Nice comparison. The Takumars are pure jewelry. The tactile feel is amazing. Many of these lenses are well over 50 years old and still kick butt like day 1. I agree with you. These 2 are extremely close and user ability will be a big factor.
Thanks for the excellent comparison! I have the SMC Takumar 50, 1.4 and the Nikkor 50, 1.4 AI-s. Those two would seem to be a closer comparison in terms of vintage and build quality. My later Takumar lacks the warm radioactive glow :-). The Nikkor is slightly heavier and bigger and weighs 252g. I think they're also very close in performance.
Thank you for this comparing .. i have a GH5 and will get some Pentax lenses later today .. i am normally a nikon guy but have a metabones nikon adapter for my GH5 .. but one with glass... soo gonna be interesting to see what that test comes out to... but i must say i am not so happy with my Nikon 50mm ... compared to the newer G series its just not as good, so i often end up not bringing it when using my nikon camera. .. but well thanks again .. was interesting to see :D
Nice video. Not sure what year your Nikon lens was made...but if it is multicoated...that coulkd account for the contrast difference wide open...since the Tak is single coated.
Great comparison, thanks. I would add that the other problem with the Takumar on Nikon bodies is that it will not be able to focus to infinity using an M42 to Nikon F mount adapter. Like you, I prefer solidly built lenses, which is why I pick up the older Nikkor AI/AIS MF lenses. They are gorgeous, both optically and mechanically.
I have the Nikon 50mm f1.4 and love it to bits! I have heard great things about the Takumar. Now that I now that optically, they are near identical there is no point in sacrificing autofocus and infinity for the cheaper lens. Obviously, this is why tha Takumar is that much cheaper. Thanks for the comparison!
Right. If you are starting out, don't mind MF and on a budget, then the Takumar is worth a consideration. But agreed, I grab the Nikon most of the time out of sheer convenience.
The yellowish of the photos calls warm/hot because of the yellow tint of the thoriated glass. Treat it with UV light or simple exposure to sunlights for a few days will almost clear up and hence the photos is more neutral in tone.. Having said that, the Nikon system by default produces colder pale photos, so you have to take that consideration into comparison.
Nice. Also Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.4 is worth considering. Equally superb lens, often overlooked. May be Zuiko will be found better. Second, Minolta Rokkor PG(or MD), I don't remember, 58mm f1.2. renders excellent colours .
Thanks for sharing! I have recently bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.2, and it is a fantastic piece of glass! Highly recommended of you don't mind manual focus and no (lend) EXIF information.
@@frederikboving... yes dear. This Nikkor is a fantastic lens, which I loved and used for several years. Thanks. Also Nikon 's wide angle lenses have very to no competition. Superb lenses. An AF zoom, 17-35 2.8 first release, wow. Happily and sadly a loving friend of mine snached , hahaha, it from me. Those days there was no free market for cameras in India. Anyway good. Enjoy dear.
Muy bien esa versión no tiene multicapa .solo tienen multicapa los que pone takumar SUPER MULTI COATED .Y LOS takumar SMC .los que pone super takumar no son multicoat.
You should get fine image quality, but of course you would only be using a fraction of the FF glas, as the APS-C sensor is much smaller + you would get a cropping factor to both focal length and aperture. And you would buy and carry a lot more glass than needed. You can try a so-called speed booster that condenses the light from the FF lens down to APS-C size, hence countering the cropping effect of both focal length and aperture. Hope this makes sense - otherwise let me know!
If you're going to review a lens then you should know what lens you are talking about: 1) It's pronounced Ta-KOO-mar, with the accent on the second syllable 2) You have the second iteration of the Takumar 50mm1.4, the 7 element Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. The original lens was the Super-Takumar 50mmf1.4. Your lens has radioactive Thorium glass, the original 8 element Super-Takumar did not. The third iteration of this lens in M42 mount was the SMC Takumar. 3) Unless you grind up the Thoriated glass and ingest it, this lens is not harmful in any way. Use it at will, every day and all day long and it won't harm you.
Hi Jim, If you are searching for a review, I suggest you find videos that says "review" in the thumbnail or title. This is just a compare of the center sharpness of 2 fast lenses, combined with a bit of buying advice. All the best!
This is not an accurate comparison. The 2 lenses are from different eras by at least 15 to 20 years. The older Nikkor-S 50mm F1.4 non-ai would have been a more suitable competitor.
It is a good point. My motivation for the video was that I had heard so much good about the Pentax lens and its sharpness that I wanted to give it good competition and see how well it did. But the time difference should have been made clear, agreed.
@@frederikboving I don't have a Super Takumar 1.4 but I do have a Super Takumar 55mm F1.8 and I can tell you that the optical quality is great as well as the fit and finish, with super smooth focus ring . I also have the Nikkor-S non ai 50/1.4 The external design is somewhat similar to the Super Takumar with all-metal constuction and scalloped focus ring. However optically, I believe the Super Takumar is superior.
Nice comparison. The Takumars are pure jewelry. The tactile feel is amazing. Many of these lenses are well over 50 years old and still kick butt like day 1. I agree with you. These 2 are extremely close and user ability will be a big factor.
Thank you! Much appreciated!
Thanks for the excellent comparison! I have the SMC Takumar 50, 1.4 and the Nikkor 50, 1.4 AI-s. Those two would seem to be a closer comparison in terms of vintage and build quality. My later Takumar lacks the warm radioactive glow :-). The Nikkor is slightly heavier and bigger and weighs 252g. I think they're also very close in performance.
