The BEST Budget Macro Lens - PENTAX SMC TAKUMAR 50mm Macro F4

[@MaxV11]

Just bought one, your reviews are dangerous for my credit cards...

[@MarkHoltze]

you won't be disappointed with this one.

[@MaxV11]

@@MarkHoltze I'm absolutely sure! Thing is I already have the 50mm 1.4 and I'm compulsively looking at the 55mm... Takumars are addictive :) And in November I'll be in Tokyo hunting for the mythical 15mm f4

[@anbar5675]

@@MaxV11, the 50mm f4 Macro in my opinion is underrated. Personally prefer that lens to all Takumar and Pentax 50mm f1,4, 1,8 and 1,7s. Generally Tak. and Pentax Macro lenses are great.

[@MarkHoltze]

I think a forest in the winter is one of my favorite places to be. On topic: Thoughts on the Macro 50? GO! EDIT! Just a side note, all the sample images are straight out of camera. Absolutely zero post editing in LR. I wanted to show the natural images straight out of camera just context.

[@TechTekker]

Thank you thank you thank you YES! Do you know any good.places to get these online apart from Keh and eBay? It doesn't feel like a completely reliable experience on those two sites although I think I would prefer Keh.

[@MarkHoltze]

I got this one on eBay. Mostly I like to wait for the camera shows that pop up, but those are hard to rely on depending where you live. Do you have any local online market places?

[@MarkHoltze]

Never even thought of that, but heck yes it would.

[@punkrachmaninoff]

someone PLEASE make a video about the digitization of 35mm film negatives with this lens... bust out the tubes!! we need total coverage!!

[@MarkHoltze]

@@punkrachmaninoff If I ever get tubes, I totally will! I'm curious about that process myself actually. Maybe I should start looking for some tubes ;)

[@djtoman6875]

That shot at 5:14 takes the prize! Love all of your videos. So well presented and informative. Only problem is... they give me G.A.S.

[@Raychristofer]

Hello Marky. I just want to say the quality and watch ability of your videos it's pretty perfect is really nothing you need to improve on and that's coming from a dude trying to run a KZbin channel also. The music the b roll the technical info the photographs the fact that you went in the field to shoot stead of sitting at a desk. Mad respect. I recently reviewed the tak 28mm also

[@dougsmit1]

Another way to go beyond the 1:2 limit is to reverse the lens. You will need not only a reversing ring but also a helical mount to restore focusing (the one on the lens becomes an adjustable lens hood!). I have added tubes to the reversed lens and shot as close as 5:1. Being reversed makes the sharpest result beyond 1:1 since the design was corrected for the opposite direction. Obviously there is no depth of field but focus peaking on a mirrorless is your friend.

[@boxofchocolates2362]

Vintage is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are gunna get....until Mark Holtze does a banger review on one. Then you know exactly what you are going to get! Your reviews are the best on KZbin man. I don’t think anyone is doing what you are doing for this niche at this level. Congrats for being original if nothing else.

[@donaldphotovideo]

I found one of these today and the seller sold it to me for $10. I wasn't sure of the quality it provides but when I came home I went onto your channel and watched this video. I'm pleased that you say its its such a nice performer. I will be experimenting with it when I get a chance and I hope I have a good copy. The glass is nice and clean and no fungus to spite a musty smell that some old lenses have from sitting inside an old lens case for years.

[@MarkHoltze]

Wow!!! $10!!! I paid about 70USD for mine lol.....GO and enjoy that lens my friend!

[@lloyddickie9124]

Brilliant review Mark, your videos are a breath of fresh air on this platform!

[@Holly-wx3bt]

Love it! These are literally the best lenses made

[@MarkHoltze]

I agree, even after all these years they’re still so good...best part is the price. I’d take these over a $500 lens anyday.

[@jameswburke]

They also give a 3D look which modern, multi-element lenses don't do.

[@patuta_design]

This was my first vintage lens that along with my X-T2 has brought such a joy to my life. Since then, I've learn a lot about photography and I've done it in the best way possible, shooting. Now, I own one more Asahi Pentax lens, the Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 135mm f3.5 and I am on the hunt for a Helios 44-2 58mm f2 and the Pentax Takumar 50mm f1.4. So, happy to see you enjoing this unique vintage lens and congrats for your amazing chanel.

[@MarkHoltze]

They’re great tools to help learn, I don’t know why but even me. I started to use these and I felt like my learning meter spiked like crazy. The Helios 44-2 58 is a banger lens. I have the 44-M 58 F/2 and love it! Waiting for the spring to review that one, need some buds in the trees and some flowers to showcase its characteristics :) Thanks for the kind words and personal experiences Issac. My favourite thing about this channel is that community engagement . Love sharing the enthusiasm with like minded people such as yourself. Have a great week!

[@brianmccutcheon3205]

I really do value your depth of knowledge on Pentax lens, and insight you deliver, it is appreciated . Thank you

[@MarkHoltze]

My pleasure! Love these lenses and just trying to share that infection ;)

[@MORCOPOLO0817]

@@MarkHoltze Do you know if Alstar was a lens made by Pentax? I have a Super 8mm camera by that name. I figured that the AL was for asphearical lens and Star was for the airtight construction of the star series of Pentax lenses.

[@SmayleDo]

I'm beginning my path (rabbit hole ) into vintage lenses, thanks for being a true inspiration and educator on the subject. Looking forward to more great reviews.

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate ✊

[@domtomazo]

Great channel, and happy to have come by! I use a lot of the Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMARs on digital, collection built up over the last five years, from the 17/4 fish-eye to 200/4. Always happy to use them :)

[@MarkHoltze]

Hi Thomas, happy to have you mate. Always nice to see a fellows takumar lover in the field. Heavily underrated lenses, both in terms of what you can do with them and how they handle. They're something special for sure. The Fisheye was a big surprise for me, I really loved that lens and got some of my coolest night shots with it ;)

[@EsaMononen]

the sturdy metallic build quality makes it pleasure to use any takumar

[@MarkHoltze]

Definitely

[@vaskoobscura_]

This lens looks really good. Adding it to my wish list. I've been using an EF 50mm macro a lot for my KZbin close ups but vintage glass has that extra character and Reto colours which is so awesome.

[@MarkHoltze]

The Contax 60 2.8 has trumped this lens, but it’s now my second fav maxi lens after the Contax. Small, affordable and versatile. It’s pretty great

[@buzmccullough7901]

I bought this lens with my Pentax Spotmatic II in 1971 (Lens S/N 3913355). It was so sharp corner to corner, that I also used it as my enlarging lens on my enlarger in my darkroom. You could not beat having it for taking pictures and printing pictures with the same lens.

