Thanks Mark. I appreciate the knowledge transfer, and all great shots! I
like the Rock Dove!
Tom C.
From: "Mark Cassino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 500mm Zooms
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 18:18:44 -0400
I used to own a Takumar 500 f 4.5. Not the SMC version. It was a unique
lens in that someone had modified it by gluing part of a screwmount to K
adapter to the lens - making it more or less a K mount lens (it would only
mate to K mounts, but it would not lock into place.)
Some sample shots taken with it (these are old photos) -
The extraordinarily rare and elusive Rock Dove (har!) -
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/birds/0204b35.htm
red bellied woodpecker -
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/birds/0204b36.htm
Blue Jay -
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/birds/0204b52.htm
Another Jay -
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/birds/0204b50.htm
Chickadee -
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/birds/0204b56.htm
The latter is a crop from a Kodachrome 64 slide - it really does not hold
up at bigger sizes. the others are all printable at Super-B size with no
problems, lots of detail.
I shot lots with this lens but replaced it with the A* 400 f2.8, which with
teleconverters is much sharper, though it can burn you in the Bokeh dept.
It should be noted than the A*400 cost a whole order of magnitude more than
the Takumar 500 f4.5!
The stop down aperture was not a major issue once you got used to it.
This was a very high resolution lens, capable of producing great results on
film, but it has a major degree of chromatic aberration. I don't know how
it would do on digital bodies. One plus for APS sized digitals - this lens
has a minimum focusing distance of 10 meters, so you need to use tubes
(sometimes lots of them) for smaller birds. That would cause vignetting on
film -probably would not be a problem on *ist-D / DS's.
There was a thread on photo.net where this lens was panned by numerous
people who never used it, based on their 'understanding' of the laws of
physics and how pronounced the CA would be. In real life the lens is quite
good - not on par with the best of the best but probably the best bang for
the buck for big glass. As for the photo.net thread - it underscored the
validity of the saying "Those who know it all have the most to learn."
- MCC
(who knows it all and is busy learning.... :-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: 500mm Zooms
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 1:51 PM
I find it a little annoying, but not $400 -$500 so...
Cool. I was always curious about that lens and the Takumar equivelent.
Please post some pictures taken with it when you can so we can see how it
performs.
Christian
