Thanks, J.C. The unit I have must be the older version, as it's 80mm long. Perhaps I ought to put it on eBay and keep my eyes open for the later version. Well, vise versa, of course! It is SMC. Is the 5 element design a mediochre performer? (It's relatively new to me, and I haven't used it much at all.)
Every time I've read a performance report about the 135 2.5, it was praiseworthy, and I doubt everyone who commented had the newer version. Perhaps the difference is subtle? keith whaley "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > No, there were two different S-M-C Takumar (both screwmount) > 135 2.5 lenses. The first is 80mm long, the second is > 85mm long (measured from front edge of barrel to flange > with focus set at infinity). I know of no way to tell just by a > serial number alone. > > The second version is an improved 6 element design while > the first is the same very old 5 element design as the super-Takumar. > > The second version is the one to get. It's about the same as or > slightly rarer as the first version. Last one I sold went for > $125 on ebay about 6 months ago to a buyer who knew the difference. > > BTW, the 135 2.5 "Takumar" bayonet mount lens (non-smc) is a total piece > of crap budget series lens not worth buying at any price...... > > JCO