[@jacobsanchez7343]

Have you had a chance to try the AUTO takumar 50 f4 1:1?

[@SpankyLee126]

I was going to ask the same thing.

[@MarkHoltze]

I haven’t, the auto’s I need to get into I think!

[@MarkHoltze]

Auto 35 2.3 first I think. Tracking them ;)

[@SnahLhug]

5:35 Hexagonal? More like *PENTA* gonal!

[@MarkHoltze]

5 sides, I can count I promise ;)

[@takfan7296]

OMG I think I've found someone who loves these lenses as much as I do!!!! You are my FIRST subscription!

[@MarkHoltze]

You are named tak fan so I think you win here! It’s an honour to be your first subscriber.

[@UNRATEDGfx]

I've been searching for a while and just picked up a very clean example for £100 - Can't wait to test it out!

[@MarkHoltze]

Ohhhhh!!! Great price! Let me know how you like it! What camera?!

[@rodrrico]

Another solid review there Mark. You sure know how to source, use and review these amazing 'hidden' gems that are these vintage lenses. I see you said that this is the only lens you have bought this year (so far...), but I think we all want to know where and how you store all these fantastic lenses when not using them. Do they live in a hard case or a dehumidifying fridge or a shelf? I'd love to see how to look after some classic glass. Boom!

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks Rodrrico! SO far ....... ;) I do keep the lenses nicely displayed on wall mount, i dust them every week and want to be able to LOOK at them when they're not in use ;) I've never collected anything in my life but I'm kind of addicted to collecting these! ;) LOOOOOOOVE

[@rodrrico]

@@MarkHoltze Oh I wish I had any / more space to keep my favourite parts of my kit out on a shelf. Good to hear you dust them often. My lenses and well just about everything live in pluck foam pelican cases scattered throughout my apartment (in any space I can hide them away). Can't wait for your next video!

[@MarkHoltze]

@@rodrrico Thanks for watching mate!

[@al201103]

And another lens for the wishlist....looks lovely, thanks for this!

[@MarkHoltze]

My pleasure, it’s a great lens!

[@roadapple8193]

Great video and very informative !!!!! Thanks, and keep at these reviews of the Takumar lenses !

[@MarkHoltze]

Thank you! Glad you found it informative. I'm enjoying doing them, such a fun excuse to get out and shoot....even if it's freezing outside ;)

[@zezenzaenalmutaqin6808]

Thank for your videos. I now Takumar lover after watching your reviews and I love the lens!

[@MarkHoltze]

My pleasure mate. Just happy to share the love. Glad you are enjoying them! Have a great weekend.

[@jvladcliff4083]

The Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 is also a sleeper of a lens, a real beast.

[@benzenoonezneb2451]

As always love your non boring reviews, I have the other version with the lockable set aperture, just like many others I was skeptical cause it’s f4, now I tell the others that their missing out on this amazing len

[@MarkHoltze]

Non boring! I consider that a BIG win. F/4 macro though honestly is so good 2.8 makes landing focus really challenging and it's so easy to light a bit extra in macro mode, small amount of light at that magnification goes a LONG way. Thanks for watching mate!

[@Jerbod2]

Mark, you set the focus metering on your "portrait" shot somewhere on your neck, did you try putting it higher or do you move about too much for it to properly focus on your eyes? It's just a tad off at the moment.

[@MarkHoltze]

Oh my talking head? Ya, I noticed that too actually, super annoying, I need to move it higher I think I was too far back in the frame. I actually shot most of this OUTSIDE but my battery died mid way through so did a quick pickup of all it inside lol. I also shoot wide open and try hard NOT to look at the monitor so missed it on this one. I like the position of the camer better a bit further back there,but need to move the center line focus higher in the frame to hit the eyes for sure. C200 has eyetracking....too bad it's $10k ;)

[@Jerbod2]

@@MarkHoltze I figured maybe you did it on purpose, to get a bit of a dreamy feel... I have some friends who blame anything on "style" though haha.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@Jerbod2 I just checked the C100 MK2 with that 24mm 1.4 lens DOESN"T have facial detection...some later Canon lenses do on this camera apparently ... so annoying.

[@MarkHoltze]

Oh ya, I mean, I MEANT to do it...to get that DREAMY effect!!! lol...it's funny that opening shot me me undoing my jacket was ACTUALLY me coming in from shooting the on camer stuff OUTSIDE....the wind noise was too much and found it distracting so I shot the on camera stuff ALL over again...but ya...that focus issue was TOTALLY on purpose ;)

[@Jerbod2]

@@MarkHoltze Haha thats it! You've got it.

[@reginaldworthington7558]

You seem to have carved out a nice slot for your channel in this extremely populated space. Nice Mark. Wish you well.

[@hernancastano9573]

Love the video and love the lens. I borrowed it from my brother and I have played the good part of this quarentine

[@MarkHoltze]

Such a great lens. Nice and light too!

[@hernancastano9573]

@@MarkHoltze I just re read my comment and I suppose I wrote it with my daughter around because I don't know what I was trying to said haha. This Tak and 1.4 are both, my absolute fav. Great video Mark!

[@tommypaterson]

Another super high quality video from a master.

[@MarkHoltze]

✊

[@hoorayforpentax3801]

I bought one of these for my Spotmatic F. The earlier Super Takumar macro was 1:1, but this one gives seamless open aperture metering on the F without the need to stop down as with the earlier Spotmatics. As a daytime walkaround lens it's perfect; I rarely need faster apertures for light gathering in daytime, and I can get as close as I need to. For dedicated, specific macro work or when I know I'm going to want shallow DOF, I use other things, but this is still great as a general-use 50mm on film.

[@MarkHoltze]

Ya I read about the 1:1 tak macro. This one is just so good for the price, for my use anyway. As a dedicated macro maybe not so much but as a 50 that can get real close in lots of light environments, good. What else do you use?

[@MinhajMalik]

Is this one radioactive?

[@MarkHoltze]

This one is not no.

[@johnnyfive9893]

This video is better than you tubers with 100x the subscriber base. How are you not exploding right now?

[@MarkHoltze]

I can’t even begin to think of why or why aren’t people on this platform find their audience. I just try to focus on the content.

[@JamesDBuzzard]

Great video man! I definitely need to get my hands on one of these old pentax lenses soon!

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks James. It's a great lens, nice and small footprint even fully extended.

[@JamesDBuzzard]

@@MarkHoltze what would be your top couple vintage lenses to try out first. I'm trying to find a deal on a helios 44 rn but should I be looking at anything better or more interesting? I dont want to spend more than $60-90 shipped if possible. Been watching a ton of your videos lately and love the pentax takumars and the canon fds as well as the Helios 44s. Want to have a good fist experience with a vintage lens so figured I would check with you 😉👊

[@MarkHoltze]

@@JamesDBuzzard Hi James, the Helios 44 is a great lens. I would say it's a GREAT entry level lens if you want to explore vintage. Has really great images characteristics and they're very reasonably priced based on how common they are. Just make sure you get one with NO FUNGUS. You don't want to deal with that stuff. Takumar's are amazing, they're my favourite right now simply because they mix amazing optical quality and build quality. I haven't come across a bad one. FD"s are great, but you pay a premium on those right now, maybe something to look into if you know this is right for you. I think the Helios is a great place to start, the Pentacon 50mm 1.8 M42 mount is also great. If you can find a SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 in your price range THAT is a must buy. 1.4 will give you that extra speed and it's so versatile. 1.4 is so good for night or if you want to experiment with a really shallow depth of field. If you want DM me on insta of some possible links and I'll give you my opinions on them. @mholtze on insta.

[@JamesDBuzzard]

@@MarkHoltze I think that will have to be my first vintage purchase then! Also looking at the mir-1b 37mm f2.8. Looks to be another pretty sweet bokeh lens of you love the bokeh 😄. Have you ever tried a MIR-1b 37mm f2.8? They are around $65-100 would make for a great video 🤘

[@JamesDBuzzard]

@@MarkHoltze will definitely find you on the gram!

[@syoung3868]

You sir are killing me every time you show a lense i want to buy it and take a road trip !! Keep up the Great work Thank you as Always !!

[@HAMATERYS]

Does it match with 5d Mark III ? is there a risk to damage the miror at infinity point ?

[@MarkHoltze]

I can't say 100%, I used it fine with the 6D Mark II without issue.

[@HAMATERYS]

@@MarkHoltze Nice ! It means it's gonna work for me ^^

[@MarkHoltze]

@@HAMATERYS I should be fine, M42 lenses are pretty forgiving and the wider ones seem to have bigger issues. EDIT: I just checked with the M42 to EOS adapter from fotodiox, the back element of the lens doesn't protrude out with the adapter so the mirror should be fine. Only issue on any lens I used with mirror was a Leica R 24mm with an EF adapter hard mounted. I think the wider lenses tend to have a bigger issue, but that could be based on nothing lol. Best of luck my friend, enjoy that setup!

[@HAMATERYS]

@@MarkHoltze So gentle !

[@HAMATERYS]

@@MarkHoltze i purchased an Helios 44-2 and i am afraid the back of the lens shocks the mirror at the infinity point. I never found someone who could confirm it.

[@Noealz]

Most of my vintage lenses are Pentax Glass, I just recently got the Super Takumar 500mm - pretty sweet stuff

[@MarkHoltze]

Oh my! 500mm!!!! F/5.6?

[@Noealz]

4.5 : )

[@nightcoder5k]

Really like videos like this. Thanks for making them. I love vintage lenses.

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate, I think they're my fav to make as well! Going to keep on trying to showcase these as best I can moving forward! Thanks so much for watching!

[@CarmineGroe]

Great video Mark! I love this lens. One of the reasons I switched from Canon to Pentax many years ago was because of how much I liked the look of Pentax glass. The Takumars are amazing! I've owned the 35 F/2 and 85 SMC Tak as well which is a real gem for portraits. Thanks for sharing!

[@MarkHoltze]

SO good, hey do you still own the 35 F/2 and 85/1.8 or the 1.9?

[@CarmineGroe]

I had traded the 35 f/2 years ago for the contact Zeiss 28 which is also amazing. I recently sold off the 85 f/1.8 SMC tak in mint shape to a local videographer who's shooting 6k anamorphic on a gh5. I had GAS for a while lol, and just had to get rid of some of my prized gear. Maybe similar to you, I have owned so many incredible pieces of glass over the years. These days, I'm enjoying a small Pentax kit with limited lenses and a Hasselblad 500 cm with film and digital backs. Love your videos Mark!

[@MarkHoltze]

@@CarmineGroe 28, Distagon or something? The 28 2.8 I think I handled one of those at the lsat vintage lens sale I was at and I WAS IN LOVE with just how it felt. $600 CND dollars, gentlemen next to me bought it lol. I was jealous. Damn GAS!, but it must be nice to slim down the kit! EDIT: Thanks for watching mate, glad you enjoy them. Just trying to bring these relics into the lime light a bit for those who are interested.

[@CarmineGroe]

Mark Holtze yes, the distagon. I've owned some nice Zeiss primes and this one is gold. Especially for the price. Really enjoying your channel👍

[@MarkHoltze]

@@CarmineGroe I've got a 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 on loan right now that are CINE modded. Basically modified for professional videography work. The 35 1.4 is massive, but the min focusing distance is insanely close. I'm totally in love with them, they cost an arm and a leg, but completely worth it if I were a dedicated commercial shooter.

[@mistermatsuda]

Though not the Takumar, I have a vintage Minolta MC Rokkor-X 50mm f3.5 Macro that I enjoy shooting. It's the close focusing distance that gets you - that and the fact that like most macros, they are really sharp wide open. It allows you to blow out the background even at f4 when you can get close like that.

[@MarkHoltze]

Minolta's are pretty amazing from what i'm seeing. I don't see many of them around, but I hope to get my hands on one one day! Thanks for the info mate! I'll keep an eye out for the 50 macro 3.5!

[@FotodioxInc]

Beautiful

[@MarkHoltze]

My fav macro right now heheh.

[@Buschwerker1]

Hi Mark, have you ever tried the Canon s.s.c. 50mm f1,4?

[@MarkHoltze]

I have it’s a fantastic lens! If I see one I’m buying it lol. I’m just being honest. Anything Canon S.S.C is fantastic.

