Pentax Spotmatic

darinwc · Feb 25, 2010

zumbido said:
With the bayonet I'm always looking for the orange dots and fumbling around, lest I cause metal to grind on metal and put my teeth on edge.

I totally agree with most bayonets being a pita to align right. Especially nikon in that regard. I always liked Canon FD because there are very clear red dots on the TOP. The M42 easy as pie to change lenses. But I can see how this would cause problems when trying to communicate lens info to the body.

2F/2F · Feb 25, 2010

Never had a problem with any TM lens system. I find it very straightforward and quick...more so than any other system. Nikon can be a bit of a PITA for me if moving very quickly. I love Canon old FD mounting. I can't stand Canon New FD mounting. The coolest thing about the BL system is how the lenses tighten themselves, and how they don't have any sort of interlock for removal! New FD does neither of those things.

zk-cessnaguy · Feb 26, 2010

mgb74 said:
The Takumar lenses were/are very good. A 50mm 1.4 lens will be more desirable than the 1.8 or 2.0. Series (over time) went from Takumar to Super-Takumar to Super Multi Coated (SMC) Takumar.

The 50mm f/1.4 is a great standard lens, but its arguable that the 55mm f/1.8 is a bit sharper.

Steve Smith · Feb 26, 2010

wiltw said:
Nevertheless, the Olympus OM-1 is absolutely dependent upon constant 1.3v, its meter does not align two needle but is similar in appearance to the Spotmatic (align needle to center of indicator area), its needle swings out when power is off.

The fact that the needle is not centred when it's off is a sign that it is not a bridge circuit so you are correct that it needs a stable 1.3v to work accurately.

The only minor problem which can occur if using 1.5v cells in a 1.3v camera with a bridge circuit is that if you have positions marked as +/- one or two stops for exposure compensation, they will be a bit further out on the meter's swing than they were with a 1.3v cell. Not by much though.

Steve.

Snapper · Feb 26, 2010

Good news - the battery cover came off with a bit of WD40. There were no batteries inside, so no corrosion.

I have more cameras than is healthy at the moment, but I may look at buying the lens. Is there such a thing as a M42 to OM-mount adapter?

There is also a 28mm Super-Lentar and a 135mm Super-Lentar with the camera. I'm thinking these are not as great as the Takumar.

Steve Smith · Feb 26, 2010

Snapper said:
There is also a 28mm Super-Lentar and a 135mm Super-Lentar with the camera. I'm thinking these are not as great as the Takumar.

You could be right but don't write them off until you try them. The 135mm will probably be fine. It's a simple focal length to design for and I haven't ever found a bad 135mm lens (for 35mm format). Even the Hanimex 135/f2.8 I use on a Nikon is good.

Steve.

mgb74 · Feb 26, 2010

Sorry. Didn't mean to suggest that the 1.4 was more or less sharp than the 1.8. Quite frankly, I don't know which of the 2 is sharper. I was commenting from an overall perspective, which will be heavily influenced by lens speed.

I was told by an employee of the importer many years ago that some models with a top speed of 1/500 actually had a shutter capable of 1/1000 (the same shutter in other Spotmatic models). But the dial limited you to 1/500. The reason for this was to differentiate lower priced and higher priced models. But I don't have independent verification.

This sounds a bit silly, but my favorite feature of the Spotmatic is the wind lever. No other SLR I've seen had such an aesthetically graceful lever. Pure aesthetics I realize, but it's something I remember.

zk-cessnaguy said:
The 50mm f/1.4 is a great standard lens, but its arguable that the 55mm f/1.8 is a bit sharper.

Ian Grant · Feb 26, 2010

Having owned both the f1.4, f1.8 and f2 versions of the Takumar's Supers, SMC & later Pentax versions there might be very slight differences in sharpness if you do extensive testing but in practice they are all exceptional good sharp performers

The Pentax's with a top speed of 1/500th have an unmarked 1/1000th which is unregulated and not as accurate as the camera's with a the marked 1/1000th

Ian

Pumal · Feb 26, 2010

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31601-takumar-club-239.html

John Koehrer · Feb 26, 2010

mgb74 said:
.

I was told by an employee of the importer many years ago that some models with a top speed of 1/500 actually had a shutter capable of 1/1000 (the same shutter in other Spotmatic models). But the dial limited you to 1/500. The reason for this was to differentiate lower priced and higher priced models. But I don't have independent verification.

Consider it independently verified!
The 1000 isn't on the dial but the detent works.

Uncle Bill · Feb 27, 2010

John Koehrer said:
Consider it independently verified!
The 1000 isn't on the dial but the detent works.

Think of the hidden 1000 speed on the SP500 and S1a as turning it up to 11.

Paul Goutiere · Mar 2, 2010

I took these with my Pentax Spotmatic over 40 years ago. I found the old negs Ilford HP4 and scanned them.

ricksplace · Mar 2, 2010

Paul Goutiere said:
As for quality; just holding one of these cameras speaks volumes. I'd put the body quality up their with the Leica M stuff any day.

I'm glad somebody else agrees with me regarding the build quality of spotties. IMHO, the top SMC Taks are as good or better than anything leica made in the same era too.

Say this to a leicafile and watch the fireworks!

Ian Grant · Mar 2, 2010

ricksplace said:
I'm glad somebody else agrees with me regarding the build quality of spotties. IMHO, the top SMC Taks are as good or better than anything leica made in the same era too.

Say this to a leicafile and watch the fireworks!

You can't make a statement like that and not expect a response

Comparing a Leica M lens like a Summicron to an SMC Takumar, or similar quality Japanese lens is unwise, they have different design criteria in terms of resolution/definition, micro-contrast and apparent sharpness and tonality..

Whether you think one is better than the other is subjective, I've used both, and while there are significant differences both are excellent lenses.

Ian

Paul Goutiere · Mar 2, 2010

ricksplace said:
I'm glad somebody else agrees with me regarding the build quality of spotties. IMHO, the top SMC Taks are as good or better than anything leica made in the same era too.

Say this to a leicafile and watch the fireworks!

In 1966, the year I bought the camera, it was as good a camera as I could have possibly afforded at the time. If I had waited for a better camera I might never have bought one.

The camera bodies of the Spotmatics are excellent. The lenses were definitely good enough. The miniscule difference between lenses is not enough to spend a lot effort cranking out meaningless rhetoric when one time could be taking pictures. Been there, done that, and none of my work is any better for it.

Pumal · Mar 2, 2010

I'm more than happy with my Spoties and Super Takumars. The image branded by a SMC Takumar is unparaleled.

Trond · Mar 2, 2010

I'm very pleased with both my Spotmatics and SVs. The lenses are generally very good.

Mark Layne · Mar 2, 2010

Steve Smith said:
I thought all Spotmatics used a bridge circuit and were not sensitive to voltage variations. My non F model is fine with alkalines as is my SP500.

It's easy to tell. If the meter position for proper exposure is in the centre and the meter needle goes to that position when the meter is switched off, then it's a bridge circuit and an alkaline or silver 1.5 volt cell will do.

The meter in a bridge circuit displays the difference in voltage between two potential dividers. At correct exposure, this difference is zero so it cannot vary with cell voltage.

If the exposure is set by lining up one needle with another then it is not a bridge circuit and will be sensitive to voltage change

Steve.

I suspect most alkalines have declining voltage on the drive home between the store and the camera anyway. With silver oxides being sold around here for $2.50/5 pack I go that route

Mark Layne · Mar 2, 2010

Paul Goutiere said:
In 1966, the year I bought the camera, it was as good a camera as I could have possibly afforded at the time. If I had waited for a better camera I might never have bought one.

The camera bodies of the Spotmatics are excellent. The lenses were definitely good enough. The miniscule difference between lenses is not enough to spend a lot effort cranking out meaningless rhetoric when one time could be taking pictures. Been there, done that, and none of my work is any better for it.

The rhetoric is not meaningless. I have a radioactive 35 f2 Takumar which can resolve a sailboat in a sunset, but it can't produce the beauty of a 35 f2 Summicron in many landscape situations.
Mark

ricksplace · Mar 2, 2010

Sure a summicron is a good lens. It should be for the money you pay for it. I just don't think the majority of photographers out there would be able to tell the difference between a print from a summicron and a smc tak. There are probably more photogs here who could tell the difference, but I doubt many could tell which one is which. I read an interesting test where the same shot was taken with four different lenses (Med format)on the same film, same soup, same subject. Guess which one John Q Public chose as the best lens? The Mamiya! I believe they compared Zeiss Planar, Mamiya Sekor, Bronica Zenzanon, Schneider Kreuznach Xenotar. With another subject and lighting, one of the other lenses would probably get the nod.

I have a Color-Heliar 105/3.5 that has "cult" status because of its "glow" at wide aperatures. That glow (ever hear of the leica glow?) is lens aberrations. They go away when you stop the lens down. At f11, you or I will not be able to tell the difference between the Heliar, Planar, Xenotar. (I have all three). I'm talking about picking out an 8X10 print.

My point is not to denigrate any top quality lenses at all. Are there differences in micro-contrast? Sure. Resolution? sure. tonality? yup. You will probably find differences in each of these areas between identical lenses made in different years too. I have a 50/4 Zeiss Flektogon, arguably one of the finest wide angle medium format lenses anywhere, and it's a piece of crap. If doesn't get sharp in the corners until f11. I just got a dud.

Get out there and shoot what ya got.

Paul Goutiere · Mar 2, 2010

ricksplace said:
Sure a summicron is a good lens. It should be for the money you pay for it.

You are right, and money can't buy imagination, unless you are buying someone else's.

I like good stuff but I really wonder how much my work has improved by more expensive equipment. My Leica M4-P isn't enough of an improvement over my Spotmatic to have anyone notice. My Hasselblad's 6x6 negative is, however, and I suspect a 4x5 neg would be.

For me the big thing is to have the time to get the pictures I want, process them and present them. Looking for the perfect lens/camera/system combination is over.

Pumal · Mar 3, 2010

I'd say that personal preference is more important than rhetoric.

magkelly · Jun 15, 2010

387S watch battery, fits Spottie and is fairly low drain.

I'm a huge Spottie fan. Love my SP1, really covet an SP2, and some more Takumars, but that's a far as I think I'd go towards the later models with the exception maybe of the Spotmatic F. I actually like the M42 mount better than the bayonet.

lxdude · Jun 15, 2010

Something I want mention about removing battery covers. If a coin won't remove it after applying something to dissolve the corrosion and a drop or two of penetrating oil, take the plate off the camera. Often the cover will have two spot-faced places on the other side, which provide a place to put a home made tool. Just remember that from that side you turn it clockwise to remove it.

resummerfield · Jun 15, 2010

lxdude said:
.....Just remember that from that side you turn it clockwise to remove it.

I'm probably confused, but I think "lefty-loosey", or counter-clockwise, will loosen the cover regardless of which side the torque is applied.

Pentax Spotmatic

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency