canon rumors FORUM

Gear Talk => Third Party Manufacturers => Topic started by: AprilForever on November 27, 2012, 08:35:24 AM

Title: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: AprilForever on November 27, 2012, 08:35:24 AM
Anyone else here like Takumars?

I have a 50 1.4 Super Takumar, the kind with the Thorium, which I love shooting on my 7D. It seems ideal on the 7D for sharpeninjg corners the poor man's way. I also like the warm glow it gives like everything. Sure now, and it could be added in post, but I like the visceral sort of feel it brings. At some point I might even get around to posting some of my favourite images from it! I also like the fact that it is all metal, and the focussing is epicly smooth.

Anyone else out there like them? 
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sandymandy on November 27, 2012, 09:13:27 AM
I only heard good about the Takumar SMC versions so far. Just got none yet theyre kinda pricy :)
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Nick Gombinsky on November 27, 2012, 09:17:56 AM
I don't know what Thorium is, but I have the 50mm f1.4 and 135mm f2.5, both SMC. I use them for work, in my lens case I have those lenses and the rest are all Samyang/Rokinon (8mm, 14mm, 24mm, 35mm and 85mm). They look awesome on video and stills. The 50mm is one of my favorites.

This video, aside from the awful compression Chevrolet did after we handed it to them, was done solely with the Pentax 50mm SMC and a Rokinon 24mm, each on a 7D.

Chevrolet S10 presenta: La capital nacional de la empanada salteña (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh2cKx87yis#ws)
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on November 27, 2012, 10:06:47 AM
I enjoy using vintage glass as well.  I have the SMC 28mm f/3.5 (a great lens on a crop body, vignettes pretty bad on my 5D MKII), Super Takumar 35 f/3.5 (works amazing on crop, not at all on FF), SMC 55mm f/1.8 (works great on both crop and FF - kept this one over the SMC or Super variants of the f/1.4 and the SMC f/2), and I also use the 150mm f/4 Super Tak (great on my 5D - awesome portrait lens).  I've used several others at times, including both the 3.5 and 2.5 versions of the 135mm and SMC 35mm f/2.

I also love my Helios 44-2.  These lens brings something very unique to both the finished product and the shooting process.

SMC 50mm f/1.4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7071/7138493387_a5bb89d62d.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/)
These Shoes Are[n't]Made for Walking (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 50mm f/1.4

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7249/6914459472_335e547645.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/)
The Man with the Scarf (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

28mm f/3.5
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8040/8039035506_3c6d1bc27f.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/)
Kent and Erin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super Tak 35mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7160/6663778017_fdba4a6a2b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/)
One Perfect Winter Day (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 55mm f/1.8
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7012/6782015893_7424cee098.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/)
Gathering Dust (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 135mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6846269375_f4ca555d28.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/)
You Lookin' at Me? (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 150mm f/4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7136/7787888788_2c271254fb.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/)
Fade to Memory (Explored August 14th, 2012) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

And my favorite:  the Helios 44-2
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8166/7621300940_ac6a873d09.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/)
Cast Off (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8150515773_df9bdc26a1.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/)
Spiral of Color (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7393763844_86881009c8.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/)
Brownie Points - Explored June 17th, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sandymandy on November 28, 2012, 02:34:49 AM
I don't know what Thorium is, but I have the 50mm f1.4 and 135mm f2.5, both SMC.

Thorium is a radioactive material. In fact many m42 lenses use radioactive materials and also emit unhealthy gamma rays (which penetrate EVERYTHING, alpha and beta just go about skin deep in worst case).

@TWI by Dustin Abbott

Nice shots
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: dr croubie on November 28, 2012, 03:35:50 AM
My mum picked up the set in Japan in 1967 when she was there on a uni trip.
Didn't know much about cameras, she just bought "what the salesman told her was good".
Pentax spotmatic
55/2.0, 35/3.5, 135/3.5, 2x teleconverter. She also has a Soligor 35/2.8, but didn't like it for some reason and then bought the 35mm tak.
The body died around 1995 so she bought another one, which came with a 55/1.8.

I blame that kit for getting me interested in photography. I've still got the first photo I ever took on it, when I was 7 or so, of my mum on some camping trip. The expression on her face is halfway between "pose nicely for the camera" and "DON'T YOU DROP MY CAMERA!"
Technically it's still hers, but she's now on a K-5 and she's not too interested in learning MF on it, so they're all interspersed in my collection now, although I haven't used them much.

I since bought myself the 50/1.4 from ebay for $50 or so (the cheaper 7-element radioactive one). It's great for portraits outdoors, that yellow makes for lovely warm tones. I would absolutely love to get the 24 or 17/8 fisheye, but they got for a (comparative) lot. Or the 85/1.9, but that would be my 4th 85mm I just don't need, or the 35/2.0 (but it might not get much work vs the Samyang).

I've also got a Pentax 67 300mm f/4.0, that's technically a Takumar too...
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: dizeaz on November 28, 2012, 06:25:52 AM
I love the feel of Takumars. I have acquired the 55 f1.8, smc 105 f2.8, smc 200 f4 last year. A little worried about the potential radioactivity on the 55 f1.8 though.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: dr croubie on November 28, 2012, 06:37:58 AM
I love how everyone is still concerned about the radioactive elements.
Ever have one of those old (30+ years) glow in the dark watches?
Live or work in a brick building? or stone?
Ever had an xray?

On the big chart of radiation (http://xkcd.com/radiation/), sleeping with a Takumar under your pillow has got to be down the bottom near the order of one or two blue dots, putting one up to your eyes a few times a day is no worse than staring into the sun...
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: mws on November 28, 2012, 08:27:59 AM
I have one that I use on a 50D, I just wish I could use it on my 5Dmkii (lens hits the mirror if you didn't know). I love the look it give, and it is insanely sharp.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: mws on November 28, 2012, 08:30:55 AM
I love how everyone is still concerned about the radioactive elements.
Ever have one of those old (30+ years) glow in the dark watches?
Live or work in a brick building? or stone?
Ever had an xray?

On the big chart of radiation (http://xkcd.com/radiation/), sleeping with a Takumar under your pillow has got to be down the bottom near the order of one or two blue dots, putting one up to your eyes a few times a day is no worse than staring into the sun...

Cool chart, I had no idea about bananas.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sandymandy on November 29, 2012, 06:50:42 AM
I love how everyone is still concerned about the radioactive elements.

Im not concerned :) Nuclear all the way!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: AprilForever on November 29, 2012, 10:58:39 AM
I enjoy using vintage glass as well.  I have the SMC 28mm f/3.5 (a great lens on a crop body, vignettes pretty bad on my 5D MKII), Super Takumar 35 f/3.5 (works amazing on crop, not at all on FF), SMC 55mm f/1.8 (works great on both crop and FF - kept this one over the SMC or Super variants of the f/1.4 and the SMC f/2), and I also use the 150mm f/4 Super Tak (great on my 5D - awesome portrait lens).  I've used several others at times, including both the 3.5 and 2.5 versions of the 135mm and SMC 35mm f/2.

I also love my Helios 44-2.  These lens brings something very unique to both the finished product and the shooting process.

SMC 50mm f/1.4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7071/7138493387_a5bb89d62d.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/)
These Shoes Are[n't]Made for Walking (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 50mm f/1.4

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7249/6914459472_335e547645.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/)
The Man with the Scarf (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

28mm f/3.5
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8040/8039035506_3c6d1bc27f.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/)
Kent and Erin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super Tak 35mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7160/6663778017_fdba4a6a2b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/)
One Perfect Winter Day (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 55mm f/1.8
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7012/6782015893_7424cee098.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/)
Gathering Dust (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 135mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6846269375_f4ca555d28.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/)
You Lookin' at Me? (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 150mm f/4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7136/7787888788_2c271254fb.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/)
Fade to Memory (Explored August 14th, 2012) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

And my favorite:  the Helios 44-2
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8166/7621300940_ac6a873d09.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/)
Cast Off (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8150515773_df9bdc26a1.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/)
Spiral of Color (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7393763844_86881009c8.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/)
Brownie Points - Explored June 17th, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Which is your favourite of them?
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on November 29, 2012, 01:32:29 PM
The first one I fell in love with is the Super Tak 35mm f/3.5, so I'll go with that one.  It blew my mind the first time I put that little tiny lens on my 60D and watched vivid colors and sharpness pop out of it.  Amazing little thing!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: PVS on November 29, 2012, 01:40:23 PM
+1 for SMC Tak 50/1.4
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6233/6231003251_07f67fcc71_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/overdear/6231003251/)
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sandymandy on November 29, 2012, 02:43:17 PM
Bokeh really owns and almost(?!)  50mm 1.2L style.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 15, 2012, 04:58:15 PM
Is it just me, or does this image from the SMC Tak 55mm f/1.8 look a lot like something from the 50L?  This was taken this morning with a 5D MKII and I've only adjusted WB as it rendered a little cool.  Takumars (IMO) have a very high quality transition from focus to defocus that reminds me of very expensive primes (which they once were, of course).

