Fred wrote: > > First, I wouldn't worry about the difference in smallest aperture - > that's not a difference in the glass, nor is it likely to be > significant for portrait use in any case, either. (And, it's not > unusual - many of the screwmounts went only to f/16.) >
> As for the glass, well, you don't want (for this application) the > Auto-Takumar 85/1.8 (5 elements in 4 groups, and only a > semi-automatic diaphragm), but instead you want the SMC Takumar > 85/1.8 (6 elements in 6 groups), which is the same as the K 85/1.8 > (except for the mount, the smallest aperture, and - I would assume - > a small difference in SMC coatings). And, I don't think that there > was more than one version of the SMC Takumar 85/1.8, so you can't > get "the wrong one" by mistake (someone please correct me if I'm > wrong on this). > I agree. The difference in the smallest aperture is not very important, but in the book I qouoted (1977 5th edition, translated into Spanish), Keppler wrote that the SMC Takumar 85 1.8 is a 5-element lens, then the book is wrong, or the K and the SMC Takumar are different lenses. I don't have the Takumar, but I am eagerly waiting for the SMC K which I bought some days ago :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Zaragoza (Aragon) - Spain ------------------------------------------------------------------ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
