Differences between Pentax 105mm 2.4 Takumar vs Non-Takumar

[moodlover]

Asahi Takumar Version

SMC Pentax Version

Anyone know what the difference is? I'm in the market for a Pentax 67 and want the 105mm 2.4 lens that has that buttery beautiful bokeh but not sure which one of these two delivers that. I want to make portraits like this guy: Dead Link Removed - I love his work!

 

[jspillane]

Optics are the same in all three versions, only casing (and maybe coating?) changes. The later, non-takumar version is slightly lighter weight. I have only ever used the Super Takumar version and it is great.

More info:
Dead Link Removed

 

[scapevision]

main difference is rubber vs metal focusing ring. That's also how the weight differs

 

[moodlover]

Scapevision, is the newer one rubber, which is why it's lighter?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Takumar is the name given to earlier ones. They should be similar in optical performance. Notice those eleven aperture blades which give
out-of-focus highlights a nice round rendering. This types of aperture exists in a number of P67 lenses, all of which give reasonably pleasant "bokeh", though people will endlessly argue over the nuances of this term. Nor do you need to worry about that ugly double-lined effect often seen with Japanese lenses. With a few lenses there are distinct improvements over time, esp with the 55 and 200. For portraiture the 165/2.4
is a gem, and the 105/2.4 for a little wider perspective.

 

[micmarphotography]

I started shooting with the 6x7 about 2 years ago and love the system. I found this website to be helpful when choosing my next lens. Have fun

http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-67-Medium-Format-Lenses-i5.html