Hi all, this is from Paul Fox who had an excellent response. He may join us, but for the moment couldn't work out how to join. I showed him the way...
:-) Paul Delcour >From Paul Fox: I just found the thread on pentax discission forum but I don't know to reply.. Anyway : I have made my expperiences with many Pentax 135 lenses : The 1.8 A, K2.5, K-Takumar 2.5, M42-Takumar 2.5, A 2.8, M 3.5 First : The 1.8 is the best of them all but nearly noone will sell it (by good reason !). The second best is the K 2.5 (that U mentioned being on ebay) The 3.5 is not THAT good (in my opinion) - and that is supported by a big 135 lens test in german ColorFoto magazin in the early 80's. There were nearly all 135mm lenses... (and they support my opinion about the K 2.5 being one of the best 135 in the world and the 3.5 being good but not phantastic). The A 2.8 is really not a good lens ! The M42-Takumar 2.5 I have is an SMC one and really great - but not on same level as K 2.5 (maybe because it's older and the SMC has been improved then). I use it with adaptor ring on my Canon EOS that I'm using too. The K Takumar is really not bad ! It's made quite fine, has built-in lens hood (the K 2.5 and M42-Takumar or 1.8 don't have ! you have to screw a lens shade on), is lighter, you have to beware of flare - you should leave the sun behind you - not in front, otherwise... o.K. : I've been making indoor sport shots with it and portraits as well and this lens lens was very good in both cases. I just sold it because I could get the K 2.5 and that is really heavy ! - but for indoor sports a little bit better (even not THAT much !). 40 EUR is a fair price for the Takumar ! The K 2.5 mostly sells for 60-90 Euro on ebay. You have to decide whether this extra money is it worth for you ! One thing : If you want to take portraits the K 2.5 may even be too sharp and contrasty - every line in the face can be seen. There the K-Takkumar is even smoother - many people liked portraits with the K-Takumar even better ! Kind reagrds Paul Fox
