Takumar bayonet 135mm f2.5 - vintage lens review and test

-

Takumar lenses are well known and praised for their quality in the vintage lenses community, to the point that they have achieved almost an iconic status and prices in recent years have risen like a cake in the oven.

But not all Takumar were created equal; somewhere in between the 80s and 90s, Asahi Optical produced a sort of obscure line under the name Takumar Bayonet and the lens we’re talking about today is one of those.

Unlike previous lines with the same name, these more recent lenses lack the Super-Multi-Coating, have bayonet mounts, from which their name, and they look just like the Pentax-M series.

Allegedly, they were intended as a budget option, so let’s take a closer look and see for ourselves.

The Takumar is made out of metal, it weights around 390g, it is 78mm long when focused to infinity and 97mm when fully extended, with a 52mm front thread. It also has a built-in sunhood.

The iris has 8 blades, the aperture is clicked and it goes from f2.5 to f22 with half steps.

The focusing ring is big and rubberized and it turns 270 degrees and minimum focusing distance is 1.2m.

Flange distance for the Pentax K mount is 45,46mm and can be easily adapted to mirrorless cameras. (affiliate link)

Compared to the Asahi Pentax-M 135 3.5, the Takumar is bigger and heavier, to accommodate the wider iris and it can focus 30cm closer.

Sharpness wide open is good across the frame, with minimal chromatic aberration and some blooming in the highlights. Stopping down to f8 it gets sharper.

As I said, some chromatic aberration is visible wide open but it quickly disappears by closing the iris a little bit.

Specular highlights have hard edges and backgrounds might feel busy because of that.

Colors tend to be on the warmer side without being saturated and while not lacking in contrast, it’s not punchy either .

Even without the super multi coating, flares are very well controlled, but the lens is prone to ghosting.

The Takumar bayonet might not be as good as the original Takumar lenses, but it is far from a bad lens, so I cannot understands why many people seem despise it, treating it like a toy not worth using.

I think this is a good lens, I have no complaints about it and I am satisfied with the images I took. Would I use the Takumar over the Pentax-M 3.5? Honestly, only to shoot at night or in a dark environment, I still prefer the compact size of the Pentax.


Adapter on Amazon (affiliate link)
Bu my prints on RedBubble:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Yashica 135mm f2.8 ML - Lens review

-
Image
  Last winter I bought three Yashica lenses and a camera body fo quite cheap, because they were not in the best conditions, especially the 135mm.  The optical elements were dirty, the aperture had been poorly de-clicked and, worst of all, the focusing helicoid was completely off and needed to be recalibrated and lubricated, so I gave it to a lab to be fixed and cleaned and now it works perfectly.  Yashica is one of those well know names in the industry, with a history dating back to the late '40s and in 1975 they introduced the Contax Yashica bayonet mount in collaboration with Carl Zeiss. They had three ranges of lenses: the basic one was the DSB, which had single coatings, above that was the ML, with multi coatings, and the top of the line was the Zeiss AE series.  Now, back to this lens.  The body is made of metal and weights 410 grams; it is 76mm long when focused to infinity and 90mm when fully extended, with a 52mm front thread and, my favorite feature, a built in sun hood.  
Read more

Soligor 28mm f2.8 C/D - vintage lens review

-
Image
Soligor was a supplier of photographic equipment based in the United States and Germany, active mostly between the ‘60s and the early ‘90s. They had a very comprehensive catalog of lenses, made in Japan by manufacturers like Tokina and Tamron, covering a wide array of focal lengths and they were available for all major camera brands. Soligor lenses were also sold under alternative brand names like Hanimar, Porst or Super Carener, in different geographical areas. From my research, the 28mm 2.8 alone has at least 21 different versions, so chances are that yours looks different than mine. Specifically, the one I own is part of the C/D line released in the mid-1970s as a premium line of lenses. The Soligor 28mm is made out of metal, it weights 200g, it is 33mm long when focused to infinity and 37mm when extended, with a 49mm front thread. The iris has six blades, the aperture is clicked and it goes from f2.8 to f22 The focusing ring is rubberized and it turns 180 degrees and mi
Read more

Canon FD 100mm f2.8 - Lens review

-
Image
 Canon FD lenses have grown in popularity in the last few years because they're cheap, easy to find, reliable and with cheap adapters you can mount them to modern digital cameras. Mirrorless like Sony's or Canon's EOS R and RF will work best and will be easier to adapt, but you can use Canon FD lenses on your DSLRs too, although you might need a different adapter with a focal reducer, due to the incompatible flange distance. Personally, I'm not a fan of focal reducers, as they cad degrade or alter the quality of the image produced by the lens.  Anyway, these Canon FD lenses are completely manual and have no electronic, and this one specifically is part of the so-called nFD, or new FD, series, introduced in 1979.  Everyone seems to love them so, back in 2017 when I was getting into vintage lenses, I was eager to try them. Luckily, a friend of mine owned two of them and he was kind enough to let me borrow them for a few weeks.  Right off the bat this lens sounds promising
Read more