markintosh13
Veteran Member
Anyone have one and willing to share your thoughts on this lens?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Pentax A 50mm 1.4
- Thread starter markintosh13
- Start date
Lightshow
Veteran Member
It's a nice lens, good flare control, fairly well made, not their best IMO, that would be the K version, it's my favorite 50 that Pentax made and I do have a good number of them.
Focus Breather
Senior Member
One of the best legacy 50mm ever.
Lightshow
Veteran Member
John Michael Winterbourne
Senior Member
That's a bit precious? What if Jokica had said "one of the best ten 50mm legacy lenses"? Would you argue against that? Given that you only came up with five - OK, off the top of your head. But if it is in the top ten, that would still make it pretty good, which I think was at the heart of the OP's question.
Lemme see...Lightshow called it pretty good, but suggested there was better. Then Jokica says it's "one of the best ever." Then Lightshow points out that it's probably not the "best ever," (listing others that are better) but is still pretty good.
Then I read your post, and...what is your point?
LOL - we could probably make a whole thread about this and everyone would likely have a different opinion about what are 'the best 10 legacy lenses ever' - it's purely subjective, isn't it? ;-)
Maybe some pictures would help show why it is so good!
pentaxforums.com is a good resource re. Pentax and other third party lenses - the Pentax A 50/1.4 does score pretty high by their reckoning.
Last edited:
widgetbox
Leading Member
Good place to go for Pentax lens reviews. Might not be DXO but I reckon you get a very good feel for what people think of the lens. Plenty of non-Pentax lenses get reviewed there too - nice place for FSR and others.
Here is the review section for the lens in question . First review says it's the sharpest lens they've used
--
Richard
Last edited:
I don't know if I have one of the more rare 8 element versions of this lens.
According to Pentaxforums the ID includes: A and M on the switch, a protruding rear element and the infrared mark to the right of the "4" mark on the zone focus scale. I have all the attributes except that the infrared mark is to the left of the "4" mark. It has no radioactive discolouration.
Despite the infrared mark I think it must be an 8 element model. But some opinion says that the 7 element lens is just as good.
In any case it is a very compact lens and I am very happy the way it works either way. (8 or 7 elements).
According to Pentaxforums the ID includes: A and M on the switch, a protruding rear element and the infrared mark to the right of the "4" mark on the zone focus scale. I have all the attributes except that the infrared mark is to the left of the "4" mark. It has no radioactive discolouration.
Despite the infrared mark I think it must be an 8 element model. But some opinion says that the 7 element lens is just as good.
In any case it is a very compact lens and I am very happy the way it works either way. (8 or 7 elements).
Tom the 8 element of course has a different optical scheme than 'this', the Pentax A lens. Actually it is said that the optics of the Pentax A have been somewhat tweaked, again are a bit different from those of all earlier 7 element versions of f1.4/50mm lenses made by Pentax.
as for telling if your Super Takumar is an 8 element see my 3 lenses, a 7 element, one I called 'Hybrid" and an 8 element:
Only the 8 element version has the protruding rear element resp. more precisely a 'recessed collar'. The copy in the middle has all the other known marks of an 8 element, the infrared mark is to the right of the f4 marking and it's stop down switch says M/A, not manual/auto, only it's rear element isn't protruding.
The 'Hybrid' compared to the 8 element:
To find out which optical version it is I took them all apart ( order is changed )
one can clearly see there is only one 'thicker' triplet of the 8 element, the 'hybrid' didn't have it, it is a '7 element'. Note also the yellowing of the doublets of the 7 element versions
or in short, there are lenses out there that have signs of either version, this 'Hybrid' most likely being a transitory piece. And importantly: the most reliable way to tell if it is an 8 element version imo is to evaluate it's rear element: If it's collar is recessed leaving the rear glass slightly protruding, it would sit on or rather wobble on it's rear glass if set set down without rear cap, than it's an 8 element
--
photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony A7, NEX5n, Ricoh GXR M, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/
Last edited:
Andreas,
Thanks for your clear description. The lens I have is obviously another seven-element hybrid. This does not concern me as I bought it as a seven element lens, it is in excellent condition and I am very happy with how it performs. I am of the school of thought that the eight-element lens is interesting and "rare" but not of any other particular reverence.
All the other "writings" talk of "protruding rear element" on the eight element lens but do not show images as examples. As far as I am concerned all Takumar 50/1.4 lenses have protruding rear elements in a conventional sense - hence my confusion. A domed rear element that protrudes beyond the retaining ring is quite another thing and I now note this difference. My lens does not do this and therefore must be a seven element lens. It is in such good order that I would be completely paranoid if I even thought that I needed to pull the lens apart just to check.
Therefore of the list of "signals" that my lens has the only one that is remaining set to "eight element" is the M/A lettering on the switch instead of MAN/AUTO. The only test of absolute surity seems to be that protruding lens dome - or pull it apart and look for that identifying cemented triplet.
On another point - as it is possible to have the "hybrid" seven element lens with the infrared marking in the eight element position (mine doesn't) then with the general vague not-ever-illustrated protruding rear element description being put about then maybe there are quite a few hybrid seven element Super takumer 50/1.4 lenses about being proudly acclaimed for their "eight element" photographic capability.
Noteworthy on pentaxforums.com there is not one illustration of this defining eight element domed protrusion, but plenty of noise about the defining position of the infrared mark giving assured exclusivity.
If anything Pentax might have been happy to re-design the eight element lens as that "dome" is a piece of glass just asking to get itself damaged.
--
Tom Caldwell
Thanks for your clear description. The lens I have is obviously another seven-element hybrid. This does not concern me as I bought it as a seven element lens, it is in excellent condition and I am very happy with how it performs. I am of the school of thought that the eight-element lens is interesting and "rare" but not of any other particular reverence.
All the other "writings" talk of "protruding rear element" on the eight element lens but do not show images as examples. As far as I am concerned all Takumar 50/1.4 lenses have protruding rear elements in a conventional sense - hence my confusion. A domed rear element that protrudes beyond the retaining ring is quite another thing and I now note this difference. My lens does not do this and therefore must be a seven element lens. It is in such good order that I would be completely paranoid if I even thought that I needed to pull the lens apart just to check.
Therefore of the list of "signals" that my lens has the only one that is remaining set to "eight element" is the M/A lettering on the switch instead of MAN/AUTO. The only test of absolute surity seems to be that protruding lens dome - or pull it apart and look for that identifying cemented triplet.
On another point - as it is possible to have the "hybrid" seven element lens with the infrared marking in the eight element position (mine doesn't) then with the general vague not-ever-illustrated protruding rear element description being put about then maybe there are quite a few hybrid seven element Super takumer 50/1.4 lenses about being proudly acclaimed for their "eight element" photographic capability.
Noteworthy on pentaxforums.com there is not one illustration of this defining eight element domed protrusion, but plenty of noise about the defining position of the infrared mark giving assured exclusivity.
If anything Pentax might have been happy to re-design the eight element lens as that "dome" is a piece of glass just asking to get itself damaged.
--
Tom Caldwell
Last edited:
Lots of versions of this lens. I have two copies of the 7-element M42 Super Taks. Both have the distinctive glow to them until about f/2.8. After that, they're fantastic; sharp and great color. Both are cleared of the yellowing from the thorium decay. Still, I prefer my Canon New FD 50mm f/1.4.
Pentax Super Takumar M42 50mm f/1.4 at f/2.8; Sigma SD 15
--
Tony-S
Last edited:
Lightshow
Veteran Member
The 8 element lens was brought in to combat the Zeiss Planar, they were very expensive to manufacture, some say they lost money on each one, they then quietly changed them to 7 element design to make them more affordable after they recieved their day in the press touting its capabilities.
Is it sharp? Yup, but it does have some nasty flare, my 8 element looks like it's been well used, similar to Kuuan's hybrid .
Kuuan, have you taken pictures of the other elements? In your hybrid to see if it's exactly the same as the 7 element? My theory is they switched the design to 7 element and just used up the remaining parts in the parts bin that were for the 8 element, the only people likely to notice would be IR shooters. This of course doesn't preclude the possibility of someone buying an 8 element, swapping the optics with their 7 element, then selling the 7 element hybrid as an 8, if the optics can be swapped, I suspect they can.
--
I don't have any AF lenses, so if I want a picture, I have to do more than squeeze a button.
Interested in Adapting lenses? head here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1065
My shots:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/
My lenses:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewprofile.php?Action=viewprofile&username=LightShow
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.
-Mark Twain
Reputation is the shadow. Character is the tree
-Abraham Lincoln
####Where's my FF NEX-7 ?????
Last edited:
John Michael Winterbourne
Senior Member
Tom, there's another way to tell the difference - the 8-element is heavier than the 7 element versions. Not much help if you only have one version, I suppose. I have an 8 element Super Takumar, a 7 element Super Takumar, and an SMC. I can't remember the weight difference, but it was big enough to show on a fairly cheap electronic postal scale we used to have at work.
I gave up trying to evaluate/compare them on my Nikon D700 because apart from the acceptable IQ influence of the optical adapter element in "normal" use, the glass element made them all simply unusable wide open - they are all said to have a wide-open "glow" that can be - apparently - good for portraits, but this was a different phenomenon altogether. Still on the "to do" list for the A7, not least because my M42-Sony adapter is too short and I haven't got it properly sorted yet.
I gave up trying to evaluate/compare them on my Nikon D700 because apart from the acceptable IQ influence of the optical adapter element in "normal" use, the glass element made them all simply unusable wide open - they are all said to have a wide-open "glow" that can be - apparently - good for portraits, but this was a different phenomenon altogether. Still on the "to do" list for the A7, not least because my M42-Sony adapter is too short and I haven't got it properly sorted yet.
I rather doubt that one could swap the triplet with the doublet, the fitting of the doublet and the triplet within the lens will be different, after all the triplet is much thicker, also optical designs are different, I don't think that this would match up.
Even if it was possible I am sure that this had not been the case with that 'Hybrid'. It had not been advertised as an 8 element and I had bought it cheaply, but I had spotted the position of the infrared mark in the listing and presumed that it will be an 8 element, same thing with the one that did turn out to be a real 8 element, wasn't listed as such.
On the other hand this Hybrid also 'internally' shares some parts with the 8 element and other with the 7 element, this could be taken as indication that the triplet really could be exchanged with the doublet, anyway, that made me certain that it must be a 'transitory' piece. Right now none of these lenses is with me, I may check again if swapping is possible next time they are.
see the full optical blocks, and the 'Hybrid' showing shared parts with both the 8 and 7 element:
fitting of the front element it shares with the 8 element ( the 8 element sits inside an adapter so that it's rear glass doesn't touch the table, that's the 'fat' part that makes it's base look different )
inside it shared more characteristic with the 7 element
the pic of the full lenses I showed last time cannot be viewed big, therefore again, this time can be viewed bigger:
-- photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony A7, NEX5n, Ricoh GXR M, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/
Last edited:
John my 3 versions all have slightly different weight. I didn't record that then, but if I remember right the weight of my 'Hybrid', which optically is a 7 element, was nearer to that of the 8 element than to that of the 7 element. Or in other words I thought that weight was not a reliable way to tell.
Lightshow
Veteran Member
Actually there was 7 listed.
I will argue against the use of the word best, it's a very good lens, but not the best, oh, and the best at what?
Lightshow
Veteran Member
Thanks, I was just speculating, now that I see that the front end is similar to the 8's, that may account for the placement of the IR mark(speculation), I will have to keep an eye out for a hybrid, I have a feeling they are very rare, like less than 1000, and possibly less than 100, though there is likely no way to know for sure since this seems to be a newish discovery.
see the full optical blocks, and the 'Hybrid' showing shared parts with both the 8 and 7 element:
fitting of the front element it shares with the 8 element ( the 8 element sits inside an adapter so that it's rear glass doesn't touch the table, that's the 'fat' part that makes it's base look different )
inside it shared more characteristic with the 7 element
the pic of the full lenses I showed last time cannot be viewed big, therefore again, this time can be viewed bigger:
-- photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony A7, NEX5n, Ricoh GXR M, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/
--
I don't have any AF lenses, so if I want a picture, I have to do more than squeeze a button.
Interested in Adapting lenses? head here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1065
My shots:
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.
-Mark Twain
Reputation is the shadow. Character is the tree
-Abraham Lincoln
####Where's my FF NEX-7 ?????
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum