Thanks for the honest review. I'm checking one out tomorrow for $30 and she says it's got a little dust in it. I'll be using it with a M42-FX speed booster so this extra stop might make it a tad more decent. Who knows, but for $30 it'll make a good addition to the collection.
I have a full shelf of Super Takumars, including this lens. I haven’t found it very inspiring thus far. I keep it because the Tak’s are to me the pinnacle of vintage lenses as far as feel goes. Just buttery smooth, and a joy to use.
I don’t understand. You used zone focus rather than focusing critically, you didn’t use a hood and despite a very decent looking test chart even wide open, you couldn’t see what was special. The image quality of that lens is actually rather high. You hobbled it significantly by not taking care.
I had my doubts about this lens (Takumar super-multi-coated 35mm f3.5), having only paid $35 for it. Plus it was kind of slow at f3.5.. I'm not sure if you got a dud, but I absolutely love mine. The lens is very contrasty and produces deep rich colors. The small details are absolutely amazing. What tops it off, is the lack of vertical distortion. I can point the camera at tall buldings and they come out looking straight. Out of all my Takumar lenses, this is one of my favorites even though I also own the infamous 50mm f1.4 8-element and the 85mm f1.8. For the money this lens is a bargain and can't be beat ! I also own the Super-Takumar version, but I'm not sure which is which ? I think last time I went out with it, I used the Super-Takumar version ? Maybe these lenses don't work as well on mirroless cameras ? I tested mine on my Pentax K-5 IIs DSLR ?
The point of these old Takumars is that you use them ‘because’ of the lens quirks like barrel distortion, soft corners and vignetting. It gives images a retro 3D ‘pop’ that’s somewhat missing from most of today’s 5-zillion element, computer-designed behemoths. If you’re buying a lens for professional production work then a $40 wide angle lens from 1965 probably isn’t the best option. Prices are going up these days because lots of people are getting into cinematography with their DSLRs, due to the lockdowns, and the 35mm f3.5 Tak is the go-to wide angle if you can’t afford the f2. Great vid though. That take-out you had at the beginning looked awesome.
Yeah, it was definitely a delicious lunch. If I wasn't a fan of these lenses, I wouldn't have a shelf of them... and make videos about them. I feel confident I can point out their flaws without hurting their feelings.
Thanks for the review. The 35mm is my personal favorite focal length for one-lens/one-full-frame body situations. I own and use the following 35mm lenses: 35mm f/3.5 Takumar for my Pentax Spotmatic SLRs 35mm f/2.8 Vivitar lens with M42 lens mount 35mm f/2 Nikkor for my Nikon SLRs 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor for my Nikon SLRs 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon for my Leica rangefinders Most of the time, I use the f/1.4 lenses and carry the slower lenses as backups. However, I rarely need backups.
@@Fujifilm2021 The 35mm f/1.4 are the best for me. I use the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 on the Leica M6 for shooting black & white film. I use the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 on Nikon F2 or F4 for shooting color film. When shooting digital color and digital black & white, I prefer to use a Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 on a Fuji X-Pro2 APS-C digital mirrorless instead of my 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss on my Leica M10 full-frame digital rangefinder. The reason is because my M10 body has proven to be less reliable than my X-Pro2 body.
The switch is there to toggle the automatic aperture on and off. Since you are adapting the lens, this feature doesn't apply... but... If your adapter has a ridge that keeps the aperture pin pushed in, you need to set the lens to manual for the aperture ring to work properly. If your adapter doesn't keep the pin pushed in, then there will be no difference between Auto and Manual settings.
In the past I’ve used eBay… but these days finding a reasonable price can be tricky. For the most part I try to find lenses locally with things like Facebook marketplace.
I've been using that lens for a few years now, but I've never tried it on a digital camera - that lens has additional lugs and pins, as all Super-Multi-Coated and SMC Takumars, it was purposely built for Spotmatic F, Electro Spotmatic, ES and ESII, on those cameras it performs wonderfully. Interesting fact - front element on that lens does not have full Super-Multi-Coated coatings due to extreme curvature, it is coated the same way as in Super-Takumar version. Also, except additional open-aperture hardware and better coatings, those are identical lenses.
