*Secret CRAZY-CHEAP Awesome Lens * $25+ Super-Takumar 55mm f2
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 сер 2024
- *Secret CRAZY-CHEAP Awesome Lens * $25+ Super-Takumar 55mm f2
www.flickr.com/photos/margall...
IF YOU LIKE THESE VIDEOS, YOU CAN MAKE A KIND DONATION OF $2 OR $5 VIA PAYPAL TO EMAIL: kenw111@insightbb.com
I literally bought the same lens just to test my radiation equipment 😂
Even after all these years, I'm still buying Ken's recommendations. One of my favourites is the Nikkor 135mm f3.5 Ais. I bought a Tokina 100mm f2.8 AF-D macro recently, & I bought a Super Takumar f1.8 6 element, single coated, Ultron (1960) earlier today. 😊
Found a good copy of the Super Takumar 50 1.4 earlier this year. It's lovely.
Very true statements. I have a Tak S-M-C 50 1.4 that I love, but my favorite radioactive lens is the Fujinon 50 1.4. That lens is HOT!
Jared polin needs to do smell test of these lenses :P
Thanks keep telling it as it is and keep them vids coming.
scored a zeiss 300mm f4 for $100, testing it as soon as I get it. 6 elements in 4 groups so could be as good as the nikkor 300mm f3.5. What you opinion on the lens Ken?
So a bunch of lenses I've picked up recently have had recommendations from you that helped me with the decision making process during my research, ranging from the a few of the Nikkor's like the 135mm and 105mm and a few of the Takumar's like the 50/1.4 and the 135mm. Thank you for that. I'll start with the question pertaining to this video: I got a mint 55/2 which I think you also recommended and its glass is super yellow(safe to assume radioactive?) would you also recommend the 55/1.8? Or would these more or less be duplicates in my collection? Another two Takumar questions 1) would you recommend the 105mm in place of the (very pricey) 85mm(which I'm thinking with the already legendary Nikkor 105mm might not get used all that much) and 2) out of the 6 or 7 Takumar's that Ive already picked up(all in really good condition too) only one is SMC - should I try to replace/duplicate some with their multi coated variants? And two quick ones with the Nikkor's 1) I got a sonar 105mm how does it weigh against the gauss version and 2) I bought a non-ai 135/3.5 "Nikkor-Q" to save some money and received an ai with the built in hood and its in great condition - this is an upgrade right? I'm not finding any differences between the two other than the hood and it being multi-coated...
Thanks.
Well it has been a fascinating day. I learned that my 55mm f2 Takumar lens is a beta and gamma emitter 🤔
great info Ken !!!! (THE KIDS PART) Gracias !
I wonder if these Radio active Takumar's are immune to fungus?
It was only AFTER I purchased one of these for my XPro 2 that I realized that I had the EXACT same lens on my first camera purchased in 1972. I love the images from it and did a nice corporate portrait with it a few months ago.
Totally agree, my one is the 1.8 ,this lens is awesome!
Sharp , beautiful color rendition , contrast etc....
Very well build, focus ring smooth as butter.
The only negative point is this lens needs to be turn A LOT in order to focus , on Nikon ones just a half of turn you have the whole range of focusing .
And the aperture ring is narrow to operate.
But the images this lens produce .......😍
But my favourite....50 mm pancake 1.8 ais.
What make you like 50mm 1.8 AIS more?
We used c79 optical sights in the military, the ones with tritium. We were specifically told take the weapons with us in case there were fire in the barracks.
hey ken im confused ¿thats the 10 blade version or the 6 blade version?
Hey! I just got my SB-23 and have no idea how to read the "auto range" graph on top of the flash. Could you make a video covering how to get the right exposure? Also, is there a way to control the power of the flash manually?
did u lose ur hair because of this lens?
always loved takumars. They render close to mf look on full frame. Is there much difference between these & pk lenses?
Would you recommend the AUTO takumar 55 f2 ?
Is the Auto-Takumar 55mm 2.0 radioactive? I just bought a copy -- the front element looks a little bit yellowed and I was wondering whether it was thoriated. Can't find this info online. If you're able to test a copy --- thanks!!
Hey could osmeone tell me what kind of adapter I'd have to buy to get this on a Canon Rebel EOS T6i? Buying one right now
Just got this lens for my Fuji X-T1 and its awesome, in fact it made me pull the plug for a mint 50mm f1.4. version on eBay. Eagerly awaiting the new lens and results. I also went for the Vivitar 135mm f2.8 (early Komine version) the Rokinon 12mm f2 (for shooting the Milky Way), another Vivitar (Komine version) 400mm f5.6 (for moon shoots on the cheap lol), and finally the Fuji 35mm f2 and the "kit" 18-55mm. Got everything used on eBay. The X-T1 I got used (body only) for an amazing price. I think right now the X-T1 is the best all round camera you can get on the used market, wth focus peaking and these old manual lenses you can really come out ahead for less than the price of an new X-T2 to new Nikon.
