I got one of these lenses a few years ago for $100 a millimeter! I used it a few times but found it just too heavy for my Tiltall tripod. I got good results, however. I got the cannon to add to my collection of SMC Takumar lenses. I personally like the SMC 300mm Takumar because it has auto aperture. The 400mm SMC Takumar is also good - and much lighter. Would you see another if you didn't buy it? I once saw a 1000mm SMC Pentax K mount lens. Haven't seen another. Had it been an SMC Takumar I would have purchased it. Good luck!
Jim A. > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 09:06:46 -0500 (CDT) > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: feedback wanted--SMC Takumar 500/4.5 > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:34:44 -0400 > > > I stumbled upon a store offering a 500/4.5 SMC Takumar screw-mount lens > for $700 in very good shape the other day. I'm a little nervous about > buying it, for a couple of reasons. > > 1) From what I've seen of K-mount 500s and the few M42 500s I've seen $700 > appears to be a fair price, but it is a little steeper than I'd like. > Is this a reasonable price? If I don't buy it, will I ever see another > one for sale outside of e-bay? I'd actually prefer one a little more > banged up to get the price down. > > 2) 4 elements in 4 groups, with no mention of ED glass or anything. This > makes me very leery of optical quality compared to the Nikkor big glass > that I am used to (which normally has at least twice as many elements, > with 3-4 of them being ED). Of course the 200/3.5 Takumar has a very > similar construction, and it isn't at all bad optically. > Can anyone speak to the optical quality of this design, > especially if you've experienced modern Canon/Nikon 300/400/500/600 ED > fast lenses? I've seen some suggestions that the standard glass, simple > design is going to produce chromatic abberation or color fringing and > this is going to really annoy any digital camera it gets mounted on. > > 3) No internal focusing and a focusing ring behind the tripod mount > suggests that this lens is going to be a bit cumbersome to follow-focus, > even without the annoyance of trying to focus an f/4.5 lens on the dim > spotmatic screens. Given that the only uses I can imagine having for a > 500/4.5 involve things that move, this strikes me as a possible > showstopper. > > On a related note, anybody know who made the Sears 300/5.5? The off-brand > lenses page notes a couple of 300/5.5s on the market at one time, and I'd > have to assume that they were actually all the same design, made by > one of the Tokina/Sigma/Tamron/Kiron crowd. Anybody used one of these > things by any name? It's cheap enough to be tempting if it doens't > absolutely stink. > > DJE >