(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8498/8277874158_6bb34e79fc_c.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8277874158/)
Saturday Morning (In Honor of the Children) [Explored December 16th, 2012] (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8277874158/) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 15, 2012, 04:58:54 PM
Bokeh really owns and almost(?!)  50mm 1.2L style.

Wow, I just read your post.  We were really on the same wave length.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Sporgon on December 15, 2012, 05:16:59 PM
What make of adapter do you guys use ?
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 15, 2012, 05:59:05 PM
I use a couple of Ebay specials (with flange and variable aperture reporting).  This one works well with every lens save the 50mm f/1.4 (in either Super or SMC variety).  The design of that lens hangs on this adapter, so I've used a different one (Without flange) for the 50mm f/1.4.

I love my M42 lens for close to medium distance works.  I'm not blown away with any of them at infinity.  They don't seem to resolve as well as modern lens at that distance in my experience.  That is particularly true with a FF body (for me).  That may be a byproduct of the adapters that I have used and the distance of the lens from the sensor.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: pwp on December 15, 2012, 07:13:24 PM
My very first "real" camera was a Pentax Spotmatic with the 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar SMC lens. I loved it and somehow missed it's almost intangible qualities when I switched to Nikon when I got more serious about my photography. (The switch to Canon happened a little later with the then amazing EOS1n film camera and Canon's great lenses and unrivaled CPS support).

My brother has our Dad's identical Pentax Spotmatic with the 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar SMC lens, plus other Takumar lenses tucked away somewhere in his store-room. I'm inspired to dig it out and get an EF/Takumar adapter. BTW where do you get EF/Takumar adapters? eBay?

-PW
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 15, 2012, 07:41:19 PM
My very first "real" camera was a Pentax Spotmatic with the 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar SMC lens. I loved it and somehow missed it's almost intangible qualities when I switched to Nikon when I got more serious about my photography. (The switch to Canon happened a little later with the then amazing EOS1n film camera and Canon's great lenses and unrivaled CPS support).

My brother has our Dad's identical Pentax Spotmatic with the 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar SMC lens, plus other Takumar lenses tucked away somewhere in his store-room. I'm inspired to dig it out and get an EF/Takumar adapter. BTW where do you get EF/Takumar adapters? eBay?

-PW

That's where I have gotten mine. They typically don't cost much more than $10 shipped.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on December 15, 2012, 07:48:27 PM
I enjoy using vintage glass as well.  I have the SMC 28mm f/3.5 (a great lens on a crop body, vignettes pretty bad on my 5D MKII), Super Takumar 35 f/3.5 (works amazing on crop, not at all on FF), SMC 55mm f/1.8 (works great on both crop and FF - kept this one over the SMC or Super variants of the f/1.4 and the SMC f/2), and I also use the 150mm f/4 Super Tak (great on my 5D - awesome portrait lens).  I've used several others at times, including both the 3.5 and 2.5 versions of the 135mm and SMC 35mm f/2.

I also love my Helios 44-2.  These lens brings something very unique to both the finished product and the shooting process.

SMC 50mm f/1.4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7071/7138493387_a5bb89d62d.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/)
These Shoes Are[n't]Made for Walking (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7138493387/) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 50mm f/1.4

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7249/6914459472_335e547645.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/)
The Man with the Scarf (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6914459472/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

28mm f/3.5
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8040/8039035506_3c6d1bc27f.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/)
Kent and Erin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8039035506/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super Tak 35mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7160/6663778017_fdba4a6a2b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/)
One Perfect Winter Day (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6663778017/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 55mm f/1.8
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7012/6782015893_7424cee098.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/)
Gathering Dust (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6782015893/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

SMC 135mm f/3.5
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6846269375_f4ca555d28.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/)
You Lookin' at Me? (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/6846269375/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Super 150mm f/4
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7136/7787888788_2c271254fb.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/)
Fade to Memory (Explored August 14th, 2012) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7787888788/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

And my favorite:  the Helios 44-2
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8166/7621300940_ac6a873d09.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/)
Cast Off (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7621300940/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8150515773_df9bdc26a1.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/)
Spiral of Color (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8150515773/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7393763844_86881009c8.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/)
Brownie Points - Explored June 17th, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/7393763844/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Those are absolutely stunning! Really great photos!  :D
I was asking myself why the Helios 44-2 was your favorite, so I tried getting more information.
I saw some photos with magnificent vortex-like bokeh and can barely believe a f/2 lens can produce it.
Is it too good to be truth? How does it perform in terms of sharpness?
Being a avid manual lens fan myself, some first hand opinion would be greatly appreciate!  :)
If this lens is as good as it seems, it could definitely be a great christmas present from myself to myself; although I still love my good old SMC 50mm f/1.7 (my first lens, with which I started photography, with a Pentax K-1000), I could definitely use an upgrade in term of bokeh capacity.
Thanks a lot, and yet again, congratulation on the awesome photos!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 15, 2012, 08:22:02 PM
The Helios produces the most unique bokeh of any lens I have used and is also very sharp wide open.  It is also quite versatile, because stopped down it has less "character" and just becomes a sharp prime.  Color rendering has a Zeiss quality.  Considering I got mine for $25 shipped from Russia, it is also an amazing value.  It is an awesome portrait lens.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on December 15, 2012, 10:06:31 PM
Thank you very much! I checked and found a few at about 40/50$.
In term of adapter, what do you use? I say that there were some
AF-confirm adapter in M42 mount at 5/10$. Do you know if they
work correctly? Having focus confirmation could definitely be a plus!
Thanks again for the help!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: dr croubie on December 15, 2012, 11:48:45 PM
Thank you very much! I checked and found a few at about 40/50$.
In term of adapter, what do you use? I say that there were some
AF-confirm adapter in M42 mount at 5/10$. Do you know if they
work correctly? Having focus confirmation could definitely be a plus!
Thanks again for the help!

For adapters, almost anything for $2 from China will do. Some of the lower-quality metals can get jammed on your camera and/or lens (but i've never had a problem on Canon bodies, mostly that applies to m42 on Pentax K bodies).
For AF chips, same thing applies, pay next to nothing and get a basic chip.

But for the best, I'd look for one by 'ml-gvalt' (http://www.ebay.com.au/sch/ml-gvalt/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_trksid=p3686) on ebay. They're still fairly cheap, but the AF confirm works great, you can set the EXIF data to read anything (ie I've got one set to 50/1.4 on my Tak, 85/1.5 on my Cyclop, 35/1.4 on my Samyang). They also work with ETTL Flash, although I've never tried flash with a different chip, and you can AF Micro-Adjust from within the Chip, if you've got a 60D or less without AF MicroAdjust in the body. They're a bit weird to program, but once you get used to it it gets easier.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on December 17, 2012, 09:34:06 AM
One thing of interest:  a disproportionate amount of my Explored imaged on Flickr have been with my M42 lens.  To date I have had 69 Explores, 18 of which have been with M42 lens.  M42 uploads on Flickr account for less than 90 of my over 700 uploads.

Now Flickr Explore is a strange animal (I'm not as excited about it as I once was), so I don't know if being M42 adds to the "interestingness", but I suspect that at least part of the equation is that the M42 glass often gives images a slightly unique look that people instinctively like.

This is most prominent with my Helios uploads.  Over time I have uploaded 8 images; 5 of those have been Explored.  Of course, nothing really produced images quite like the Helios 44-2.  It is the epitome of a "character" lens.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on December 17, 2012, 11:23:22 AM
@ dr crouble: Thanks for the advice! Since I barely use the EXIF data and don't missed them that much with my samyangs, and I work in manual mode with my flash, I will probably get some cheap one from China (it might also have something to do with the fact that I'm fairly poor!) :P

@ TWI by Dustin Abbott: I guess it as to do with the fact that these lens produce a different "look" that modern lens; it makes the photos more unique because it doesn't have the "look" of today's lens. Also, but this might only apply to me, I feel that the more time I spend preparing per photo, the better they are; having to choose the exposure and to focus manually give's me more time to think about the photo itself, what I want to express by it and how I can do it. This is one of the reason I mostly use manual lens, aside from the fact they are far cheaper. Personally, I rather shoot 30 photos and have 1 great than shooting 100 and have 50 okay, but nothing better!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: AprilForever on December 26, 2012, 12:45:29 PM
@ dr crouble: Thanks for the advice! Since I barely use the EXIF data and don't missed them that much with my samyangs, and I work in manual mode with my flash, I will probably get some cheap one from China (it might also have something to do with the fact that I'm fairly poor!) :P

@ TWI by Dustin Abbott: I guess it as to do with the fact that these lens produce a different "look" that modern lens; it makes the photos more unique because it doesn't have the "look" of today's lens. Also, but this might only apply to me, I feel that the more time I spend preparing per photo, the better they are; having to choose the exposure and to focus manually give's me more time to think about the photo itself, what I want to express by it and how I can do it. This is one of the reason I mostly use manual lens, aside from the fact they are far shaper. Personally, I rather shoot 30 photos and have 1 great than shooting 100 and have 50 okay, but nothing better!

I know what you mean; the distinctive bokeh is really quite to love!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on January 16, 2013, 10:14:07 AM
I went out in some early morning fog the other day for a shoot.  It was raining and cold, so I had my Tamron 24-70mm VC lens mounted on the camera and threw my Super Tak 150mm into a pocket.  It is fantastic to be able to have a competent telephoto compact enough to GO in a pocket!  Anyway, here is one of my results from the shoot using the Super Takumar 150mm f/4 mounted on a Canon 5D MKII:

(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8470/8379547093_6d7098393d_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8379547093/)
Swallowed (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8379547093/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on February 12, 2013, 02:44:06 PM
When you want to use a Takumar 50mm 1.4 SMC on a full frame, you'll run into the problem with the mirror hitting the back of the lens. You can mod the lens though, wrote a bit about that on my website www.florianbieler.de (http://www.florianbieler.de). Going to try the lens out as soon as my M42 adapter arrives.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Aglet on February 13, 2013, 01:17:00 AM
LOVE 'EM! :)
Just started playing with a small variety of old primes and a couple zooms in M42 on a crop body so no mirror-strike worries.
the super smooth feel, and every one has an interesting character that will lend itself to certain kinds of shots.
prices are rising tho, as everyone hops on board the oldies train.

favorite so far is also the SMC 50/1.8 but looking forward to trying a Mamiya that's still on its way to me.
Haven't take the Helios 44-2 outside yet.
Was quite surprised to see just how well the old SMC performs, very sharp, good contrast characteristics and nice bokeh.  I wonder if new Pentax glass performs as well?
-
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on February 24, 2013, 01:24:53 PM
I finally just bought the Helios 44-2! I was looking for one in perfect condition from a trusted seller, so it took me a while to choose. I'm definitely looking forward to try it! If anybody's interested, I could post test shots whenever I receive it (I guess the ride from Ukraine to Québec might take a while). Thanks for the great advices on previous posts!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on February 24, 2013, 02:23:36 PM
I finally just bought the Helios 44-2! I was looking for one in perfect condition from a trusted seller, so it took me a while to choose. I'm definitely looking forward to try it! If anybody's interested, I could post test shots whenever I receive it (I guess the ride from Ukraine to Québec might that a while). Thanks for the great advices on previous posts!

Would love to see your shots.  It is a very unique lens.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: dr croubie on February 27, 2013, 10:05:53 PM
I finally just bought the Helios 44-2! I was looking for one in perfect condition from a trusted seller, so it took me a while to choose. I'm definitely looking forward to try it! If anybody's interested, I could post test shots whenever I receive it (I guess the ride from Ukraine to Québec might that a while). Thanks for the great advices on previous posts!

Would love to see your shots.  It is a very unique lens.

I've also just picked up an MC Helios 44M-4, which should be sharper than the 44-2 according to the Zenit (http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/helios-44.html) website (you don't have to read russian, just google translate, or look for the line "MC Гелиос-44М-4 — 41/20 линий/мм", which means MC Helios 44M-4 has 41 Line Pairs per mm in the centre, 20 on the edge, better than non-MC 44-2 at 38/20. And before anyone asks, the much-better 44-7 is rarer and more expensive).

So one day when I get time (in a few months, if that), I'll do a proper scientific comparison between my:
Takumar 55/2.0
Takumar 55/1.8
Takumar 50/1.4
FL 55/1.2
OM 50/2.5 Macro
MC Helios 44M-4
EF 50/1.8 II
EFs 15-85 @ 50mm
(maybe the Shorty Forty?)
(maybe Zeiss 50/4.0 in Pentacon Six? Or Mamiya645 45/2.8 C?)

But until then I'll just keep shooting in the real world and comparing them that way...
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on March 17, 2013, 08:41:52 PM
I finally got my Helios 44-2!  ;D
First impression: The lens is smaller and lighter that what I would have though. It is all made of metal and really feel solid. The focus ring is about 270°, allowing slower but more precise focusing. As strange as it might sound, it seems that the aperture values are put backward; at f/16, the aperture is wide open and at f/2, it is closed. I am quite happy to see that the lens itself is in perfect condition; barely any sign of use on the barrel, the glass elements are perfect, the aperture is smooth and oil-free. Although the lens is a bit less sharp than I excepted, though I haven't done any formal testing so I might be surprise later, the result it gives are stunning. It is reasonably sharp, the CA is reasonably well controlled, but the color and image rendition is unique and lovely. The bokeh is nothing short of amazing IMO. The photos I took with it really have a unique feel to them. To me, in a modern photographer bag, this lens is a wonderful tool. Of course, performance-wise, it is out-classed by modern standard lens (though I only have significant first-hand experience with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4), but I consider it more like a speciality lens, a bit like a fish-eye. It might not be your everyday use, walk-around lens, but it is definitely give unique image than no other lens I know can do.
Conclusion: Highly recommended!  :D
P.s: I attached a picture I took to show the unique bokeh rendition of the Helios 44-2. Not my best photo artisticly-wise, but still, I guess it make it point.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on June 03, 2013, 11:23:40 AM
Here's one from the SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8.  Brought it out this last weekend and was again reminded what a great little lens it is:

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7399/8936637849_6b747d8c0f.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8936637849/)
Simple Things (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8936637849/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr

Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on June 06, 2013, 10:34:20 AM
Here's another beauty from the SMC 55mm

(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2806/8969017932_9496e72a9e_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8969017932/)
Intimate World (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/8969017932/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on June 23, 2013, 08:18:58 AM
Here's another from the 55mm f/1.8

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3726/9116214678_52c8467220_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/9116214678/)
Floating in a Sea of Light (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/9116214678/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Vivid Color on June 23, 2013, 10:39:17 AM
My first SLR, purchased in 1973 or 1974, was a Honeywell Pentax Spotmatic and over the years I acquired 4 wonderful Takumar lenses: 28mm, 55mm, 105mm, and a 200mm. I sold everything a few years ago. I loved that camera and set of lenses, but I had switched to Canon some years before and I had no idea there were lens adaptors for my Canon DSLR. The Takumar lenses, despite extensive use over almost 30 years, were in excellent condition. (This was in part due to the fact that in those days, when you bought a lens, it came with a really nice hard case with leather exterior and velvet lined interior.) Hopefully, whoever bought my lenses will enjoy and appreciate them as much as I did.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on October 10, 2013, 09:46:52 AM
Dustin, that Takumar 55 1.8 images make me curious. Tell me, do I also get mirror problems with that lens, so that the mirror hits the back of the lens?
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 10, 2013, 10:48:40 AM
Dustin, that Takumar 55 1.8 images make me curious. Tell me, do I also get mirror problems with that lens, so that the mirror hits the back of the lens?

No, Florien.  Part of the reason that I went with the 55mm f/1.8 instead of the 50mm f/1.4 is because the 55 works perfectly on a full frame body.  It has very few of the optical imperfections you associate with older lenses.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on October 10, 2013, 11:08:36 AM
Well okay, that's nice, I modified the old 50 1.4 to work with my 5D Mark III without hitting the mirror but I don't own it anymore. But I have seen the 55 1.8 is only around 60€ here so I got one off ebay with minimal dust inside, I think there's a M42 adapter still flying around here so I thought I'd give it a shot! Your shots with that thing certainly make me curious.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: ugly_bokeh on October 10, 2013, 12:31:21 PM
The Helios produces the most unique bokeh of any lens I have used and is also very sharp wide open.  It is also quite versatile, because stopped down it has less "character" and just becomes a sharp prime.  Color rendering has a Zeiss quality.  Considering I got mine for $25 shipped from Russia, it is also an amazing value.  It is an awesome portrait lens.

I was asking myself why the Helios 44-2 was your favorite, so I tried getting more information.
I saw some photos with magnificent vortex-like bokeh and can barely believe a f/2 lens can produce it.


If you like the look of the Helios lenses, you might also like the Carl Zeiss Biotars.  I think there is something of a chicken vs the egg debate about the Helios and the Biotar (what I have read makes me think that the Zeiss came first), but they are definitely related and have similar looks.

My apologies to the OP for prolonging the Helios sidebar....
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on October 10, 2013, 01:21:58 PM
The Helios 44-2 you are all talking about is that 44-2 58mm 2.0 lens, right?
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: bjd on October 10, 2013, 02:45:08 PM
So would anyone happen to have instruction showing how to disassemble the lens to clean the dust out of the inside?
Sorry, found some instructions (Just need to use the correct search string).
Cheers Brian
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 10, 2013, 03:14:55 PM
The Helios 44-2 you are all talking about is that 44-2 58mm 2.0 lens, right?

I that is directed at me, then the answer is yes.  It is my favorite vintage lens to use because it has such unique rendering.  It will hit on the mirror near infinity, so I switch to live view if using it that way.  Most of my work with it is within 15 feet, though.  Very unique portrait lens.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Artifex on October 10, 2013, 04:32:56 PM
The Helios 44-2 you are all talking about is that 44-2 58mm 2.0 lens, right?

I that is directed at me, then the answer is yes.  It is my favorite vintage lens to use because it has such unique rendering.  It will hit on the mirror near infinity, so I switch to live view if using it that way.  Most of my work with it is within 15 feet, though.  Very unique portrait lens.

Strange, I have no mirror problem with my Helios 44-2 on my 6D.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 10, 2013, 05:57:45 PM
The Helios 44-2 you are all talking about is that 44-2 58mm 2.0 lens, right?

I that is directed at me, then the answer is yes.  It is my favorite vintage lens to use because it has such unique rendering.  It will hit on the mirror near infinity, so I switch to live view if using it that way.  Most of my work with it is within 15 feet, though.  Very unique portrait lens.

Interesting.  I have a Helios 44-4 and have no mirror issues with it, but my 44-2 does.  The 44-4 and 44-2 are very different designs.  My 44-2 is a preset version with 8 very curved blades.  My 44-4 is much more modern looking, has clearly defined stops, and has only six blades (less curved).  I feel like the more modern 44-4 has less microcontrast, although I haven't compared them head to head.

Strange, I have no mirror problem with my Helios 44-2 on my 6D.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on October 18, 2013, 04:41:20 AM
I also received a Helios 44-2 today and the mirror doesn't hit the back of the lens on infinite. I am quite satisfied with it and probably will return the Takumar 55 1.8, one of those 50-ish lenses will do and the Helios with its swirl is probably the more interesting one.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: agierke on October 18, 2013, 04:47:37 PM
my interest is peaking with this talk of vintage glass and i am wondering if any of you can provide advice on the brand of adapters you are using to convert these lenses to the Eos system.

i have looked at fotodiox and they appear to be quality products but they dont seem to include AF confirmation. so far it seems like most of the adapters i see with AF confirmation are coming from China (i just dont trust ordering a product from China so i'd like to stay in the US or europe)

another question i have is that its appears there are no issues with mirror clipping on APS cameras but i will be wanting to use this on the 5D series cameras so do all the adapters run the same risk of mirror clipping or do some prevent this better than others. or is it simply a crap shoot as it seems (from what i have read) that there are variances from body to body in mirror clearance.

final question, is it better to get an adapter without glass in it and deal with potential mirror clipping or does an adapter like the fotodiox have quality enough glass in it that IQ of the original lens will be preserved?

appreciate any insight and direct experiences any of you might have concerning above questions. 
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: florianbieler.de on October 21, 2013, 01:39:15 PM
I just use a simple screw-in-adapter without any AF confirmation. I don't see the need for them because I probably won't take out such an adapted lens on a hike where I don't have much time to shoot, I only take it with me when I know I can play around a bit and then I can also set the focus via LiveView to be sure.

By the way there is my first good swirly shot with my Helios 44-2, I can't really believe how sharp it is.

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3795/10406885834_7fa3e623b1.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/florianbieler/10406885834/)
Down the rabbit hole (http://www.flickr.com/photos/florianbieler/10406885834/#) von Florian Bieler (http://www.flickr.com/people/florianbieler/) auf Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 21, 2013, 02:26:46 PM
I just use a simple screw-in-adapter without any AF confirmation. I don't see the need for them because I probably won't take out such an adapted lens on a hike where I don't have much time to shoot, I only take it with me when I know I can play around a bit and then I can also set the focus via LiveView to be sure.

By the way there is my first good swirly shot with my Helios 44-2, I can't really believe how sharp it is.

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3795/10406885834_7fa3e623b1.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/florianbieler/10406885834/)
Down the rabbit hole (http://www.flickr.com/photos/florianbieler/10406885834/#) von Florian Bieler (http://www.flickr.com/people/florianbieler/) auf Flickr

Yep, that's what I'm talking about right there.  The Helios is very sharp in the center of the frame, and then that wonderful artistic bokeh rendering.  This is a fantastic use of it!
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: Kernuak on October 21, 2013, 06:11:47 PM
It's beginning to make me think I should dig out my 44-4 that came with my old Zenith.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: pwp on October 21, 2013, 06:52:54 PM
My very first "real" camera was an ancient though perfectly good 1960's hand-me-down Pentax Spotmatic with a 50mm  f/1.4 Takumar. The exquisite, unique qualities of this lens helped foster the beginnings of a decades-long love of photography. As I was generally shooting 64 iso Kodachrome or 125 iso Ilford FP4 I tended to shoot wide open a lot. Pure magic...no wonder this lens still has a well informed following.

