On 11/20/07, .timber>>code <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any real, visible differenc between the multi coated > SMC-Takumars and the normal (older) Takumar? Could anyone show the > difference between non coated, single coated and multicoated lens?
Actually, there's a little bit more of a distinction to be made. Here's my experience: 1. Takumar or Auto-Takumar lenses. These are single coated. All the ones I've seen have a purplish tinge to the coating. 2. Super Takumar lenses. These are multicoated, but not with the SMC coatings. Usually have both a purplish and an orange-yellow tinge to the coatings. 3. SMC Takumar. Usually three distinct colors to the coatings (purple, orange/yellow, and green). Obviously the best coatings of the bunch. Pentax also made some cheaper non-SMC lenses that were labeled as "Takumar Bayonet." These seem to have the same type of coatings as the older Super Takumar screw-mount lenses. I have a 28/2.8 like this, and it is absolutely identical to my A28/2.8, with the exception of the "A" contacts on the mounting flange, the "A" position on the aperture ring, and the lens coatings. In terms of real-world use, the Super Takumars are pretty darned good lenses. They'll flare if you shoot in high-contrast situations, or directly into the sun, and the SMC versions are better for that. But they're certainly not terrible in that respect. I have yet to do any real-world shooting with a Takumar or Auto Takumar, but I imagine that they'd flare as much as any similar single-coated lens of a similar vintage. I've got a couple of those for my large-format camera, and you do have to be careful about lens shading with them. -Mat -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