Anyway I think I got all my bases covered here. Thanks for all the tips and reviews on vintage lenses, learning to shoot manual on the X-T1 is awesome. Keep up the good work.
I still have my first one, came on my SP 1000. great little lens
I purchased a takumar 55/1.8 a couple of years ago after watching this video. To this day, i'm very happy with it and highly regard it performance wise. Also, got it mint from Japan and use it on my fuji xt10.
Bought one for one dollar
I just ordered one on Ebay. Started looking for a m42 adapter ti Fuji x, fiund loads of cheap adapter, but also a Fotodiox one, and the seller mentioned that some these Takumat lenses dont fit on that. Since the Fotodiox was more expensive than the others. I dont care, but what about the other cheaper adapters....do they take this kind of lens? Or us it just a Fotodiox thing, since they recomend type 1 of their M42 to Fuji, instead of their tyoe 2?
Would it be a bad thing to gently open up the takumar 55mm f2 for a clean? If carefully done.
lead foil is relatively cheap, i use it to wrap the box i keep my canon fd 35mm f2 in.
You should try 35 f2.4 Flektogon CZ Jena.I use this one on DSLR, m4/3 and Fuji via adapter.It serves, 35mm walk around lens, 50mm on Fuji and on m4/3 70mm macro (1:2) .The minimum distance is 19cm and boekeh and color , contast is exceptional. My copy is sharp and mint state, made in DDR.
is it f 2 or f 1.8? There is one available which is f1.8.
is there a recommendation for the adapter? after reading some blogs there are varied opinions - dealing with the infinity focus / corrective lens inserts - inferior glass corrections etc. . . I love the pics illustrated / I'm shooting with a D7100
adapters are cheap on ebay :)
I'm ordering this and the adaptor today. Is there a wide-angle lens like this that you would also reccommend? The cheaper the better?
Bought it from a local store. They've also got a super-takumar 135mm 3.5 I will probably buy.
Just spent 2 hours cleaning one of these. Extra crusty and full of dirt as it's missing name plate and filter ring parts, it also changed the aperture a stop while focusing ,a helicoid guide had looose screws , it was used to replace a missing Helios in the cheapest photosniper kit..
Wonderful, as a prime lens shooter this is one more reason not to waste my money on modern prime lenses (but I will do get that Fujinon 23mm f/2 though)
behold items in my ebay cart: 1 super-takumar, 1 voigtlaner 58 and 1 custom x-ray bib w eye holes.
Another glowing review by TA!
ultra-early sneak peek: Fuji X-T3 'Gamma' w optional 20mm lead shield replacing the LCD. ... weighs more than a gx680.
but seriously TA: you're awesome, thanks for the videos: critical thinking and challenge the status quo ... let us all do so
i am? :P
Theoria Apophasis , yes you am, really, thanks for the research, work n info, very valuable.
one question: can you give us an idea of the radiation fall-off distance for one of those hot lenes, say, that takumar or the voigtlander 58? not asking you to qualify a level of danger, just give an idea of the size of the sphere of significant zap. thanks again
Ken, two questions. Does the adapter affect the focal length? And is there any difference between the 1.8 and the 2.0 besides the aperture?
i dont own the 55mm , i do however own a pile of diff 50mm takumars, which is the next lens to talk about
Does your adapter have the extra glass for focus infinity or are you just using a plain ring?
What is better: Super-Takumar 55mm f/2 or Helios 77m-4? Thanks alot
takumar 50mm f1.4
wont the beta particle and gamma photon would cause damageon ur sensors?
most def, and more importantly the board behind it......solid state electronics damage from radiation is a VERY WELL tested entity
I was hoping that you were going to knock over a fake lens and go, "OMG, NO! F'n NO" Then bring up a hand covered in glitter and lick your fingers, etc.
Would there be a Nikon adapter for that to put on my d700?
I hope we hear an answer.
of course there is, tons of em on ebay M42 mount to nikon F mount
I have a mamiya/sekor 55mm f1.8 that has a major brown/yellow cast to it. I don't know if it's radioactive or not but I'd be willing to take a bet that it is.
Yup, it is radio active.
Figured as much lol awesome little lens though!
I have the 55mm f1.8 one awesome little lens.
hello Ken ,thanks again for your videos !! I am following your recommandation and just ordered on ebay this SMC takumar 55mm F1.8 to be mounted on a Nikon D700 . I find two types of M42-Nikon adapters ( on ebay mostly from Chinese sellers ) : one is simple metal adapter ring and another type is having a glass lens on the back side of the adapter say to allow focus infinity . I have questions please : which one I should buy ? do you think that this glass will impact the image quality and lower the benefit of such takumar lens ? thanks for your help . daniel from France
i never mentioned the 55mm 1.8 Takumar, however also a fine lens :)
you MUST make sure the rear element doesnt strike hte mirror, some adapters allow that to happen :(
dont damage your camera
ok thanks . according what i read on the web , it seems that 2.0 lens is the economical version of the 1.8 lens but still same construction inside . Beside what you said about the mirror , haev you already use on adapter on Nikon D700 ? if yes , which one did you buy ? where ?
Hi Ken, Do you use those lenses on any current cameras? It would be nice to see the results compared to a AR coated.
this isnt a coating, its IN THE GLASS
My mistake for not clarifying. The AR was just stated as an example of a lens non thorium type. It could be any non-radio active lens. It would be nice to see what we are missing in comparison to todays glass, only if you got the inkling.
The AR coatings on the super takumar lenses do not help with sensor reflections/ghosting and are much more prone to flaring than newer lenses in my experience. This is most likely due to the coatings being made for film cameras and not digital cameras, which can reflect light back from the sensor.
The SMC versions fare a bit better, the Yashinon coatings are much better for sensor reflections and ghosting in my experience. Basically, shooting into the sun or light sources can be in issue with a majority of older film lenses.
AR coatings today do a better job with sensor reflection/ghosting in my experience... but sometimes I find that creative flaring with older film lenses is so much more artistic than the dead flares I see in modern photography.
Check out the Jupiter 9 85mm f2 (Russian design) to see what I am talking about...
Well there is no problem if you shoot in live view mode,
I have the takumar 55mm f/1.8, surprisingly low contrast compared to my hexanons and nikkors. the low contrast might be from the deterioration of the thorium coating, but I think it adds to it's character.
that ones not radioactive
NO SUCH THING as a thorium coating, its IN THE GLASS
That could be a good series. Going through each company product line and showing which ones have thorium and which ones don't. Just to clarify the misguided information on Camerapedia.
Hello everybody, can someone tell me please if there is only in this lens or in others legacy pentax lenses to? Thanks
other ones too, the main one is the 50mm 1.4 takumar, i made video on it today
Theoria Apophasis Thank you for your help and rapidly reply. I have a Pentax A 28mm f2.8 and a Pentax A 50mm f1.8. Are they dangerous to?
Congratulations for your work on UA-cam, I follow you since long time and I have learned very much with yours fantastic videos. And I buy a lot of crap with others "engineers" and their videos.
DEPENDING on teh serial number, the 50mm 1.8 likely is thoriated with thorium in its rear elements. :)
Would it fry the electronics on a camera if mounted for an extended period of time? And how does one store a lens like this safely?
away from your private parts :P
Theoria Apophasis but but but... The tingly feeling!
Winter is coming. It will keep you warm if you place it under your butt. ;-)
I have the f2, 1.8, and 1.4 of this lens. Although, I only have the Super Takumar version of the 1.4 - I'd like to get the SMC version someday if I can find it for a really cheap price (no reason to spend a ton of money since I already have it)
www.flickr.com/photos/134746128@N05/29760688074/in/dateposted/
@johnfoley4023 I have three f2 and 1.8 to friends and have only had the 1.4 for the past several years. I like the 1.4, but there are a lot of other lenses I prefer. It's great for the price, though. They all are.
:) their super program and me super did the same.......not all the time....a random thing....like...did my camera just break? Am I still thinking 645Z, K1, K70 and K3iii? yes, but only if I can have other stuff too.
I just bought for 36.00 which includes shipping a Takumar 55mm 1.8.... I can't wait to get it in...
its radioactive….. dont lick it :P hehehehehehhehe
Jack McKechnie
its a great fing lens, ive got 4 of em
Oh My God! I just took delivery of one of these. The f1.8 version. I was testing some Sony lenses a few weeks ago. Sony must be having a laugh.
Who needs a macro lens when you can put one of these on a crop sensor then crop in some more. Incredible image quality.
I just ordered one on Ebay. Started looking for a m42 adapter ti Fuji x, fiund loads of cheap adapter, but also a Fotodiox one, and the seller mentioned that some these Takumat lenses dont fit on that. Since the Fotodiox was more expensive than the others. I dont care, but what about the other cheaper adapters....do they take this kind of lens? Or us it just a Fotodiox thing, since they recomend type 1 of their M42 to Fuji, instead of their tyoe 2?
will this focus to infinity on Nikon body
No
yeah, cause my little kids are allowed to juggle mylense on the back patio every week! lolol
I asked you about "Pentax glass" a while ago in one of your live streams :D and you said that you didn't use them after your film days.
i generally dont, last ones i used are 67 pentax lenses. i still have plenty of old pentax lenses however , the great ones for adapting
Have you tried the M 50mm 1.7?
i havent no :)
So then I'll wait for you to get one and do a review :D
Also the 35-105 is a heck of a good lens (apparently)
radioactive !!!
Hi Ken, I got this lens on your recommendation but it won’t give me infinity focus with m42 adaptor on Fuji. Is this expected
any tips on how to keep them stored safely?
away from your private parts :P
www.ebay.com/itm/SIMA-PROTECTIVE-WHITE-POUCH-AIRPORT-X-RAY-35MM-FILM-LEAD-SHIELD-BAG-/152270976862?hash=item23740eb75e:g:leYAAOSwLnBX3w4r
A really good SMC Takumar 50/1.4 (radioactive) can set you back up to $100, depending on your ebay skills and good fortune, but the 55/2.0 are kit lenses; a dime a dozen.
i own both of those
I picked up the SMC for $50. Perfect condition save a little finish loss on the filter ring. The color and contrast is out of this world.
Who the hell wants to take those risks?
On a side note. I almost bought another 135mm f3.5 Nikkor. Was just browsing stuff on Ebay and say one less than $100+ shipping of course.
i live the crazy life. another, wahts wrong with 4 of em ? :)
One risk I won't take. I might end up getting another 135mm. The one I have now is great. But the focus ring is just a little stiff compared to all the other lenses. Also want to get the 85mm f2 ai.
Something you can see in the glass? That's just the radiation getting to you Ken.Ah ha ha! Thanks for all the great videos. Such a bargain these lenses are!
But why are they radioactive any reasons? (:>)
Hmm, this or zeiss jena tessar?
jena tessar
Thanks for warning me I have epilepsy so I have to avoid things like this
Lead case.
Is there any documented proof of any photographers suffering ill effects from long term use of these lenses ?
yes, from the thoriated viewfinders , yes
Not from these lenses if used properly. Viewfinders and eyepieces are known to cause cataracts and other issues. If you live in Denver, you get much more radiation daily than if you were to use one of these lenses once in a while.
Whats in denver ?
BF4pawntard The Colorado plateau has a lot of radiation due to higher altitude and uranium rich soil. They are exposed to straight up radon gas, which is what you also get from your basement.
On another note, cosmic rays from higher altitude are also the reason why airplane workers receive a much higher exposure to radiation than people in other, regular jobs.
These are reasons why the physicists I have spoken with agree that lens radiation levels are not a concern. You get more radiation from normal activities like sitting out in the sun at the beach, taking a plane, living in Colorado, sleeping in a basement, than you would using a lens normally.
The only real danger in these lenses is if you put the thoriated part of the lens right up next to your eyeball or butthole for extended periods of time for years (viewfinders or eye pieces) or if you inhale/ingest dust particles.
It is also a good idea to store them in a room that you don't use often to limit exposure to the radiation, however usually the radiation levels become normal background levels about 1-2 meters away, and are seriously dissipated by about 40-50cm.
www.cpr.org/news/story/colorado-radiation-levels-are-high-and-thats-normal
Thanks for that very interesting read .
You are turning into hulk with all that gamma radiation... Mr angry photographer.... Hmmmmm. Hulk photographer...
i dont have any muscles :)
But DXOMARK.COM doesn't like Pentax all they like is Nikon and Sony!
I have that little bastard XD
SMC Takumar f2 the late version with the rubber grip, only f2 for a prime but the images are damn creamy, my glass is clear but does has that deep red refraction on the rear element a telltale sign of thorium doping.
www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Super-Auto-Takumar-55mm-F2.html
its actually 3 elements, not just the rear
I'm not interested into pulling mine apart to find out. XD
kalidesu just found out I've got this lens as well! so is the SMC basically the same thing as the ken's?
MANY lenses contain radioactive elements, especially those made between 1940 and 1970.
Canon, Nikkor, Zeiss, Kodak, Minolta, Olympus, Leica, Vivitar, Yashinon, Konica, Fujica, Focal......etc.
So we shouldn't think just a few lenses sound scary! Thats very misleading, there are hundreds of different models. The radioactive elements just happen to make the lenses SHARP at a low cost, so "everybody" was doing it!
How can you tell the thorium glass inside broke and the shit has gone spread to area ?
What if it would do it during the transport in the box - if I open that box - will it change my house to a fucking Chernobyl?
got one from Roberts for $22 coconuts!
adapter time now :P
O My God, you should not be wearing that outfit man.
OMG, im so glad youre concerned about it