Thank you for sharing! Yes, there is something about those radioactive lenses!!
Thank you for this comparing .. i have a GH5 and will get some Pentax lenses later today .. i am normally a nikon guy but have a metabones nikon adapter for my GH5 .. but one with glass... soo gonna be interesting to see what that test comes out to... but i must say i am not so happy with my Nikon 50mm ... compared to the newer G series its just not as good, so i often end up not bringing it when using my nikon camera. .. but well thanks again .. was interesting to see :D
Thank you Mikkel! Best of luck with your Pentax lenses!
Nice video. Not sure what year your Nikon lens was made...but if it is multicoated...that coulkd account for the contrast difference wide open...since the Tak is single coated.
Thank you Jack - yes, I think you have a point there!
@@frederikboving They are both great lenses...you cannot lose.
Great comparison, thanks. I would add that the other problem with the Takumar on Nikon bodies is that it will not be able to focus to infinity using an M42 to Nikon F mount adapter. Like you, I prefer solidly built lenses, which is why I pick up the older Nikkor AI/AIS MF lenses. They are gorgeous, both optically and mechanically.
Thank you for sharing 🙏🏻
I have the Nikon 50mm f1.4 and love it to bits! I have heard great things about the Takumar. Now that I now that optically, they are near identical there is no point in sacrificing autofocus and infinity for the cheaper lens. Obviously, this is why tha Takumar is that much cheaper. Thanks for the comparison!
Right. If you are starting out, don't mind MF and on a budget, then the Takumar is worth a consideration. But agreed, I grab the Nikon most of the time out of sheer convenience.
Thank you for a very interesting video.
So nice of you. 🙏🏻
The yellowish of the photos calls warm/hot because of the yellow tint of the thoriated glass. Treat it with UV light or simple exposure to sunlights for a few days will almost clear up and hence the photos is more neutral in tone..
Having said that, the Nikon system by default produces colder pale photos, so you have to take that consideration into comparison.
Thank you Vincent!
I have the Pentax which was quite amber. I treated it with sunlight and a small UV light for two weeks and it cleared nicely to about 95%
Thank you for sharing David!
Nice. Also Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.4 is worth considering. Equally superb lens, often overlooked. May be Zuiko will be found better.
Second, Minolta Rokkor PG(or MD), I don't remember, 58mm f1.2. renders excellent colours .
Thanks for sharing! I have recently bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.2, and it is a fantastic piece of glass! Highly recommended of you don't mind manual focus and no (lend) EXIF information.
@@frederikboving... yes dear. This Nikkor is a fantastic lens, which I loved and used for several years. Thanks.
Also Nikon 's wide angle lenses have very to no competition. Superb lenses. An AF zoom, 17-35 2.8 first release, wow. Happily and sadly a loving friend of mine snached , hahaha, it from me. Those days there was no free market for cameras in India. Anyway good. Enjoy dear.
Leave the Pentax lens in your window a couple of weeks the brownish will eventually disappear to almost water white but not totally.
Thank you! Will do.
Well Windows remove uv light (if I'm not wrong) so don't leave it behind the glass window.
focus system between the two is difference. Nikon couldn't be as smooth as Tak due to helicoil design
Thank you for sharing!
Muy bien esa versión no tiene multicapa .solo tienen multicapa los que pone takumar SUPER MULTI COATED .Y LOS takumar SMC .los que pone super takumar no son multicoat.
👍
What if I use any of these on an aps-c camera? Can I have similar result in terms of image quality?
You should get fine image quality, but of course you would only be using a fraction of the FF glas, as the APS-C sensor is much smaller + you would get a cropping factor to both focal length and aperture. And you would buy and carry a lot more glass than needed. You can try a so-called speed booster that condenses the light from the FF lens down to APS-C size, hence countering the cropping effect of both focal length and aperture. Hope this makes sense - otherwise let me know!
Which one lets more light in?
I have not tested them, but as they are both 1.4 I would assume them to be very close.
If you're going to review a lens then you should know what lens you are talking about:
1) It's pronounced Ta-KOO-mar, with the accent on the second syllable
2) You have the second iteration of the Takumar 50mm1.4, the 7 element Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. The original lens was the Super-Takumar 50mmf1.4. Your lens has radioactive Thorium glass, the original 8 element Super-Takumar did not. The third iteration of this lens in M42 mount was the SMC Takumar.
3) Unless you grind up the Thoriated glass and ingest it, this lens is not harmful in any way. Use it at will, every day and all day long and it won't harm you.
Hi Jim, If you are searching for a review, I suggest you find videos that says "review" in the thumbnail or title. This is just a compare of the center sharpness of 2 fast lenses, combined with a bit of buying advice. All the best!
This is not an accurate comparison. The 2 lenses are from different eras by at least 15 to 20 years. The older Nikkor-S 50mm F1.4 non-ai would have been a more suitable competitor.
It is a good point. My motivation for the video was that I had heard so much good about the Pentax lens and its sharpness that I wanted to give it good competition and see how well it did. But the time difference should have been made clear, agreed.
@@frederikboving I don't have a Super Takumar 1.4 but I do have a Super Takumar 55mm F1.8 and I can tell you that the optical quality is great as well as the fit and finish, with super smooth focus ring . I also have the Nikkor-S non ai 50/1.4 The external design is somewhat similar to the Super Takumar with all-metal constuction and scalloped focus ring. However optically, I believe the Super Takumar is superior.
@@msbrownbeast Right. This confirms my "hunch" that there is something extraordinary about the Super Takumar lenses. Thank you for sharing!