[@Buschwerker1]

@@MarkHoltze just got one in perfect condition, and was quite suprised. now the glas demons call for a whole set of s.s.c's...haha. one more question, I got a makinon 35mm 2.8 and can't find anything at the internet about it. The adapter is on it's way and i'm curious about sharpness,contrast, etc.(I know.. makinons reputation isn't the best) but seems very well build and very rare, any gossip? Thx for your time.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@Buschwerker1 I think you're going to love it! I would start my own, but I've already committed to the Tak's...but who knows what the future will bring lol. I honestly haven't heard much about the Makinon, regardless of it's sharpness, you can always find a creative use to play with it's "charm" (this is what we're going to call it's LACK of sharpness..."charm") ;). I would love to hear your actual thoughts on it though.

[@Buschwerker1]

@@MarkHoltze absolutly with you, used the helios for a wasteland metal band shoot wide open and it came out fantastic. While realy loving the uniquness of each lens, the smell of oil and the bold metal, the one that stay in my bag are those with "charm" and stoped down with clear sharpness&contrast, and a smooth focus ring. I bet everybody (except your takumars) would be happy to see some other lenses too. Guess everybody following you allready own Takumars, haha.

[@MarkHoltze]

Ya I’ve got a few others going to review as well. Some weird ones for sure. I feel like I have to review every vintage lens I have, that’s the goal anyway. :)

[@donaldlampert331]

Ok, so with endorsements like yours, I had to go searching amongst my 3-400 cameras, until I found my few Takumar lenses. The one that I just found, came on a Hanimex Praktica TL...... possibly a bit “de classe” for that lens, ... but the price was right! So, I have an Asahi Opt Co. Auto -Takumar 1.8, 55mm version...... which might be an older one, but I’ve never tried it out. By the way, you know that the name “Pentax”, was one of the original alternative names for what became Pentacon....... that they later sold the rights to, to Asahi...... we’re all connected!! Anyway thanks for your most fun, informative, artistic, and just cool vids..... I love watching them... even if just for fun and the creative elements! You are good.

[@MarkHoltze]

That's interesting, I didn't know about Pentacon and Pentax name options! Thanks for stopping by and adding some value to the discussion mate!

[@120fps]

0:33 you totally have a problem :D I'd love to see a video on some crap vintage stuff, the struggles, the comedy. But then I also how darn hard & time consuming that would be to make. What's your thoughts on vintage glass for video? I know I say it a lot to you, but I've been really tempted for a long time to jump in on some, either for the c100 or even for something apsc sized. I guess for the staged/set shots it'd be great but more of a struggle when 'documenting' or run n gun? Great video as always mate, my saturdays feel complete now with your regular schedule :D

[@MarkHoltze]

Oh I have thoughts on these for VIDEO....quite simply they are MADE for video. I bought my sony a7SII mirrorless specifically to SHOOT low light fashion events. I honestly like them MORE for video where that manual focus and fast aperture really shine. Of course you can't VLOG with them easily, but if you're operating, my god...heaven. My next video will address this, I've got some CINE modded lenses (follow focus gears, de-clicked aperture, dedicated EF mount, Lens hood (for filter/matt box mounting). Also, everything except my talking head and the traditional VLOG setup in this video was shot on Vintage lenses. Those slider shots were done on the Cine Modded lenses actually. I would sell ALL my modern canon lenses for this set. When I do sit down talking head interview stuff and I'm operating I always shoot with a vintage lens. You can always do the run and gun stuff if you shoot 5.6 to 8 you've got loads of focus room. One of the reason I love the Tak's so much is the focus system is just SO SO SO SO smooth so even if you need to fix focus, you can do it gently. I say GO for it, get a cheap 24 or 35 or 50 super fast, get an adapter and the C100 will do the rest. Nice thing about video is there's way less pixel counting vs most high MP digital cameras where that clinical sharpness across the entire frame isn't detectable. There are loads of commercial DP's I know who actually use these lenses on their RED's Arri's, Alexa's etc. I think you guys SHOULD do a video on it, the banter with the challenges I think would be brilliant. Lets talk about it (DM) I can send you my Canon FD 24mm f/2.8...give you about a 35mm on the super 35 sensor.

[@120fps]

Mark Holtze I like this a lot. Maybe something we can work together on? I know I’ve wanted to do real filming with some vintage glass for ages now, and I entirely blame you for that 😆😆 and also I’d love for us to be able to work together on something, even if we are separate by a large body of water!!

[@MarkHoltze]

@@120fps We SHOULD definitely work together on it, we live in the GLOBAL village, so don't let a little Ocean get in the way of what could be a very cool authentic collaboration ;)

[@matteosbisa2783]

Mate thank you so much, i really love your reviews, so professional and enjoyable 😁 Keep it up! Cheers

[@prku2]

Hello Mark, I'm new to vintage lenses and just purchased the Super Takumar 8 Element 1964-1966 batch before the Super Multi-Coating line starting from 1966 on, have you had a chance to try the older 8 Element line on the APS-C lineup? I'm thinking I should go with the Super Multi Coat generation as I've heard that this older line (8 element) doesn't play well with color and only works well with black and white using say... a Pentax SP500 using 35mm film, what are your thoughts? I may need to cancel my order of the 8 element in favor of a later generation Takumur such as the one you have wit SMC technology BTW I have the Sony a6600 using the Zed Battery so I'm good with the battery thing (LOL!)

[@MarkHoltze]

Hi Peter, I just got the 8 element myself a few weeks ago and the few shots I've taken with it has easily made it my favourite. Don't listen to the colour issues, there are none. It's sharper than the 7 element SMC version and it's also NOT radioactive so there is some value there. This 8 element was a superior design that was just too expensive for the company to continue manufacturing them, so the 7 element was dropped and and the super multi coating was developed. Honestly with modern photography and colour maniuplation of raw, colour isn't an issue. Also the thorium in the radioactive versions of the lens yellow over time which compromises the natural colour of the lens anyway. My advise, STICK with that 8 element, it's a keeper for sure, there's a reason it's still way more expensive than the 7 SMC version. In 10 years it will be worth more as well simply because it's a collectors item and it's "clean" - non radioactive. Hopefully that helps mate! Just my opinion.

[@prku2]

@@MarkHoltze Thanks for the very quick response Mark! Your video on this lens is what sealed the deal for me and now your further clarifying endorsement confirms what my instincts had already been telling me, that this is a great lens choice and will further help to motivate and inspire my photography learning curve, especially with all the time I will have because of Covid-19. Sir Issac Newton discovered Calculus and Newtonian Physics and I can be inspired by the potential for my own new discoveries at minimum (not Calculus or Newtonian Physics of course LOL!) One more question, any recommended tutorials on your style of photography? Cheers!

[@MarkHoltze]

Trust the eye and what it sees through the camera :). For me it’s about getting out and exploring. Hoping to find something interesting in the seemingly mundane. I did a how to make your macro pop tutorial awhile back. That might help?

[@prku2]

@@MarkHoltze That would help, thank you!

[@HaraldEngels]

9 months ago I purchased this Takumar Macro lens over ebay and the pandemic prevented a delivery and the purchase got cancelled. Some weeks ago I purchased then a nearly mint Olympus 50mm f3.5 Macro lens (because the offer was very attractive) and I can report that this Olympus lens seems to me being an attractive alternative to the Takumar lens. Also very sharp (even by modern standards), great micro-contrast and with an obscene color-rendering (great pop).

[@MarkHoltze]

This lens is like a secret weapon lol. Small light and portable, great optics, reasonably priced. True 1:1 macro would be best, but tubes are cheap and it's just such a great lens. Sharp, sharp sharp! I need to get my hands on some OM lenses. c

[@djchips]

Wow, I agree with you that this lens has amazing contrast and color. I tested it against my modern 60mm Fuji close-focus lens and the difference is night and day, the Pentax has better contrast and colors! I was so surprised I did a whole bunch of tests to make sure I wasn't going crazy. The handling is superior too, gotta do more comparisons, maybe I can replace the Fuji and save $$$.

[@MarkHoltze]

It's crazy how good it still is.

[@MotoRich900]

Love this lens, I picked up a mint copy for $20 and use it with my Pentax K-1ii

[@MarkHoltze]

$20?! Wow that price is the best deal in photography lol. That’s awesome mate!

[@silencenhikes6692]

Got the 100mm, it’s just to get another takumar. I got the 50mm f1.4, the 135mm f3.5. Just like the images and also love the look of the lens itself. Looking to get the 28 mm also.

[@MarkHoltze]

28 is a nice lens mate. You won't be disappointed with that one.

[@silencenhikes6692]

Mark Holtze yeah just thought the 50 is great but i wanted a bit wider. Thanks.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@silencenhikes6692 Understood! Something like a 35-40mm?

[@silencenhikes6692]

Mark Holtze yes anything you know in that range?

[@MarkHoltze]

@@silencenhikes6692 Not off hand on the vintage market i'm afraid. Widest I've got now is a 50.

[@PatrickOliveros]

I have this lens which I got for $60 with case. I am not sure though if it's SMC but I do love the render of this lens! The photo in 5:14 is amazing!

[@MarkHoltze]

I love those Tak cases! I rarely use mine ,but it's just so nice to have it. Feels like a complete package. I think this was the only one that had 0.5 magnification, if you got either of the earlier versions those were true 1:1. Really not sure why they went for 1:2 on their last iteration of the lens. Curious. Thanks for watching Patrick!

[@PatrickOliveros]

I also have that one 1:2. In fact, I also have a Canon 50mm FD 3.5 Macro, which is also a 1:2 but I prefer using the Takumar. An expensive lesson that I have learned doing macro is something you have mentioned in your video - AF isn't needed per se and sometimes, doing manual is better at all. I use a Fuji and a Sony and I first got the 80mm then my frustration made me realize that MF is better because most macro subjects (aka insects) are gone by the time AF locks-in. Great content always! :)

[@Legionere]

Love your content. Keep up the good work!

[@fenixtech1342]

Awesome review, got this bad boy in my sights!

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks Fenix, it won't disappoint! I promise!

[@heyyitsandy]

Really great stufff - that thing is SHARP

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks, this lens really is amazing. I use it all the time for my wider FOV macro stuff. It also takes almost all thumbnail shots. Such a great lens, especially at that price point.

[@CGScarf]

Very good. You have to test the EBC Fujinon 55mm f / 3.5 macro.

[@MarkHoltze]

Brilliant, thanks for the suggestion!

[@CGScarf]

@@MarkHoltze I have one, and it's a pretty sharp lens.

[@JoeyHowellArt]

Love your videos! They're always so informative. Is this radio-active?

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks! This one is not no. :)

[@jacktoddy9783]

Really impressed with this video - Great review and you've sold me the lens.

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks for watching, great little lens! Enjoy yours!

[@ttlreviews]

I've got the 100mm f4 macro takumar, it really is a fantastic piece of kit as good as any modern macro lens.

[@MarkHoltze]

Agreed. The 100 inspired the 50.

[@ttlreviews]

@@MarkHoltze I didn't know that. I've done a comparison with the 100 and the sigma 105 which is a good bench mark and image quality wise you can't really tell any difference apart from the sigma having slightly better contrast, it's easy to add contrast in post anyway so that's not really a problem. Asahi did a great job when they designed that lens and it shows because it can still stand its own ground against a modern equivalent in all but speed which is no problem for macro when you'd usually be adding light and stopping down a little anyway

[@tomislavmiletic_]

Informative and fun video as always ;-)

[@MarkHoltze]

As long as I don't waste peoples time, i"m satisfied ;) nothing worse than that. Thanks for watching mate!

[@DrErickLopez]

what's the filter thread size?

[@MarkHoltze]

49mm thread mount.

[@DrErickLopez]

Thanks! Just got this lens and this video helped a lot with that decision! ;)

[@MarkHoltze]

@@DrErickLopez Happy to hear that! It's defiantly why I'm doing these videos. Showcase the value of these lenses. Hope you enjoy it as much as me! :)

[@71janas]

Hey Mark. I absolutely adore the last picture in this review. The macro shot of the lens👌👌

[@thedondeluxe6941]

This video gave me a mild addiction to old 50mm macro lenses... thanks!

[@westpoll1]

I have one and I love it! Great video.

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks Stephen! They’re so good. You had yours long?

[@westpoll1]

@@MarkHoltze Hi Mark, I have had mine for about 18 months, I also have a 300 f:4, 135 f:3.5 , 24 f:3.5 and a spermatic with 50 f:1.8. They are all great lenses.

[@MarkHoltze]

They are, there’s a very good reason so many people are loyal to them. Wonderfully crafted, a joy to use and results outstanding. They’re the best value in photography at the moment. I’m waiting on a 17mm SMC fisheye to come in. Super curious about this lens.

[@TylerCinema]

Great video man! Love the info as always. Also send some of that snow my way please!

[@HelpUsSaveLives]

I have it and love it! Great lens!

[@MarkHoltze]

It really is! Do you use tubes at all?

