Love it, Bruce. The Super Takumar was probably a 135mm f2.5. I don't think a f2.8 was made in that focal length. The f3.5 is much narrower (49mm filter size).
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > Trekked down to The Pilot Tavern in Toronto's trendy Yorkville area > this aft to catch some of Canada's jazz A-listers slumming it. Barry > Elmes, Artie Roth, Kelly Jefferson, and Lorne Lofsky putting their > stamp on standards -- it gets no better than this. > > But what really took me by surprise was seeing a guy near me pull out > a K-01 with what I'm pretty sure was a Super-Takumar 135/2.8 on it. > I'd never even seen a K-01 in real life before let alone in a place > usually disfigured by Canonistas and Nikonites. I had only just got > over the shock of that when another guy arrived and produced a K-5 > with a DA*55/1.4 on it. WTF? Was I dreaming? The only other cameras in > sight were the usual iPhone wavers. > > If I had brought my kit we might have attained some sort of strange > critical mass and caused temporal havoc, so it's just as well I'd only > come for the music. > > -- > -bmw > > -- > 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. -- Nothing is sure but death and Pentaxes. -- 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.
