answers: 29

  1. Forumrecon
    15.10.2018

    similar in characteristics to Jupiter-21m

    Reply

  2. anonym
    16.10.2018

    Tell me why an adapter with a lisa? And in kenon without a lens. There is where to read about it?

    Reply

  3. Michael
    16.10.2018

    Pentax Week is in full swing)) Interesting reviews, thanks

    Reply

    • Alexey
      16.10.2018

      Yes, there were three reviews in a row! But for the majority, Pentax is an incomprehensible curiosity. And the optics are actually super cool for their time.

      Reply

      • koba
        16.10.2018

        the ethos now Pentax does not have a significant share of the world market, and in 1980 he sold 10 million cameras and on this indicator beat Kenon and Nikon together. And Pentah's manual lenses have always been famous for their quality and design.

        Reply

      • Andrey T.
        16.10.2018

        Not “in” 1980, but “to” 1980, i.e. for the period 1952-1980

        Reply

      • Andrey T.
        18.10.2018

        If you read in English, on Photonet there is a memoir of Western grandfathers about the camera market in 1960-1980. They do not agree in everything, but in the main they are 100% uniform: 1) until the 80th year, all the pros were on Nikonov with a very small share of Hasselbladov (portrait shooting). 2) Pentax was perceived by everyone as a manufacturer of cameras in the amateur segment. Hence, quite likely, and good sales volumes. According to sales statistics, I will not go into details, but from 1945 to 1980. Altogether, Pentax's share of the Western camera market was less than 10%. The result is good, but not outstanding.

        Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        19.10.2018

        Tell me where do you get this?

        Reply

      • Michael
        16.10.2018

        Well, it is well known with whom cooperation began) Apparently taught

        Reply

  4. Nikolai (sn797)
    16.10.2018

    Liked it! And constructive, which in general is understandable :) and the picture. Sharp with pleasant bokeh, it seems, nothing more is needed! Backlight, yes, is problematic, but that's why backlight :) Even with very good glasses, very good photographers try to avoid it. I think that not the best performance on F / 4 is due to inaccurate focusing. A tripod plus Live View 10x plus a static item, I think it would be completely different :) I rarely comment here, maybe once a year, when something really hooks. And Takumarych hooked!
    Liked it!

    Reply

  5. Andrey T.
    16.10.2018

    Takumar is comparatively (with other Takumaras) mediocre and therefore cheap. The picture is very similar to SMC 135 \ 3.5, which is not surprising. You can get confused if you don't look closely. The same idiosyncrasy for some lights and a very strong dependence of the color quality on the nature of the illumination. For those familiar with the Takumaras - complete déjà vu ...

    Reply

  6. Beggar Pi
    19.10.2018

    In general, of course, not a review, but solid links and a standard set of chewing gum about who where why look here ...

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      20.10.2018

      If something is not clear about the lens, ask, add it to the review or try to write it in the comments.
      In terms of review, this is an old manual lens, which, in fact, implies its meager set of functions. I see no point in writing long odes, just like writing a long subjective essay about a lens.

      Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        22.10.2018

        Yes, everything is clear with the lens. It is not clear what for so far 4/5 of the reviews are loaded with unnecessary links to where it is attached and what it works with. This is understandable to every wretched hedgehog who visits your site! As for the optics - glass produced until the mid-70s makes all zooms by 200 on its 5.6 hundred - well, except for the top 2.8 with aspherics and nano. We are missing this. What does the fear of the counter have to do with it? In 90 percent of cases, even in the SSC series, they are not sharpened to work head-on against the sun. Feature - yes, most likely. Common at the time. Did the koniks and minolt have any other way? Not a word about permission. Not inspired by 4.0? Draw parallels with 3.5 for example. Takumars - they are not helios - from curves to curves regardless of modification, in tons of helicoid slag and with bottle glass. This is history and this is one of those lines that will survive the real torn apart and resold to #yam Pentax. And if you undertake a review of Takumara, then please do not limit yourself to a ton of links to # er knows that the general conclusion from three paragraphs - that it is about nothing - but dig a little into the history of the issue. Write about 17-55 ...