[@ehJoe]

Mark I can see you really love this lens....no really love this lens. Great shots btw and awsome review.

[@MarkHoltze]

I’d say I’m smitten 🥰 ;)....totally a bias review because of it, but whatever 😂. Thanks for watching Joe, we still need to get that drink!

[@ehJoe]

@@MarkHoltze yes for sure, need to finish the 2 vids I'm working on first, love to here your thoughts.

[@RitchieAllan]

what about the none SMC version

[@MarkHoltze]

That one is 1:1 macro, but can't speak to it personally I haven't used it. I've heard THIS one is sharper, but haven't seen it first hand.

[@red92diaz]

Is this a good option to digitized film?

[@red92diaz]

My main concern is dust appeared in the frame and the 1:2 magnification.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@red92diaz Ya the 1:2 means you can't get AS close, so it's not a bad option if you have it. Not the BEST option, but a macro tube could fix that.

[@markheywood5626]

I picked a mint condition one up at a car boot sale a few yes ago for £4 and love it.

[@sparkleglitch13]

How many vintage lens purchases did you end up with in 2019? I’ve just bought this M42 version, waiting for it to arrive. I have the k mount version and love it, but have left it in my home city while I’ve been at my parents since March. Missing it, and only have M42 adapter and film camera with me, hence new lens purchase ha

[@MarkHoltze]

Quite a few, lost track lol.

[@QippysChannel]

As always look forward to your vintage lens review, cos I for one love vintage and manual lenses 👍

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate! I do love producing them! I think no matter what I will always do vintage reviews. They’re just so fun.

[@QippysChannel]

You do that, and I will carry on watching them :) ...Btw definitely inspired by your videos too with all this vintage stuff...If you have the time do cek out some of my lens reviews too :)

[@MarkHoltze]

It’s a deal ;).

[@MarkHoltze]

@@QippysChannel pS: I will for sure mate! Thanks!

[@oracleofvalerius]

I love those vintage lenses, the build quality seems very similar to the voightlander I recently picked up. Love it, may be getting one in the future

[@hw7504]

Hey Mark. Loving your work and series for vintage lenses. Wondering if you know if this lens or any of its variants has a thoriated element/doped with radioactive elements?

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate, this one does indeed have radioactive elements within the glass. Been told by many experts in nuclear physics there is zero danger to the human body when used as is. That said, I completely understand anyone who is turned off by the fact. I think the F3.5 version is clean, you could check out Canon FD 35 2.8 and Contax Carl Zeiss 35mm 2.8. Both fantastic lenses and clean of thoriated elements

[@trueaddict8733]

I'm surprised you didnt get the first version of this lens mark. The earliest model has a true 1:1 magnification and an 8 blade aperature. It's pretty pricey though, although it's an incredible lens worth every penny

[@MarkHoltze]

I wasn’t choosy, just wanted a wider alt to the 100mm macro F4. :) the collector has been growing inside me since ;)

[@trueaddict8733]

@@MarkHoltze of course- all of the versions are amazing regardless. I just didnt know if you knew of the early version (who am I kidding- you probably do as much research as possible before buying a lens) As a fellow collector I understand the itch lol. I got an m42 helicoid adapter and using it with this lens makes me feel like I'm traveling to another dimension. I highly recommend it!

[@ianboard544]

I had a manual nikkor 55/2.8 macro lens that was outstanding. I used it as my normal lens as well. I think I paid about $100 for it.

[@dialectixemcee2428]

Didnt know that existed, beautiful shots! Now the real question: Is it one of the radioactive ones like the 55? I recently got the tele-takumnar 200mm 5.6 and it's beautiful on my apsc. I dont know how but the colors off it even shooting raw with a cinestyle profile are amazing! Or it's in my head lol.

[@MarkHoltze]

Ya the yellowing on my 50 1.4 has a beautiful warm tone naturally, it’s subtle but it’s there. The macro is lightly radioactive apparently, like way less than the 7 element 50 1.4...that is according to a source I saw online. I didn’t annotate it with anything so didn’t feel comfortable mentioning it until I get a few more sources to back it up lol.

[@MarkHoltze]

@Tarik J Thanks mate, it would be! I'd have to learn a bunch about radioactivity and how to interpret the readings, alpha, gamma, beta rays all that. People make them don't they? I think i saw somewhere they do lol. I could forge one of my own!

[@dialectixemcee2428]

if only i wasn't clumsy I'd love to play with them lol... ye dope review, looking forward to more vids!

[@MarkHoltze]

@Tarik J I'll bank this idea mate, thanks so much! Enjoy your weekend my friend.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@dialectixemcee2428 I have butter fingers, except when I'm handling these lol. It's like totally ZEN when i've got them in my hands. Thanks for hanging out here mate, appreciate your time.

[@josedepaz30]

One lens that not very heard of and which I own is the SMC Pentax-FA 50mm 2.8 Macro lens, it’s does 1:1 magnification. This lens can be bought for under $200, don’t quote me on this but it’s rumored that this lens would be the Version 2 of the takumar line. It’s definitely a lens worth looking into.

[@MarkHoltze]

I will definitely look into it, thanks Jose!

[@pascaldeshayes5459]

Hey Mark, thank you so much for producing these videos! I like vintage lenses (and vintage-anything, I must admit) and your aesthetic choices hit home here. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on Takumars vs Contax Zeiss, by the way.

[@MarkHoltze]

Def planning on a video discussing that for sure! Thanks for the suggestion my friend!

[@gearheadchannel]

I managed to find one (non-multicoated)... with a Spotmatic II body... for only $25. Awesome lens!

[@MarkHoltze]

That's amazing value mate! I suspect yours is the 1:1 macro version?

[@gearheadchannel]

@@MarkHoltze it’s the plain old Super version, so it’s only 0.5x

[@richardong7029]

Can you shoot landscapes and portraits with this lens? How is the sharpness and contrast compare to 50 mm f1.4 Pentax? Thanks!

[@MarkHoltze]

You can totally shoot portraits with it, landscapes sure, it's as good as any regular 50 really. The lack of speed keeps is really sharp. I was surprised how versatile it is!

[@jsdhesmith2011]

Nice review. Do you think vintage Pentax lenses like these will increase in value over time or stay the same? For the money, it seams to me one of the best deals out there and has been for quite awhile.

