Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,826   Posts: 1,582,010   Online: 859
      
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    192

    Grungy 85 1.8 SMC Takumar

    I recently got my hands on my old 85mm 1.8 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. (put "SMC" in title to save space.) Unfortunately it has lived for most of the last 20 years in as close as you can get to a basement above ground.
    Mechanically it's fine. (Kudos to Asahi engineers!) And the front surface under the filter is clean. The rear surface cleaned up easily, but there is fungus on at least 2 of the inner surfaces.
    Is this lens worth getting serviced? Is that even possible? I owned this lens for more than a decade and it was, in hindsight, wonderfull. It's just that I was switching over to Olympus.

    Charles

  2. #2
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Fungus is always iffy: It's very hard to tell beforehand what might clean up well and what not.

    I've managed to clean some quite heavy cases of fungus, leaving no trace at all.
    I've also seen some light cases of fungus which deeply etched coatings, etc...

    Get a rough estimate on a service, then you can decide how much you want to gamble.

    You could also try the classic "leave-it-without-caps-on-a-windowsill" method.
    That *might* kill the fungus (UV light). Lots of debate over how much (and which) lenses actually let UV light through....
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    202
    I have been trying to get hold of that lens for years already and I would definitely have it serviced if I can even get hold of one.

    The main deciding factor is wether the fungus you had damages coating or not.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    28
    I've sent a 50mm f1.2 lens to Eric H. at www.pentaxs.com for a CLA. I was happy with the work. I have the same lens as you except in K mount that is badly infested. I'm trying to decide if I'm going to try it myself or send it out. I would say it is well worth fixing. I have another copy of the 85mm f1.8 in K mount that is in great shape and it is a really good lens. It has the typical issues with lenses from that era -- occasional CA, etc. But wide open it is very sharp and I like the bokeh.

    Samples from my Flickr account: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cymen/tags/smcpk85mmf18/ (all digital)
    Last edited by Cymen; 05-02-2009 at 09:05 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    Shoot a couple of rolls and decide if you like the results.
    Last edited by Pumal; 05-02-2009 at 09:12 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by Pumalite View Post
    Shoot a couple of rolls and decide if you like the results.
    I thought about the "portrait" possiblities with it in it's present state. I probably should run some film through it anyway, just to make sure that the iris is closing fast enough. I've got an H series body that is going to Eric for overhaul, so I'll send the lens along for an opinion as well.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin