Pentax 6x7 105mm f2.4 lens question...............

John Wiegerink · Aug 16, 2016

I've had the Super Takumar 105mm f2.4 6x7 lens since Noah crashed his ark and it's a honey. I have no complaints as far as sharpness or even contrast. I was just wondering if it was worth it to upgrade to the last (3rd edition) SMC 67 model of this lens. Everything I have read seems to indicate I won't gain anything as far as optical quality goes. Is that true?

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 16, 2016

True. The SMC Pentax 67-designated lens began in 1989 with no change to the optical arrangement over the original Takumar. But it shaved off 38 grams of the weight and gave the lens a fresh, modern look on a par with a few other SMC Pentax 67 lenses that came out progressively from 1989 to 1992. The lens is rated near a score of 10 for optical quality, so it's down to personal whim whether you would go to the trouble of buying the lens again just for the updated handling and appearance. The updated lens had none of the thorium coating that gives this (and two other Takumars and the early Pentax 6x7 right angle finders) a distinctive yellow appearance (and has fired the creative imaginations of radiation and conspiracy theorists), and instead had greatly improved multicoating applied that has remained unchanged in all updated SMC Pentax 67 lenses, excepting the high end 75mm f2.8AL lens.

dpurdy · Aug 16, 2016

If it has yellowed on you, you can set it facing the sun for a day or 2 and it will clear up. Some people like the yellowing though it costs a bit of speed.

John Wiegerink · Aug 16, 2016

dpurdy said:
If it has yellowed on you, you can set it facing the sun for a day or 2 and it will clear up. Some people like the yellowing though it costs a bit of speed.

I shoot mainly B&W so this lens is fine for that. I have some later SMC 6x7/67 glass (45mm f4, 55mm f4, 90mmLS f2.8, 165mmLS f4, 200mm f4) for color work if I do that. Yup, I'll stick with my old friend since she's never let me down yet. Thanks to all and now my curiosity is put to rest.

DREW WILEY · Aug 17, 2016

Certain focal lengths have distinctly improved since the Takumar days. The 105 isn't one of them. It was good from the start.

John Wiegerink · Aug 17, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
Certain focal lengths have distinctly improved since the Takumar days. The 105 isn't one of them. It was good from the start.

That's probably why I have absolutely zero complaints about my early 105mm. I also have the 55mm f4 SMC 6x7 and it's very good too, but I just bought a SMC 67 (4th version) 55mm f4 for a very good price and from what I have read it is the last and best 55mm Pentax produced. What I'm doing is upgrading my lenses for my Pentax 6x7 outfit, but only will do it if I'm gaining in optical output. The 105mm I won't, but the 55mm f4 I was willing to since I use that lens often. We'll see if I like it more than the third version????

DREW WILEY · Aug 17, 2016

Yes, the later 55's are the best. I hit pay dirt with about the third shot I took with one, which did well in galleries, but overall found the amount of illumination falloff annoying for the kinds of chromes I specialized in back then, so loaned it to my brother, who loved that focal length. For my own wide angle needs, I prefer the 75. I use the 4.5 version, which shares the same 82mm filters as my 300, so that's a fun combination to tote, but
obviously needs a much more muscular tripod than working with their shorter telephotos.

John Wiegerink · Aug 17, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
Yes, the later 55's are the best. I hit pay dirt with about the third shot I took with one, which did well in galleries, but overall found the amount of illumination falloff annoying for the kinds of chromes I specialized in back then, so loaned it to my brother, who loved that focal length. For my own wide angle needs, I prefer the 75. I use the 4.5 version, which shares the same 82mm filters as my 300, so that's a fun combination to tote, but
obviously needs a much more muscular tripod than working with their shorter telephotos.

Drew,
I have both the 45mm and the 55mm, but to be honest I find I use the 45mm more. I have the older Super Takumar 6x7 75mm f4.5 and have thought about getting the last f2.8 version, but if I'm not going to see the difference in a 16x20 print I'm not going to waste my money. Yes, it would be nice for focusing, but the f4.5 seems fairly easy for me to focus in moderately dim light. I will buy the 75mm f2.8 if it falls in my lap for next to nothing, but I'm set with what I have at the present. I have nothing longer than a late 200mm f4, but that might change if I can unload some equipment I don't use anymore.