I wanted to mention the extreme bubble-like curvature of the front element, but it didn’t quite make it into the video. Considering it’s shape and lack of SMC, I’m honestly surprised it doesn’t flare all that bad.
It’s about 60 years old, so I definitely didn’t get it new. I believe I found this one at a local camera shop which sells used gear. That said, I did a search on eBay and there seems to be many available there.
this is my 2nd (or 3rd) vid I've watched on your channel. The constant camera angle switch is your thing. Your content is worth it. I'm curious to know if there is a particular brand you are after - to amass a 'set' if you will. Do you intend to compare the Takumar 35mm f3.5 it to the 35mm f2.3 or the 35mm f2.0 (thoriated)? Thank you for the reviews!
I haven't tried this one yet, but I feel like the 28mm gives something special in the color department. The images seem to have a certain signature. I have a LOT of Takumar lenses and never considered the 28 to be anything special, until I picked up a second copy with a few other lenses and a spotmatic. Images seemed more saturated and alive through the SMC 28mm 3.5.
@@gearheadchannel Hahaha, I think we just want to share the joy of using them. I do see a lot of people making those claims though. Supply and demand is pretty simple. The lenses are still great, they just lose the benefit of being cheap. There are so many generic M-42 lenses out there that people should still be able to get into vintage glass cheaply, albeit with less capable optics. I just enjoy using them.
Are you accusing me of being a pixel-peeper?!! Generally I try to be balanced when it comes to the technical performance, subjective attributes, and physical characteristics. As you said, it isn’t the only measure of a lens.
The lens should be fitting to my concepts of photography, so your comparing with state-of-the-art standards doesn't make any sense - that's absolutely useless to great pictures, only for tech freaks who are rather measuring than taking real pics;-)))))
I’m just trying to give an objective review of these lenses. In no way do I imply that a soft lens is a bad lens… besides they don’t have feelings to hurt if I did. That said, I’m not comparing them to state of the art standards. Lately I’ve been shooting 40 year old Nikon AIS lenses on a 20 year old Canon 5D, so I’m not a newer is better guy, which I think is pretty obvious if you watch my channel. You can love this lens all you want (I prefer the 28mm) but don’t take it so personally.
@@gearheadchannel Nothing to do with 'so personally'. A vintage lens review will be more credible by presenting a sufficing widespread range of application instead of your limitation on random architecture. An ultralight 35mm lens is predestined for lively description, e.g. street photography, as shown by nearly all famous 'classic' and today's esteemed analogue protagonists, particularly Leica users > an attentive glance inmidst of which life matters - instead of showing 'sharpness' schedules (that's what I meant with your comparing with useless state-of-the-art standards) and storefronts. By the way: I don't prefer any lens type and experienced all from 15mm to 300mm (plus 500mm mirror) which fit perfectly on my analogue and digital Nikons as well. The Spotmatic with 3.5/35 and 2.8/120 is just pleasure - no more but no less;-))
Thanks for the honest review. I'm checking one out tomorrow for $30 and she says it's got a little dust in it. I'll be using it with a M42-FX speed booster so this extra stop might make it a tad more decent. Who knows, but for $30 it'll make a good addition to the collection.
I’d definitely say it’s worth $30
Subscribed and love the vintage lens reviews. Just starting out to collect M42 mount lenses.
Thanks. There are so many great M42 lenses out there.
I have a full shelf of Super Takumars, including this lens. I haven’t found it very inspiring thus far. I keep it because the Tak’s are to me the pinnacle of vintage lenses as far as feel goes. Just buttery smooth, and a joy to use.
I love the build of the Taks. So solid yet compact.
I don’t understand. You used zone focus rather than focusing critically, you didn’t use a hood and despite a very decent looking test chart even wide open, you couldn’t see what was special. The image quality of that lens is actually rather high. You hobbled it significantly by not taking care.
I had my doubts about this lens (Takumar super-multi-coated 35mm f3.5), having only paid $35 for it. Plus it was kind of slow at f3.5.. I'm not sure if you got a dud, but I absolutely love mine. The lens is very contrasty and produces deep rich colors. The small details are absolutely amazing. What tops it off, is the lack of vertical distortion. I can point the camera at tall buldings and they come out looking straight. Out of all my Takumar lenses, this is one of my favorites even though I also own the infamous 50mm f1.4 8-element and the 85mm f1.8. For the money this lens is a bargain and can't be beat ! I also own the Super-Takumar version, but I'm not sure which is which ? I think last time I went out with it, I used the Super-Takumar version ? Maybe these lenses don't work as well on mirroless cameras ? I tested mine on my Pentax K-5 IIs DSLR ?
The point of these old Takumars is that you use them ‘because’ of the lens quirks like barrel distortion, soft corners and vignetting. It gives images a retro 3D ‘pop’ that’s somewhat missing from most of today’s 5-zillion element, computer-designed behemoths. If you’re buying a lens for professional production work then a $40 wide angle lens from 1965 probably isn’t the best option.
Prices are going up these days because lots of people are getting into cinematography with their DSLRs, due to the lockdowns, and the 35mm f3.5 Tak is the go-to wide angle if you can’t afford the f2.
Great vid though. That take-out you had at the beginning looked awesome.
Yeah, it was definitely a delicious lunch. If I wasn't a fan of these lenses, I wouldn't have a shelf of them... and make videos about them. I feel confident I can point out their flaws without hurting their feelings.
Thanks for the review.
The 35mm is my personal favorite focal length for one-lens/one-full-frame body situations.
I own and use the following 35mm lenses:
35mm f/3.5 Takumar for my Pentax Spotmatic SLRs
35mm f/2.8 Vivitar lens with M42 lens mount
35mm f/2 Nikkor for my Nikon SLRs
35mm f/1.4 Nikkor for my Nikon SLRs
35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon for my Leica rangefinders
Most of the time, I use the f/1.4 lenses and carry the slower lenses as backups. However, I rarely need backups.
which one is your best 35mm lens?
@@Fujifilm2021
The 35mm f/1.4 are the best for me.
I use the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 on the Leica M6 for shooting black & white film.
I use the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 on Nikon F2 or F4 for shooting color film.
When shooting digital color and digital black & white, I prefer to use a Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 on a Fuji X-Pro2 APS-C digital mirrorless instead of my 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss on my Leica M10 full-frame digital rangefinder. The reason is because my M10 body has proven to be less reliable than my X-Pro2 body.
Hi excellent video, what is the name of the sound effect that you use when placing the text titles?
Thanks. I think I cobbled that sound together from a few different samples I found on freesound.org
It's great fo r UV photography especially the uncoated version
Great video as always, All the best for the New Year!
Thanks :) let’s make 2022 a good one
What the Auto switch allows me when using on my Cannon 5 D?
The switch is there to toggle the automatic aperture on and off. Since you are adapting the lens, this feature doesn't apply... but... If your adapter has a ridge that keeps the aperture pin pushed in, you need to set the lens to manual for the aperture ring to work properly. If your adapter doesn't keep the pin pushed in, then there will be no difference between Auto and Manual settings.
Recommendation of online shop to buy old lenses?
In the past I’ve used eBay… but these days finding a reasonable price can be tricky. For the most part I try to find lenses locally with things like Facebook marketplace.
I've been using that lens for a few years now, but I've never tried it on a digital camera - that lens has additional lugs and pins, as all Super-Multi-Coated and SMC Takumars, it was purposely built for Spotmatic F, Electro Spotmatic, ES and ESII, on those cameras it performs wonderfully. Interesting fact - front element on that lens does not have full Super-Multi-Coated coatings due to extreme curvature, it is coated the same way as in Super-Takumar version. Also, except additional open-aperture hardware and better coatings, those are identical lenses.
I wanted to mention the extreme bubble-like curvature of the front element, but it didn’t quite make it into the video. Considering it’s shape and lack of SMC, I’m honestly surprised it doesn’t flare all that bad.
How can I get this lens....eBay does not have this lens What to do? Did you buy this item new or used product?
Which website did you buy from?
It’s about 60 years old, so I definitely didn’t get it new. I believe I found this one at a local camera shop which sells used gear. That said, I did a search on eBay and there seems to be many available there.
this is my 2nd (or 3rd) vid I've watched on your channel. The constant camera angle switch is your thing. Your content is worth it. I'm curious to know if there is a particular brand you are after - to amass a 'set' if you will. Do you intend to compare the Takumar 35mm f3.5 it to the 35mm f2.3 or the 35mm f2.0 (thoriated)? Thank you for the reviews!
My primary collection is my set of Nikon Ai-S lenses. I plan on making videos for them next year… and I want to be as thorough as possible with them.
@@gearheadchannel if you fall upon the cult 58mm f1.2 or even a pair? I want one!
我父亲去世后留下了一大堆Takumar镜头和几台菲林相机，最近打算出去旅行打算带这个镜头搭配SuperA机身
That sounds like a fantastic idea.
@@gearheadchannel 父亲留下了：SuperA，MZ，Spotmatic，MTL3，我感觉SuperA对新手更友好，其他都是纯机械的，先从这个开始吧，将是我第一次独自使用菲林相机
MX，打错了
Spotmatic F
@@gearheadchannel 想请教一下Takumar 28MM、35MM、135MM、200MM，准备去新疆，那里同时拥有世界第二大沙漠，7000多米海拔的雪山，还有大草原，拍摄这些风景，当然还有人物，选择两个镜头的话，35+135，这样合理吗
I haven't tried this one yet, but I feel like the 28mm gives something special in the color department. The images seem to have a certain signature. I have a LOT of Takumar lenses and never considered the 28 to be anything special, until I picked up a second copy with a few other lenses and a spotmatic. Images seemed more saturated and alive through the SMC 28mm 3.5.
I’d say the 35 and 28 are quite similar.
@@gearheadchannel I had considered getting one, but as you said... prices have become prohibitive. Check out the 105mm f2.8
Yeah, I think a lot of lenses are seriously over priced these days… idiots like me making videos about them probably doesn’t help.
@@gearheadchannel Hahaha, I think we just want to share the joy of using them. I do see a lot of people making those claims though. Supply and demand is pretty simple. The lenses are still great, they just lose the benefit of being cheap. There are so many generic M-42 lenses out there that people should still be able to get into vintage glass cheaply, albeit with less capable optics.
I just enjoy using them.
interesting, I have this lens too, but never shoot it. I favor a Mir 1-B more, its faster, and has good color.
Fun project. I need an idiots guide to lens mounts.
Sounds like a good idea for a video
Pou-Tsin, not Poo-Tine
Did that make you feel good about yourself?
@@gearheadchannel I'm helping
pixel-peeping isn't the only measure of a lens
Are you accusing me of being a pixel-peeper?!! Generally I try to be balanced when it comes to the technical performance, subjective attributes, and physical characteristics. As you said, it isn’t the only measure of a lens.
The lens should be fitting to my concepts of photography, so your comparing with state-of-the-art standards doesn't make any sense - that's absolutely useless to great pictures, only for tech freaks who are rather measuring than taking real pics;-)))))
I’m just trying to give an objective review of these lenses. In no way do I imply that a soft lens is a bad lens… besides they don’t have feelings to hurt if I did. That said, I’m not comparing them to state of the art standards. Lately I’ve been shooting 40 year old Nikon AIS lenses on a 20 year old Canon 5D, so I’m not a newer is better guy, which I think is pretty obvious if you watch my channel.
You can love this lens all you want (I prefer the 28mm) but don’t take it so personally.
@@gearheadchannel Nothing to do with 'so personally'. A vintage lens review will be more credible by presenting a sufficing widespread range of application instead of your limitation on random architecture. An ultralight 35mm lens is predestined for lively description, e.g. street photography, as shown by nearly all famous 'classic' and today's esteemed analogue protagonists, particularly Leica users > an attentive glance inmidst of which life matters - instead of showing 'sharpness' schedules (that's what I meant with your comparing with useless state-of-the-art standards) and storefronts. By the way: I don't prefer any lens type and experienced all from 15mm to 300mm (plus 500mm mirror) which fit perfectly on my analogue and digital Nikons as well. The Spotmatic with 3.5/35 and 2.8/120 is just pleasure - no more but no less;-))