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        22.10.2018

        Thank you

        Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        22.10.2018

        Nema for scho. And here's another thing - you marked in the important thing about the back pin of the jump rope. You write - “Important: on the side of the mount, the lens has an additional very small pin, which is responsible for the MAN / AUTO switch. The MAN / AUTO switch works only when this pin is pressed. As a result, the MAN / AUTO switch works only when the lens is attached to the camera, or when the rear protective cover is attached ”….
        Stupidity and complete nonsense. The switch works regardless of whether you have this pin on the lens or someone has broken it out or is already mechanically pressed into the body by someone, or or ... In manual mode, when you turn the aperture ring, the lamellas close the hole to the working value - thereby we aim “into the dark”. In the machine, when you turn the ring, nothing happens - except for turning the slide on the inner glass of the bayonet - in fact, it transfers the aperture value to the Spotmatic of those series, in which, taking into account the mechanically transmitted information about the aperture from the lens, taking into account the TTL measurement and the shutter speed selected on the ring according to the shutter speed and the command occurs in the viewfinder more less equal. When we slap on the descent, the U-shaped #erashechka in the shaft rises, drowning the movable jumper on the lens, the aperture closes to the desired value and the shutter is triggered, exposing the frame.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.10.2018

        Please note that I have noted not about the pin of the skipping rope, but for the additional pin. It is clearly and clearly written in my review.
        How the aperture setting on the M42 for lenses works is described in many reviews and in separate articles. In this review, I did not repeat this information.
        You wrote everything right, about how the Man / Auto switch works and about the principle of how the auto iris works, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are two pins in this lens and I didn’t write about the usual pin to close the diaphragm.
        This is clearly shown on this link: 1 main aperture control pin, 2 - an additional one, which is not available with conventional M42 lenses and without pressing which it is impossible to change the position of the Man / Auto switch.

        Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        22.10.2018

        And your tail seems to me to control the dog. In general, on non-working jump ropes it happens in different ways. But at the same time, NOT ONE SWITCH in working order on Takumars does not depend on the tail jumping. Moreover, on adapters like 42-eos, the jump rope is never needed - when the switch is working, we put it in the manual, if it is absent or the mechanism is broken - it also happens - we sink the jump rope into the lens body, bending it a little before that.
        Such are Arkady pies. Read sometimes what you focus on readers. In other words, read what you write. I need to read but you read and the hair moves.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.10.2018

        No, I don’t think so. You made a mistake in analyzing the problem. Again link to the heart of the problem. Also, for the automation of the jump I have clearly and clearly indicated on the plate

        Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        22.10.2018

        Pribisochka - in the general case, it is a jump rope in order to focus on the sharpness “into light”. It is understood that at any of the diaphragms selected on the lens, we aimed at the native carcass and at the moment the shutter was activated, it automatically worked it - our selected aperture - and worked it off. On the digital, through the adapter, this is no longer a blessing, but as a rule, an extra hemorrhoid, especially in most cases over the past xx years, something is wrong with the mechanism and it has to be collective farmed.
        That’s all.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.10.2018

        We all know this about the automation of jumping ropes; here, on Radozhiv, this has been described more than once. Therefore, in the review, this information is not explained in detail, but only indicated "automatic aperture control using the aperture ring and aperture pusher of cameras that have it", which in my opinion explains the whole essence of the phenomenon, because the main task of the jump rope is "automation" diaphragm.

        And again, you confused the two protrusions on the mount of this Takumar and are trying to fight the mills. Link. Also, note that there is information on the pentax club that users who tried to switch Man / Auto without clamping the second pin damaged this switch, because my posts about an unusual phenomenon for an ordinary M42 lens are justified and designed to leave the lens intact.

        Reply

      • Beggar Pi
        23.10.2018

        Well, I look fixed in the review - it's already good! Sometimes truth is born in an argument - rarely but aptly. I telegraphed EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE JUMP!) Pointed for the kid - great! Thanks.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.10.2018

        In the review, I did not fix (did not correct the existing text). I just added a more detailed explanation in the situation (UPDATE) for users, who can make a mistake in identifying the situation, which actually happened. You need to be careful.

        Reply

  7. Andrey T.
    22.10.2018

    The SMC line is, of course, a masterpiece. Almost all.

    Reply

  8. anonym
    30.10.2018

    I have such a lens, I liked the construct very much. But I shot very little on it, a not very popular focal point on my crop. I tried to shoot at full frame through an adapter with a lens, but the quality is lost. a couple of shots on Kenon 10d attached.
    CRW-1980 CRW-2054

    Reply

  9. anonym
    30.10.2018

    I have such a lens, the construct is very good, and the picture pleases. But I shot them a little, as for me this is not a popular focal point on crop. I tried and at the full frame, through the lenses, the quality is naturally noticeably lost, but everyone already knows about this). And so, I liked the glass, for its 4000 rubles of value. For a leisurely shoot with adapters. I remembered that now I had Fujik clearing with focusing, I would have to try it too.

    Reply

  10. Alexey
    12.12.2018

    Tell me what kind of square stump in the area of ​​the diaphragm button? Because of it, the lens is not screwed into the adapter by about a millimeter, I just tried to insert it into the carcass hole without the adapter holding it with my hands, it seems that there is even infinity. I wonder what will happen if you cut it? Maybe an adapter with a lens will not be needed?

    Reply

  11. Igor
    24.10.2021

    I came across such a lens and of course you have a review on your website. Thank you so much for your efforts!

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer