>My late father-in-law left me a pristine chrome Spotmatic II >with a S-M-C Takumar 50mm f1.4 and a few accessories. >The meter even works! I was checking some of the usual sites, >but could find little information regarding which lenses to look >for and which to avoid. I did read the 85 f1.8 is a great lens >and Mike Johnston just wrote that the 35 f2 is pretty good, >but that's about it. If you could point me to a site or have an opinion > I would like to hear it. Thanks.
>Jim A lot of screw-mount lenses are the same optical design as their "K" successors, so often you can use opinions about those to guide you. My personal opinions: 50/1.4 indeed is very good. 35/2 (old and new) also very good--ALL Pentax 35/2 designs appear to be very good. 85/1.8 is very good but I find that at middling apertures the 105/2.8 is better and I am quite fond of the 105 in general. I believe most versions of the 105/2.8 are the same as K105/2.8. I find the 28/3.5 (49mm filter version) to be very good indeed, whereas the wider 24mm and 20mm lenses were pushing the limits of design in their day and are not great--the 20mm is a bit infamous. The 24 isn't really all that bad for a 24, but noticeably worse than longer focal lengths as is the case with most brands. The 150/4 (later version, which all SMC-takumars are, and is apparently the same as the K lens) is quite nice, and pretty much all the 200s (3.5 and 5.6 pre-set, and 4.0 which = K 200/4) are solid peformers but biggish by modern standards. The 300, 400, and 500mm lenses are quite credible but have been eclipsed by modern designs with internal focusing (easier to use) and low-dispersion glass. Of the three long lenses, so far I find the 500 to be the best optically but the hardest to use--but I haven't shot a whole lot with any of them. A warning that focusing a pre-set or manual lens at f/4.5 or f/5.6 is a challenge, especially if the subject is moving, which is in its way a recommendation for the 77mm filter version of the 300/4.0 because it alone of the big glass has automatic aperture. 85/1.9 precursor to the 85/1.8 is apparently loved by many, but supposedly not as sharp as the later version--it's probably a case of the "portrait feel". 135/2.5 (later SMC version--hard to distinguish and to find) is the same as K lens and has a great reputation--the earlier one isn't as good at least at wide stops. Many love the 35/3.5, whereas I find my own version to be mediocre--perhaps a bad sample. The 55/1.8 or 55/2.0 (same optics) is apparently mediocre or worse at wide and middling stops and improves markedly past about 5.6. my recs in order of preference: 28/3.5, 105/2.8, 85/1.8, 150/4, 200/4 DJE