[@MarkHoltze]

Hi Josh, thanks mate. It's hard to say, based on the TRENDS worst case scenario is that you won't LOSE money on a purchase. If you buy a lens at x in 3 years when done with it you can sell that lens probably for the same as what you paid for it. Assuming you take care of it. If you look at the last 5 year price trends they are definitely tracking upwards. Mirrorless really has made it WAY easier to shoot with these lenses (EVF, focus aides etc) and given how expensive native modern lenses are for most hobbyists I would say that these will get MORE popular, thus having an impact on the price. You can totally use these for professional photo/video work, I've done it and will always bring some with me. The fact that a professional tool can come at such a cost effective price feels like robbery, but there you go. ;)

[@jweatherly26]

IMO a lot of vintage lenses will hold their value / inflate due to build quality and vintage "character" carrying them far into the future, There have been recent advancements in lense making trickling down to companies (notably samyang) that make me want to spend money on newer lenses but even my sturdy built samyang 85 1.4 is showing signs of wear and I have a feeling my vintage pentax lenses will out-live it making some of these newer lenses more of a consumable item than an investment.

[@nicholasphilipson1107]

Really dig your channel just stumbled onto it recently. Really epic content. Just a quick question which Vintage lenses would you recommend for Landscape photography ?

[@MarkHoltze]

Welcome, thanks for stopping by :) Vintage for landscape. Well Canon FD 24mm 2.8 is great, so is the SMC Takumar 24 F3.5, SMC Takumar 35 F2 OR F/3.5 or if you want to spend a bit more money anything by Carl Zeiss in the 28-35mm range. I just recently got the SMC 17mm "Fisheye" which I'm going to mess around with some landscapes once the -25 degrees celcius cold snap ends lol.. That lens is a bit pricy though. If you're on a full frame 24mm to 35mm is great for landscapes, you'd on't have to worry about too fast an aperture because you want overall shapes across the board. Canon FD, SMC Takumar, Minolta, and Carl Zeiss would be my recommendations. What camera are you shooting on?

[@nicholasphilipson1107]

@@MarkHoltze Thanks for the quick reply and thanks for the suggestions. Im shooting on a Sony A7Rii.

[@MarkHoltze]

My pleasure, honestly on a Sony, there's really NO lens that's a bad lens lol. The Sony's are such great cameras for vintage. You'll love it.

[@nicholasphilipson1107]

@@MarkHoltze Good luck with the cold :)

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks 🙏 🥶

[@bachenbenno4067]

I definitely have to put this one high up on my Buy list.

[@inigoagote-lamaryyo]

hi mark! wich adapter do you use to adap the takumars to the c100? thanks!

[@MarkHoltze]

M42 to EOS adapter works for me :)

[@inigoagote-lamaryyo]

@@MarkHoltze thanks for answering :)

[@fergusmccarthy7736]

Thanks for the videos Mark. The obvious question is if you had to choose between the 100 & 50 macro which would it be?

[@MarkHoltze]

The 50 is super versatile so I would go for that one. I still love the 100 when I need to get a little tighter.

[@fergusmccarthy7736]

@@MarkHoltze I've the 28, 35 50, 55, 85 & 135 Takumars thanks in part to yourself. the 28 was my 3rd vintage lens and my first Takumar & it was instant love and have not used my modern lenses since. may have to hold off for a while though. Virtually on first name basis with the DHL guy at this stage.

[@MarkHoltze]

@@fergusmccarthy7736 OHHH Now you're making ME want the 28!!! DANG IT!!! So happy to hear that mate, it's nice to know I'm not crazy for loving these old lenses as I do. They not only render some amazing images, but they look SO nice displayed on a shelf for everyone to see ;). Thanks for the awesome comment mate, so glad you're enjoying them!

[@fergusmccarthy7736]

Ha ha. Came with the metal hood with both the lens & hood in leather cases. So pretty and buttery smooth. ❤️

[@MarkHoltze]

@@fergusmccarthy7736 DANG!The whole 9 yards!!! Love it!

[@tubecorr]

Found on of these in Japan for 300 yen. Mine went down to 1 to 1 macro though. One of the best bargains I ever found!

[@MarkHoltze]

You have the older one I believe! Enjoy it!!!

[@JimDurfee]

Great video Mark! This may actually be the sharpest Takumar ever made! I've even compared it to my Canon 100mm Macro L lens and well, um, geeze....can't tell which is sharper!!!!

[@Fred-Wilbury]

Love your vids ..... love my Pentax lenses which I’ve had from original...... yep I’m old ....... fred

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate! I must be old at heart because I'd take these old lenses over new ones any day of the week!

[@HelpUsSaveLives]

Great video. I shoot this lens too, but on a 6 inch bellows. Easier to focus with the bellows wheel than the lens. Try it! Thanks for a great video of an iconic lens.

[@shamanoo7841]

is that much better than pentax 50mm f4 macro?

[@MarkHoltze]

I think the Pentax is a 1:1 macro, this is 1:2. I personally find the build quality on the these older ones to be better overall, but I would have to do a side by side comparison to see if there are many optical differences. Both are great value imho.

[@21Swayzee]

Lots of time for snow bathing this year! Ha! I'm 5 years away from 48..don't think I will look that great at that age. Optical image is great...Nice crisp shot of the pine needles.

[@allenwolfkill2781]

Good lens review, Mark 😉 But what is the highest f/stop ?

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate, F/22

[@allenwolfkill2781]

@@MarkHoltze Awesome ! And thanks again for your cool videos, I got a few of my old college brothers to checkout your channel... Thumbs Up

[@MarkHoltze]

Thanks mate. My pleasure really. Can’t believe I didn’t mention max f/stop in this one. Messed up my own review format.

[@allenwolfkill2781]

@@MarkHoltze no you got it on there I just happened to miss it, my bad

[@JAMG92]

I got this lens after watching your video. Thanks a lot man! Great stuff

[@MarkHoltze]

Hope you enjoy it as much as I do!

[@JAMG92]

@@MarkHoltze BEST LENS IVE EVEN HAD! Very sharp not disapointed. I made a video with some tests i did if you want to check it out :) THANKS A LOT! kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5zTlYSpgbmrp6M

[@supranomicon]

Great video- gush away!

[@MarkHoltze]

This lens is so versatile. Use it for everything! :)

[@anug1ypineapp1e]

I actually just bought a set of these, thanks for the reasurence in my purchase 😁

[@rakanalharbi3084]

Mark Holtze I have a thought, what about if put it on aps-c with a speedbooster, does the magnification scale change?

[@MarkHoltze]

It will actually reduce the focal length closer to 50mm on a full frame vs 75mm equivalent the 50 would be on an APS-C. Give you a wider FOV showing more of the object but not being in so as close. It's a nice way to get some different functionality out of the lens.

[@Jerbod2]

Isn't a macro lens basically just a better version of whatever millimeter lens you just bought, except for maybe the amount of light it catches? Being able to focus so close while still being sharp, that's the criteria for it being a macro lens, any lens like this (50mm) could focus that close, just not render a pretty image, I believe that's why macro lenses can just as well be used for normal work, it's just a shame they're not as light sensitive, although I find myself not using my 1.4 50mm for what it's made for anyway, as the working area becomes way too small, nothing seems in focus at that point.

[@MarkHoltze]

It's more about the magnification if anything. A TRUE macro lens is a 1:1 radio, where the item in the frame appears "life size". This one is 1:2 so it's 50% magnification so it's HALF life size. You could throw some macro tubes on your 50 1.4 and get a similar look. Problem with shooting 1.4 that close is that a) your focus is a challenge to nail...when you do though super cool and you might run into sharpness issues. My Pentacon 50mm 1.8 has a REALLY close min focus distance, but it won't render the image lifesize on it's own. With high MP camera, cropping etc you can get away with a lot. Shooting very small things though, insects nothing beats a true macro. When you see the world through one you'll immediately notice the difference. Getting all those tiny details is really cool. Macro is a great portrait lens as well you're right. No matter the focal length, it's still 100mm and 50mm or 90mm whatever. It's that ability to get in CLOSE that really sets it apart though. They're my most used lenses because I can use them for so many different things.

[@MrBartolomeo22]

"Isn't a macro lens basically just a better version of whatever millimeter lens you just bought, except for maybe the amount of light it catches?" Not really, at least as vintage macros go. Macro lenses are mostly optimized for close-up, at cost of performance at infinity focus. The old Micro-Nikkor 55mm/3.5 is a good example. This Takumar as well AFAIK

[@Jerbod2]

@@MrBartolomeo22 I thought macro lenses did just as well at infinity as a normal lens, is that not the case? I thought the only difference really was that they were purpose built to be sharp at minimal focus distance, not sacrificing infinity.

[@computerjunkie4776]

Thanks for your review. I just bought a SMC Pentax-M 50mm Macro F4. I think it is identical to your lens but a little newer. I plan to use it on my Canon EOS T3i. I am curious about the numbers near the front end of the focus ring and the corresponding line on the sliding part of the lens. The numbers range from greater than 25 at infinity focus down to 2 at closest focus. What is this for?

[@ecstaticist]

I have been shooting one for about a month now after picking it up in mint, unused condition for 46 bucks, along with a perfect Asahi Pentax ES-II, a Super Tak M42 55mm f/1.8, and a M42 Samyang macro of that era that is pretty much crap, but interesting if you play to its strengths. Calculated cost of the Super Tak Macro: 10 bucks. I agree 100 percent that you should shoot it wide-open most of the time, especially when the bokeh is a compositional factor. The bokeh is beautiful. I stop it down on my Asahi Pentax helicoid extension tube sometimes if I am trying to avoid focus stacking. Get more of the refracted image in the droplet, etc. I shoot it at all ranges, and will stop down in bright light for a deeper field where bokeh is of no consequence. I agree. No aberrations. So used to seeing purple and green fringes on everything zoomed in in ACR. Amazing feature of the lens. And the color. Wow. The only lens I have in the vintage range that rivals it on color is the Helios 55mm 44-3. I shoot that on the extension tube as well. Beautiful glass. Thanks for the great review. I hope more people find this gem and have fun with it.

[@miguelespinoza2518]

This lens is amazing. One of the last taks I purchased because I didn't know it existed until I saw it a local camera shop. I always heard about the 100mm macro which I don't have because I shoot in a crop. But $40 what a steal. This is my go to when shooting rings at a wedding. Or flowers or bugs. I have the 28mmf3.5 lost it though, 35mmf2, 50mmf1.8, 55mm auto Sears, 85mm1.9, 105mmf2.8, 135mmf2.5 Which tak should I get next?

[@MarkHoltze]

You have a good lineup mate! I would consider the 100mm macro, with crop it will give you some nice focal range and it’s just as good as the 50 macro. If you are feelin really quirky check out the 17mm SMC takumar fisheye. It’s expensive though.

[@miguelespinoza2518]

I've been thinking of that 100mm macro. I considered the 17mm but at f4 and all the other options I have already for somewhat wide couldn't justify. I shoot on a Panasonic gh5 with a speed booster but it seems like that 17mm would really shine on a full frame. Thanks for the videos. You've got the best ones on the vintage. I don't know why there isn't more.

[@miguelespinoza2518]

I do have the 55 1.4auto Sears with is very unique. I've been considering getting the 50mm 1.4 just to have because it's been so popular. Everyone makes a big deal about that 8 element one. Is it really worth it?

[@MarkHoltze]

@@miguelespinoza2518 The photography world is pretty saturated right now. LOADS of "influencers" who are all talking about modern gear, latest and greatest, next best thing. Their followers are USUALLY younger and they're quite engaged so you see a lot of people going down that road. This stuff is pretty niche, even though I firmly believe it's the absolute BEST value in photography hands down. Part of me wanting to do this was seeing the comment boards of said bigger photographer youtubuers pitching $3000 lenses to their followers and comments being "I can't afford that"... I actually think vintage lenses are the BEST place for photographers to start. The connection to the camera/lens and physical dial shifting really helps land the idea on how those settings changes can affect the image. Not mention fast prime lenses which open a LOT of photography potential for new and exciting things are priced behind a paywall for the most part. $1000 vs $100. As long as you don't mind manual focusing the optics aren't really going to make or break based on that MASSIVE price difference. They're as good for amateur use as they are for professional use and anything with range like that is valuable. :) Thanks for commenting mate, appreciate your time.

[@MarkHoltze]

I. honestly would love to get my hands on one SOME day and do a side by side review. My thing is probably not, it's NOT radioactive which has some allure to some. It was too expensive to produce so they opted for thorium to replace whatever glass elements they had in the 8 element version. Honestly I don't think you'd be able to tell the difference unless really pixel counting. I mean the 135 2.5 5 vs 6 element had minor differences, mostly in CA in high contrast lighting conditions. If I wasn't comparing side by side I never would have been able to tell. The price of the 8 element 50 is really based on this cult following plus rarity, I would assume it's probably rarity.