash and clamps it, not even allowing the adapter to completely screw in. Even if the lens has phonitics, there are three types of radioactive radiation, alpha radiation, beta radiation and gamma radiation, and so Takumar does not fonit in the gamma spectrum, this is the X-ray range, and its radiation in the alpha or beta range is blocked by human skin or a paper sheet ( physics). I use Sony A100. I remove the “warmth” of enlightenment by adjusting the temperature in Kelvin. In general, an interesting lens. On the open softit, even stronger than Helios 44 series. The ease of handling is also lower than that of Helios.

    Reply

    • Paul
      19.02.2017

      Super Takumar can be cured of unwanted yellowness by simply exposing its lenses to sunlight, but it is not for long, let's say a "symptomatic" treatment.

      Reply

      • Rodion
        19.02.2017

        It didn’t help me.

        Reply

    • Rodion
      19.02.2017

      Yeah, they always admired such posts from excellent students in physics.
      In general, everything is said correctly, but with the terms (“and so Takumar does not fonit in the gamma spectrum, this is the X-ray range”), you need to be more careful.
      Thorium in takumar lenses is phonite with alpha particles. Yes, their mileage is minimal - they linger easily and naturally.
      I measured the background of the detector in the Academgorodok of NSU. It is felt by the device only directly near the lenses.

      Reply

      • Paul
        19.02.2017

        Yes, but nevertheless, this background is the basis for confiscation of the lens at customs if you bought it on ebay for example. and in fact, Alpha particles are retained by the camera and the top layer of the skin a little more than completely)

        Reply

      • Rodion
        21.02.2017

        Are there real cases to delay?

        Reply

    • Pashqwert
      21.11.2017

      About this lens with thorium glass (namely glass, and not enlightenment), the lenses are quite competent comrade in his video, applying dosimeters to the rear lens of this lens and measuring different types of radiation, tells why these glasses were replaced with lanthanum, for which customs officers like them, about likelihood of cataracts and harm from storage.
      About the lens and thorium glasses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p68s8BBf7U

      Reply

  2. Sergey
    19.02.2017

    I never understood why people buy these takumars, as for me it's bullshit, the color pattern and even the sharpness is no better than the same penny helios of the 44s, but it costs "dear mother". If you really want aperture with normal image quality, it is better to buy an old zuiko 50 1.4 or fd 50 1.4 or the same nikkor 50 1.4 old at the same price .. but this is not a miracle of the Japanese optical industry.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      19.02.2017

      Zuiko - fabulous, cute, beautiful and functional :). I have a review of this here Olympus Om-System Zuiko MC Auto-S 1: 1.4 f = 50mm

      Reply

    • Rodion
      19.02.2017

      The drawing is just quite interesting, but because of the wretched T-stop (F / 2.2, if compared with Helios-44 MS) and low sharpness with an open application, I consider it generally doubtful.

      Reply

    • Paul
      12.02.2019

      All these soviet shortcomings didn’t stand next to Takumar, I have more than ten Soviet about fifty dollars, 6 of helios, they lose in everything, details, color contrast and micro-contrast, sharpness at the corners is just hellishly miserable. I have an SMC version of Takumar, the last one is yellowness.

      Reply

    • Richard
      17.10.2020

      You looked in the wrong place, wrong and wrong. I have a K 55 / 1.8 in a new state (Mint), 1977. Prior to that, Nikkor 10 / 50 Ai-s was 1.4 years old. Before him there was Nikkor AF 50 / 1.4 (not D, Japan). Comparing Nikkor to this 55 mm is like comparing a 1977 Zhiguli to a BMW of the same year. In Nikkor's open picture, the picture is garbage, veil and haze, in this 55 mm by 1.8 sharpness and purity are uncompromising! This glass is of the Leica class or the 77th lima. 55 is better than Canon 50L and decently better. The glass contains lanthanum and has an amber brown hue. The Pentax has better mechanics, a cut higher build quality. The examples in the review are only worthy of a trash can!

      Reply

  3. Nicholas
    19.02.2017

    Good afternoon, Arkady!)
    Wildly sorry for the offtopic, but I need your advice! I want to buy a Soviet manual portrait lens for my Nikon D3000. The choice fell on the MC Granite-11N F4,5 80-200mm and Arsat H 1: 2 50mm. I read your reviews on them, from cover to cover, but still I can not finally make a choice. Thanks in advance for your reply.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      19.02.2017

      MS Helios-81H, aka ARSAT 50/2.

      Reply

  4. Evgey
    19.02.2017

    Phonite is not enlightenment; thorium is part of glass; glass is fonit!

    Reply

    • Rodion
      20.02.2017

      +1 That's right.

      Reply

  5. Oleg
    20.02.2017

    Thanks for the review! Taki Zeiss will be more interesting!

    Reply

  6. anonym
    20.02.2017

    Thanks for the review! The question is not quite on the topic, please advise the manual old 25-35mm lens not very dark, which will become 35mm, thanks!

    Reply

    • Oleg
      20.02.2017
      • anonym
        20.02.2017

        Thanks. Preferably not Soviet

        Reply

    • Alex
      20.02.2017

      Takumar 35/2

      Reply

      • anonym
        20.02.2017

        Thank you!

        Reply

      • Alex
        20.02.2017

        I want this myself. It used to be expensive, but now it looked at eBay and was completely upset.

        Reply

      • anonym
        20.02.2017

        I looked at the photos taken by him, I liked it. Looked at ebay - wow! $ 120 is a little expensive, but what about $ 35 3.5?

        Reply

      • Rodion
        21.02.2017

        So he is miserable, you yourself estimate - 35 / 3.5! It's a keyhole, not glass. Even Mir-1 white Zagorsky is much more interesting. Why such a craving for Japanese nameplates in general - I don't understand. I do not believe that this takumar in sharpness will be at least somewhat seriously different from Mir-1 on equal terms.

        Reply

      • Rodion
        21.02.2017

        It was not for nothing that Mir-1 received the Grand Prix in its time, it was indeed one of the best shiriks. But Mir-1B has tarnished the reputation of this series of lenses, alas ...
        So you can actually look for a good Mir-1.
        If you need something much better, pay attention to the 35 / 2.4. It's just quality.
        ps with tautology it amusingly comes out for me, yeah.

        Reply

      • Sergey
        24.02.2017

        I remember a year ago you, Rodion, said that Zeiss is a waste of money, and brand fees.

        Reply

      • Rodion
        24.02.2017

        Yes, if you take something like Planar 50 / 1.7 C / Y.
        Flektogon 35 / 2.4 is really a very decent lens.

        Reply

      • Reader
        16.01.2019

        And where did Mir1 get ripped off if not a secret ?!

        Reply

      • Rodion
        21.02.2017

        Takumar 35/2 steps on the same rake as 50 / 1.4. Formally, it is 1: 2, and according to T-stops it will be, as it were, not 1: 3.5. The picture, like 50 / 1.4, is very nice, but the color rendering and real aperture are extremely poor.
        If you take it - for the sake of artistic qualities. When looking for 35/2 for F / 2, it's better to take anything other than takumar.

        Reply

  7. Alexander
    25.03.2017

    Friends join a group where you can buy similar manual optics and photographic equipment.

    https://vk.com/oldlens

    Reply

  8. Gregory
    11.10.2018

    Yellowing of enlightenment is “cured” under
    395 nm ultraviolet light in 10-12 hours.
    Image quality is changing dramatically.

    Reply

    • Nicholas
      10.02.2019

      I confirm. I used a UV LED lamp (three 1 W LEDs each), shone the first couple of days in the rear lens by putting it on the foil, then took the second lamp and began to shine front and back. For greater reliability shone a week. the yellowness is gone.
      There was also a problem with the fungus - "cobweb". It was easily removed by soaking for a couple of minutes in a mixture of 3% hydrogen peroxide and ammonia in a 1: 1 ratio.

      Reply

      • Paul
        27.01.2020

        I also confirm. I ordered a 5W USB powered lamp on Ali, followed the same instructions. On the very first day, yellowness / orangishness almost disappeared (a small spot remained on ~ 30% of the area), on the second day it passed completely. Glass is not completely transparent, a light shade of yellowness is all the same, but not as terrifying as before. For reliability, I changed the side where the lamp shone every 12 hours, and also put foil on it. There is no difference in transparency and color between the 2nd and 4th days. I think it’s enough to shine for two, two and a half days.

        Reply

  9. Vitali
    28.11.2020

    it's not yours - portraits of women - no need, take pictures of flowers and cats

    Reply

  10. Beginner
    18.12.2020

    Hello, I have such a lens as in the article. But when you install it through an adapter with a chip on the Olympus E-520, the diaphragm pin remains unpressed, i.e. you can only shoot with the aperture fully open. Same with the other Yashica 50mm 1: 1.9 yashinon ds lens described here. What's wrong?

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer