Hi Eric,
I consider the Takumar an unfairly maligned lens. I took the following
three shots with the 135mm/2.5 bayonet the first few times I ever used
it, and wouldn't hesitate to pay $40 for it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/4895210419/in/set-72157624608728365/#/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/4894906307/in/set-72157624608728365/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/4895746210/in/set-72157624608728365/
One thing I will say is that it is susceptible to lens flare, so the
hood should be used on every outdoor shot. And, it can be soft at wider
aperture settings, and slow to focus in low light. Other than that, I
love shooting with it now that I know its boundaries. I'm getting much
sharper shots nowadays than I did in the above images -- FWIW.
Best,
Walt
On 10/12/2010 11:40 AM, Eric Weir wrote:
Following a treat of breakfast at a wonderful little Ethiopian restaurant here,
I stopped by Wings Camera, which sells mostly used stuff, a couple doors down.
Went to the Pentax shelf to see what they had. First lens I picked up was a
Takumar 135/2.5. Over the weekend a couple folks suggested the Pentax M 135/3.5
as a great, inexpensive option to consider for my trip to Northern Arizona.
They'll take $40 for the Takumar, but the Pentax is available from KEH, also
right here in Atlanta, for $45 to $65. I'm wondering if anyone here's familiar
with the Takumar and might have a sense of how it compares to the Pentax.
Thanks,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA USA
[email protected]
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