-pw
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sama on October 21, 2013, 08:55:25 PM
Please be aware that Helios lenses with the same name are built differently. I have mirror clearance problem with both my 44-2 58mm 2.0 and 44M on my 5DIII when focus to infinity.

I started working on the 44-2 and trimmed about 1 to 2mm off the rear lens metal barrel with a Dremel Rotary tool and the mirror problem is gone.

 

Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 22, 2013, 08:36:53 AM
Please be aware that Helios lenses with the same name are built differently. I have mirror clearance problem with both my 44-2 58mm 2.0 and 44M on my 5DIII when focus to infinity.

I started working on the 44-2 and trimmed about 1 to 2mm off the rear lens metal barrel with a Dremel Rotary tool and the mirror problem is gone.

That is true.  My Helios 44-2 (preset design) does hang the mirror near infinity.  My 44-4 works without hanging, but I find that micro-contrast isn't as good.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: ugly_bokeh on October 22, 2013, 10:24:25 AM
my interest is peaking with this talk of vintage glass and i am wondering if any of you can provide advice on the brand of adapters you are using to convert these lenses to the Eos system.

i have looked at fotodiox and they appear to be quality products but they dont seem to include AF confirmation. so far it seems like most of the adapters i see with AF confirmation are coming from China (i just dont trust ordering a product from China so i'd like to stay in the US or europe)

another question i have is that its appears there are no issues with mirror clipping on APS cameras but i will be wanting to use this on the 5D series cameras so do all the adapters run the same risk of mirror clipping or do some prevent this better than others. or is it simply a crap shoot as it seems (from what i have read) that there are variances from body to body in mirror clearance.

final question, is it better to get an adapter without glass in it and deal with potential mirror clipping or does an adapter like the fotodiox have quality enough glass in it that IQ of the original lens will be preserved?

appreciate any insight and direct experiences any of you might have concerning above questions.

The Fotodiox adapters have treated me well and I have their Nikon F->EF, C/Y->EF, and M42->EF.  People seem to think they are made in the U.S., but I don't know that to be true.  (I doubt it, actually.)

Generally, I steer clear of the super-cheap versions (I have a few M42->EF that aren't Fotodiox), but others have obviously not hesitated.

So far, I have not used an adapter with an element.  The consensus seems to be that you are better off avoiding that option, but it probably depends on how you plan to use the lens(es).  If you are after characterstics not related to optimum sharpness, I would definitely try one.  (I probably will try one, eventually, but there are so many adapter/lens combinations to consider without folding in such...elements.)

At some point, I stumbled on the 5D compatibility list of M42 lenses below and it has come in quite handy.
http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/ (http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/)
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: sama on October 22, 2013, 01:28:01 PM

At some point, I stumbled on the 5D compatibility list of M42 lenses below and it has come in quite handy.
http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/ (http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/)
[/quote]

I made reference to this list as well but please do not rely on it 100%.

Both my lenses indicated in my previous post are reported to be not having problem : "mirror hits lens back when focussing to infinity" but in the real world, they have to be modified slightly to avoid mirror jam and err message.
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: DIABLO on October 24, 2013, 03:22:26 PM
Helios 44-3 MC
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 26, 2013, 09:13:23 AM
Here's another one where the whole shot was built around the unique swirling effect of the Helios 44-2 bokeh.  I also have the 44-4, but don't find that the effect is pronounced (and don't like it as well).

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5487/10474802466_03baeacf92_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10474802466/)
Tunnel Vision (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10474802466/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 27, 2013, 05:12:38 PM
Here's one from the Helios 44-4.  I am less fond it than the 44-2 (less personality and less microcontrast), but I like this one from it:

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7303/10492241033_bfe4f60f1f_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10492241033/)
Hung Out to Dry (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10492241033/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 28, 2013, 08:37:40 AM
Here is (for me) an unusual shot from the Helios/6D combo.  I actually stopped the Helios down (it is a preset design, so no fixed aperture, but I would guess somewhere around f/6.3).  The Helios has so many artistic optical defects wide open, but its character changes completely when stopped down.  It basically just becomes a sharp prime.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7300/10510741893_8a274ab655_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10510741893/)
Duality (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10510741893/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Takumars, Anyone?
Post by: TWI by Dustin Abbott on October 29, 2013, 09:00:02 AM
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5524/10534374665_908c74fb79_z.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10534374665/)
The Parchment of Autumn (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thousandwordimages/10534374665/#) by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott (http://www.flickr.com/people/thousandwordimages/), on Flickr