Pentax 135mm Takumar - good lens with GF1?

[DHart]

I considering picking up my first legacy glass for use with my GF1:

-Pentax Takumar 135mm f/2.8 (K- mount)

or

-Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 (M42 screw mount)

Can anyone advise on the IQ one might expect with either of these lenses?

Also, might a lens such as this be a bit too heavy hanging off the mount of a GF1 when the camera body is mounted on a tripod? (I don't think the lens has a mounting collar.)

Thanks, in advance, for your input.

 

[CPWarner]

I have been using a Canon FD 135mm f/2.8. It is 395g (0.9 lb) and 78mm length (3") x 63mm (2.5"). I have not found that to be too heavy. It handles very well for something equivalent to a 270mm f/2.8 in 35mm terms. I have shot with it on a tripod and am not concerned with the weight. however, I would not want to go much larger with out a tripod color on the GF1. I am still learning how to shoot effectively with it on my GF1, and will be buying the add on viewfinder as I do not like shooting with a telephoto with the screen on the back of the camera. Also, the Olympus OM 135mm f/2.8 has almost identical specs to the Canon FD, but commands a much higher price. I am not sure which one has better optics.

 

[rgeorge911]

I have the SMC 135/3.5. It's a wonderful lens on the Pentax body. Can't say I've used it on my GF1 (even though I have the adapter).

 

[DHart]

I have been circling around the idea of getting some legacy glass for my GF1 for some time now and it sounds like a fairly quick 135 (270 eq.) would be a very nice option with the GF1. Whether Canon, Olympus, or Pentax 135mm... I'm still kicking around. Thanks for the input.

I had, for a time, dismissed the Lumix 45-200, but it continues to compete with the legacy 135mm f.2.8/3.5 options for my interest. Though there is a significant speed difference, and therefore selective focus difference, the OIS, auto-focus, and greater reach advantages of the 45-200 *might* win out... hmmmmmmmm... this is a tough call for me at the moment.

 

[Godfrey]

I've got the Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 ... It's now my longest lens. I use it in conjunction with the EC14 on the G1 as well. It's a very nice performer overall, with minimal CA and virtually no rectilinear distortion.

I've used it on a tripod often (for this long a focal length, it's really needed) and it works well. I see no sign that it strains the lens mount.

 

[CPWarner]

I have been circling around the idea of getting some legacy glass for my GF1 for some time now and it sounds like a fairly quick 135 (270 eq.) would be a very nice option with the GF1. Whether Canon, Olympus, or Pentax 135mm... I'm still kicking around. Thanks for the input.

I had, for a time, dismissed the Lumix 45-200, but it continues to compete with the legacy 135mm f.2.8/3.5 options for my interest. Though there is a significant speed difference, and therefore selective focus difference, the OIS, auto-focus, and greater reach advantages of the 45-200 *might* win out... hmmmmmmmm... this is a tough call for me at the moment.

I thought about the 45-200, but the Panasonic 100-300 sounds even more interesting. That is what led me to grab a 135 f/2.8 Canon FD. It works quite well, but difficult to shoot without the LVF on the GF1 or a tripod.