Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/04/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]" Super-Multi-Coated Takumar" may have been a mouthful but it was on the lips of all the photo people I knew who hung out at the school darkroom and all sat at the same table over French fries at the student lounge which was called the Red Carpet. This was the lens and camera, a Spotmatic that I used often as I'd check it out from the school on the weekend. It was so much lighter with far better ergonomics than my new Nikon f2 with 45mm GN lens which only focused to 3 feet. We all loved this lens and this camera at my school, Webster College in St. Louis in the early 70's it was the first to get checked out. A Canon FTb was the last as it always pulled the film out of the cassette on the last frame. It also came out in 1971 I see now. The Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4 was the first lens anybody could get their hands on which had this advanced coating which everyone was very hyped on and was developed by Pentax in conjunction with Zeiss said to have as many has 6 micro thin coatings the same lens service the idea blew everybody away. Its all they talked about in any of the photo magazines.. Was said to ad noticeable contrast to your final image and it turned out to not be hype. And contrast by the way is a good thing. The Hasselblad lenses the next year had T* on them which indicated the same thing though Hasselblad claimed they'd been doing that previously a bit anyway for a year previously. Soon any lens which was not super multi coated or T starred was not worth a hill of beans in this crazy world. Other companies had other nomenclatures. On 4/23/15 6:13 PM, "Jim Nichols" <jhnichols at lighttube.net> wrote: > George, > > I realize I am going against the grain here. I am resisting the > conventional "wisdom" that, if it is not made by Leica or Zeiss, etc, > then it has to be junk. The same holds for earlier models. I feel a > lens should be evaluated on what it can do for ME, not what the > "experts" claim. > > This is to show, especially to me, that my lens of choice, which happens > to be a Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4 (7-element lens) from > around 1971, can do a reasonable job for me without having to spend a > small fortune for the latest and greatest lens, that is admittedly > somewhat better, but at what cost? > > Since I'm getting few comments, I suspect no one else cares. > > Thanks for commenting. > > Here is my favorite image made with this lens, several Christmases ago: > http://www.gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Katie+Grace+_amp_+Kristin.jpg.htm> l > > Jim Nichols > Tullahoma, TN USA > > On 4/23/2015 4:30 PM, George Lottermoser wrote: >> On Apr 23, 2015, at 4:00 PM, Jim Nichols wrote: >> >>> This third image, shot from my neighbor's yard across the street, shows >>> that >>> things are greening up at my house, and the bushes are in real need of >>> trimming. As a general purpose lens, this lens provides plenty of detail >>> without enhancement. This raw image was converted with no special >>> adjustment, and the image was resized. >>> >>> http://www.gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/House.jpg.html >>> >>> Comments and critiques welcomed. >> As you're presenting "lens tests" with the subject line "Lens Choices" >> It would be a bit more interesting if you mentioned what lens we're >> looking >> at a sample from. >> >> Not in the text and not in the EXIF - so what "Choices" are you making? >> >> Regards, >> George Lottermoser >> >> http://www.imagist.com >> http://www.imagist.com/blog >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/