Showcase Pentax 55mm f/1.8 Asahi Super-Takumar (with Zhongyi Lens Turbo II and NEX-6)

[Kirkp]

I'm growing to like this thrift shop find.

   ---            

Beau by Telllekstr, on Flickr.

 

[unlo]

very nice.and very sharp

 

[jai]

It's a great little lens. Good size match on an NEX. I use mine with a Minolta SR-mount speed booster and an SR-M42 adapter.

Look at that Bokeh though! I haven't seen this from anything other than a Pentax. It shimmery? Isn't it? It must be some kind of aberration but I think it looks cool and isn't too distracting.

 

[xXx1]

Here are more reviews of the lens:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-S-M-C-Super-Auto-Takumar-55mm-F1.8.html

I have the K 55mm/1.8.

 

[Kirkp]

... Look at that Bokeh though! I haven't seen this from anything other than a Pentax. It shimmery? Isn't it? It must be some kind of aberration but I think it looks cool and isn't too distracting.

Some of that shimmer might be real, since there's a lake behind that chain link fence. But it's definitely not a "creamy bokeh" lens.
A good way to evaluate the bokeh potential of a lens is to photograph an object at different distances from the camera with white christmas lights far behind it and a dark background. With this lens, the image circle of each light is close to neutral -- nearly constant light within each circle, and a faint white outline. Of course, stopped down, those circles become hexagons but remain neutral. I think my "Beau" photo was stopped down a bit. Those neutral hexagons convolving with the diamond-shaped chain links might have created the shimmery artifacts. Not creamy, but not too distracting either.
In that photo, I especially like how the focus just starts to blur on the right ear and the left shoulder while nearly every hair on his face & neck remain sharp. I used magnification and the EVF to get that focus. I don't trust focus peaking for anything where focus is critical.

 

[davect01]

Lovely looking shot

 

[jai]

I've done a little comparison, of:

• 55mm Super Takumar F1.8 (mine is m42) with speed booster shot at F2
• 50mm MD Rokkor F1.4 with the same speed booster at F2
• Sony 35mm F1.8 at F2

All shots in the same location, same shutter speed. You will see the extra brightness from the speed booster, and slight differences in focal length.

Pentax:

   ---            

Minolta:

   ---            

Sony:

   ---            

The Pentax does almost keep up with the Minolta on detail, I think it does suffer a bit more from ghosting. The light was very high contrast.

The Sony is significantly sharper. Not really fair though, its gathering as much light as the Pentax and Minolta would at F2.8.

 

[jai]

Ok so i tested again to make it fair. Pentax/Minolta with speed booster at F4 vs Sony at F2.8. Thanks to the speed booster this will be roughly the same depth of field, same light gathered.

Pentax:

   ---            

Minolta:
[url=https://flic.kr/p/rALtsc]

   ---            

Sony:

   ---            

Very little between them! I think the Rokkor is actually sharpest, but only by a tiny amount.

Hard to tell with this image, but the way things fall out of focus is nicer on the Pentax.[/url]

 

[Kirkp]

Thanks for those Jai. I like my Rokkor 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.7 lenses, and have thought of doing a similar comparison to the Pentax. Except I'd put a string of mini-lights on the wall behind it to help evaluate the bokeh.
The Sony SEL35F18 comparison is helpful. That lens is tempting for the autofocus, OSS, 7 leaf aperture, and probably better coatings. But due to price and "focus by wire" (instead of mechanical focus) I'll probably stick to the legacy primes for a while.

 

[jai]

Yeah, I will admit that I didn't make it easy to compare Bokeh!

The Sony is a great lens, but I never use it when I want to manual focus (except those test shots). Focus by wire is awful. But it's a very different use case, much lighter and smaller. And I give the camera to someone else and they can actually use the thing.

What I learned from the test is, the sweet spot for the 55mm Takumar F1.8 is F4 (with a speed booster or full frame). It's wide enough to get decent background separation, but stopped down enough to get performance similar to a modern lens.

I think the MD Rokkor 50mm F1.4 gets really good a bit earlier at F2.8, but it does not like busy backgrounds!

 

[sven karma]

A5100, normal m42 adapter

   ---            

ILCE-5100    ----    0mm    f/1.0    1/125s    ISO 100

 

[WNG]

Nice work!
The 55mm Takumars are one of the best nifty-fifties performance, build, and value wise. Sort of a reference point to judge all others by. As long as they aren't too badly yellowed by the Thorium.
I think the bokeh is notably different from the excellent Minolta MD Rokkor 50 f/1.4. Bubble bokeh is easy with the MD, and so clean.
Each have their own character to justify owning both.
Similarly, my SEL 50 f/1.8 has stayed in the E-mount camera bag along the same lines of reasoning. I've not been shooting any subjects which need AF, but there when called for.
Night time street photography of people is one of those times.

 

[sven karma]

Nice work!
The 55mm Takumars are one of the best nifty-fifties performance, build, and value wise. Sort of a reference point to judge all others by. As long as they aren't too badly yellowed by the Thorium.
I think the bokeh is notably different from the excellent Minolta MD Rokkor 50 f/1.4. Bubble bokeh is easy with the MD, and so clean.
Each have their own character to justify owning both.
Similarly, my SEL 50 f/1.8 has stayed in the E-mount camera bag along the same lines of reasoning. I've not been shooting any subjects which need AF, but there when called for.
Night time street photography of people is one of those times.

I've never tried any Minolta lenses but I know what you mean. My copy is a bit yellowed and since getting the PenF 38/1.8 and losing use of a speed booster in switching from Fuji to Sony I've been using it less, since part of the point of switching was to run 50s at 75. Guess I'm saving it for if I ever go FF!