Asahi Pentax S came almost a year after the original. This was the first Super-Takumar with automatic diaphragm! But the serial number tells you.

My second radioactive acquisition. There were few versions of this Takumar, only first one to introduce 8 elements in 7 groups, while all later ones, including mine have 7 elements in 6 groups.

Another difference among them, is that two early versions – named only Super Takumar, does not have multi-coating glass, while two later versions – Super Multi Coated Takumar and SMC Takumar does. SMC Takumar has aperture made of 8 blades, while the others have only 6.In that regard, my copy tested here is probably the worse one, in terms of sharpness, and I am looking for the two newer versions to see, how much different they are. Tamil tv serial actress kuladeivam rani. Interesting comparison between the versions can be found here: My version (production started at 1965 – 1971) over 40 years old, did come in a solid conditions and everything works as it should.

You can notice yellowish glass which is typical for the lenses that are using rare earth element, I guess Thorium in this case. You can find lot of different opinions about the radiation risk using this lens on the web. I believe, that using it occasionally and keeping it far away from my living room and bedroom, should result in acceptable risk.

But anyway, does it worth any risk? First what you will notice, holding the lens its a superior build quality, and significant weight. Takumars were built to last, and they probably will over-last many modern lenses of today. Lens has 49mm filter thread, and weight 260g.

Minimum focus distance is 45cm and aperture closes from f1.4 to f16. Lens and Camera.

Following test shows lens character, color, contrast and out of focus rendition at most apertures. Focusing was at the dolls left eye.

Shot from tripod with remote, ISO 100, NEX 7, RAW developed in LR 3.6 with standard settings, exported for downsizing in Photoshop. No other corrections applied. Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 1.4 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 1.7 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 2 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 2.8 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 4 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 5.6 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 8 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 11 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 16. Here are couple of portraits in a natural light without flash. This is probably the best use of this lens on APS-C. Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 1.4 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 at 2.8 Bokeh: Takumars are famous for the combination of great sharpness and smooth bokeh.

Bokeh is very subjective thing, and it is nice indeed, but I still like more Yashinon 50 f1.7 wide open. Stopped down to f4, bokeh is very good, better than most competitors. (IMO) Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar f1.4 at 1.4 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar f1.4 at 4 Most 50mm lenses that I had been testing so far, are good performers stopped down to f5.6-f8 at a longer distances, and Takumar is no exception. Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar f1.4 at 8 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar f1.4 at 8 Sony NEX 7 + Asahi Super Takumar f1.4 at 8 HDR Conclusion: Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 is one of those lenses with a pronounced character.

There is something that makes it unique, apart of outstanding build quality. Question is, should you spent around 100 USD this days for an radioactive lens, that certainly does live to its reputation but its not miles ahead of cheaper and less risky competitors?

For those, that are looking for a bit of personality, it probably worth to touch its dark side. Dear Victor: I really enjoy your reviews. I have 9 Pentax 50 or 55-mm MF lenses including a Super-Multi-Coated 50/1.4 I bought today that I have not yet used. I did do extensive testing of my takumars using the SONY-NEX-7 vs. Other “normal lenses”. The overall “winner” was the Canon FD 50/1.4 (I have two specimens) with my results qualitatively similar to yours. My two 50/1.4 Supertakumars were a bit disappointing at f1.4, albeit one of them has some internal spider web fungus.

I intend to do additional tests when I have time. I am unfortunately not nearly as skilled as you on a computer. Hi Joe, I am glad that we share experience about Canon FD. I learned by time, that actual condition of those legacy lenses is often more important for their performance than their original optical design. There are so many anomalies that can occur with the glass during years that it is really hard to make any conclusions related to original lens performance.

Those Canon FDn are younger than Super Takumars, so they might be simply better preserved. Font family. On the other hand, we are getting new toys with those old glasses, as original as their own history might be 🙂 Thank you for visiting us and have a great day, Viktor. I placed my Super Takumar 50/1.4 (7 element version) front down(without filter) on a small mirror, with a cheap IKEA LED desk lamp (the $15 dollar bendable model with base clip).