> The original 55 I had was the f3.5 SCM Takumar. I still have some 100mm
> filters that I couldn't sell with the equipment. Now that I have been steered
> back onto the correct path, how do the various 55s stack up. The original was
> a monster, but it was my most used lens.
There are 3 Pentax 67 55mm lenses. The all have different optical
formulas:
SMC Takumar/6x7 55mm f/3.5 (100) (cannon barrel)
SMC Pentax-6x7 55mm f/4.0 (77) (Looks like a 35mm m-style lens)
SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4.0 (77) (Lens description on end of focus
barrel, not by front objective)
By the accounts I have read, the earliest lens (the Takumar) and
the latest lens (the Pentax 67) are both excellent. They are both
sharper than the Pentax-6x7 version of the lens. The newer 55mm is
slightly sharper then the old Takumar 55mm. The 55mm f/3.5 Takumar
is supposed to have the highest degree of rectilinear correction of
all three lenses. That means that straight lines near the edge of
the field are rendered the most straight with this lens. The older
lens weighs a bit more than the newest one; 2.0 versus 1.6 pounds.
The 55mm f/3.5 _does_not_ have a gel filter clip at the rear of
the lens. It may have *only* the Pentax Bay67 100mm bayonet filter
mount on the lens; it may not be possible to use 100mm screw-mount
filters with this lens.
Bolo -- Josef T. Burger
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
