It's my understanding that the two lenses are the same glass and build quality. If you don't mind the slower changing of the lenses in a K-mount body while using the Tak and the adapter, the Tak is the better bargain, so far as price is concerned.
I took my MG body with me to Hawaii, and frequently interchanged K- and M-42 mount lenses, taking my time. I did take and use the Tak 135/2.5 a lot, and I love it! Excellent photos from it. The Tak Bayonet will give you slightly less sharp photos, and overall quality will be very slightly less, but if you won't be super critical and need the speed of lens changes, nothing wrong with the Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5. Or, spend a bit more money and get the SMC K-mount version! All up to you! keith whaley Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: > > Hi! > Is the lens from the subject worth anything as a portrait lens and general > purpose short telephoto prime, or is it useless and I should look for SMC-K > 135/2.5? Some words on this Takumar's sharpness, colour rendition, contrast? > TIA!!! > > -- > Best Regards > Sylwek