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 17, 2016

I could happily trade off all of my 67 lenses, keping just the 45mm and the 75AL. But I too often prove just when I do not think I need all the others, the special moment comes when I absolutely do need the choices! So the chiropractic man will continue to see me and encourage me ... to "travel light".

DREW WILEY · Aug 17, 2016

The 75/4.5 is one of the very sharpest lenses they make, so no, buying the 2.8 isn't going to make any difference in the print, UNLESS you simply
have trouble obtaining accurate focus with the dimmer 4.5. I don't because I use a tripod and supplementary magnification. But going out street shooting, I'd imagine 2.8 to be quite a convenience.

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 17, 2016

Yes I do have trouble obtaining focus in the low-light of rainforests where the majority of my work is produced (I could get away with the 4.5 version if I photographed in bright open daylight, but I never do that), and value, very highly, the extra brightness of the 75AL. Everything else that comes with it is par for the course for an upper-echelon lens. People must be able to justify and use it, most certainly. I'm just interested in achieving critical focus quickly and fuss-free ... before I am made a meal of by the Advance Scout Battalion of Leech Company!!

DREW WILEY · Aug 17, 2016

I've certainly used my 4.5 on dark rainy days deep in redwood forests and even tropical rainforests, but will admit that I'm supplementary magnifier
dependent to do so, or else use the chimney hood with built in magnification. Or else, it's simple distant subjects where the lens is simply set at infinity to begin with. So I understand. If I could pick up a 75/2.8 reasonably, I would. But for now, the 105/2.4 and 165/2.8 are my fast lenses, and
do themselves get a lot of use. My 6x7 nest eggs evaporated with purchase of that 300EDIF a year ago. It's sure a fun superb lens, but should have come with a complementary elephant to carry it, and not just a case.

DREW WILEY · Aug 17, 2016

... should have mentioned that I seek out shiny specular highlights on leaves, or water reflections as an aid to focus. One can also employ that trick
useful in caves and night photography, namely, focus on a laser pointer beam.

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 17, 2016

Yep, magnifiers. As you know, I also cover supplementary magnification by way of the right-angle finder and the central-spot magnifier. I have the same problems focusing with the 45mm f4 (I love this lens!) so it is much slower to work with that, even though it is the ideal angle for "bringing in" the surroundings.

My eyes are getting better since I started on Vit. D and Krill Oil. Brain isn't too bad either. Just a mo' while I go and look up today's date...

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 17, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
... should have mentioned that I seek out shiny specular highlights on leaves, or water reflections as an aid to focus. One can also employ that trick
useful in caves and night photography, namely, focus on a laser pointer beam.

Yes, that's another trick. And/or...
Carry a greycard / crosshair target to pop up into the scene to aid focus. I am considering one of these "pop up targets" (which I noted in the humungously thick and detailed B&H catalogue that for some reason I am receiving here in Australia!).

DREW WILEY · Aug 18, 2016

One trick I use for dim closeups is to have a bit of shiny tinsel in my kit. Of course, you need to remember to remove it from the scene before the shot. I also have a little white plastic crosshair target I obtained from Calumet, which came with a ruler so you measure the width of that on your
groundglass and calculate the bellows factor with view cameras. Hard to that on a Pentax unless you remove the prism or finder, but the little square
card nonetheless still comes in handy for focus. A lot of my favorite 6x7 sessions with the 75 are on rainy days anyway, when I am including puddles
and rivulets in the scene, or beach moisture, where it's easy to compose with reflections and focus on them too.

essensebe · Sep 24, 2016

I just love my Takumar 105mm lens. See no reason why I should upgrade to the SMC.
Also I love the all metal build quality.

NortheastPhotographic · Sep 27, 2016

I would say avoiding yellowing is a reason to get a newer model 105. I have 2 older 105s and they both have some light yellowing. So far my main one has spent a couple days in direct outdoor sunlight and it still isn't fully clear. The weather clouded up here now but once we have a sunny day I'll continue trying. I shoot a lot of color so for me, I'd like it as clear as possible. It's one of my favorite lenses for sure though. Just incredible rendering.

Pentax 6x7 105mm f2.4 lens question...............

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency