View Full Version : Lovely Pentax 43/1.9 Special in LTM mount
I just saw this little gem on eBay: 150186529494
http://artbig.com/rff/a112274.JPG
The 43/1.9 Limited lens is one of the sharpest lenses available in Pentax K mount. I'm craving to try this lens in Leica mount. Too bad it's so expensive :bang:
Cheers,
Abbazz
The 43/1.9 Limited lens is one of the sharpest lenses available in Pentax K mount. I'm craving to try this lens in Leica mount. Too bad it's so expensive...With patience and alertness you may find one at reasonable cost. Or maybe you'll leap for that one on eBay? :D
I got this one from a Canadian forum member several years ago. A favorite with the Minolta CLE, though framing is tight. It's a brilliant lens, as expected, with just a whiff of barrel distortion.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=920&d=1092121657
Kim Coxon
11-27-2007, 00:50
It is one of my favourite lenses!.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=40060&d=1169582641
Kim
Kim, which framelines does it bring up on the Leica?
Ah - silly me - just realised it is a screw mount, so depends on which adapter you use!
Kim Coxon
11-27-2007, 02:22
In some ways it is not a silly question. I have tried both a 50 and a 35 adapter and wasn't really that happy with either. It would be ideal on the R3 body or the CL. However, It was supplied with a superb 43/50 brightline finder with built in dopter correction. About 2 weekends ago I was out using it and was finding the finder much better than using either of the framelines in the M6. I then also started using the CV 28 brightline finder for the Elmarit and found that much better as well. The only trouble is that I feel a gas attack coming on and am looking very hard at a Bessa T body!.
Kim
Kim, which framelines does it bring up on the Leica?
Ah - silly me - just realised it is a screw mount, so depends on which adapter you use!
The finder is very, very nice, but on the big side, especially mounted on a "Barnack," so I rarely use it. As w/my 40mm lenses, on an M body I usually use a 35/135 adapter & imagine tick marks inside the 35mm frames (like the 75mm corners inside the 50mm frames on a modern M) or frame loosely using the 50mm frames (not that bad, even on the modern M's w/their undersized @ infinity 50mm frames).
In some ways it is not a silly question. I have tried both a 50 and a 35 adapter and wasn't really that happy with either. It would be ideal on the R3 body or the CL. However, It was supplied with a superb 43/50 brightline finder with built in dopter correction. About 2 weekends ago I was out using it and was finding the finder much better than using either of the framelines in the M6. I then also started using the CV 28 brightline finder for the Elmarit and found that much better as well. The only trouble is that I feel a gas attack coming on and am looking very hard at a Bessa T body!.
Kim
sepiareverb
11-27-2007, 05:59
This is indeed a great lens. I had one for the summer, and shot quite a bit with it, and was quite surprised by it. Raid also has good things to say about this not so little gem.
Handling is tops as well.
I had mine bring up the 50 framelines, but used the finder that came with it for framing, the supplied VF has both 43 & 50mm framelines.
Another question for you Kim - have you compared it with the 43/1.9 Limited in K mount? Is it the same formula?
Kim Coxon
11-28-2007, 00:39
Yup! If I get a chance, I can do some side by side shots if you want.
Kim
Another question for you Kim - have you compared it with the 43/1.9 Limited in K mount? Is it the same formula?
Yes please! How about some side-by-side with the same film, and just to make it interesting, some with the K10D. You don't have a digital rangefinder body too? I know the crop will be different, but I'd like to see what you make of it. For the film shots, B&W or colour?
The lens is looong, so it was also my suggestion that it's the SLR lens design. Just amazing that PENTAX never made any Rangefinder lens in history, except this one... For my feel it's a bit too long, so it wasn't my choice and I choosed to buy a UC-Hexanon 35/2 recently. Anyway I'm more familiar with the 35mm than the 40mm focal length (my Rollei 40/2.8 in LTM). But whoever need a 43mm in between to the 50mm??
Kim Coxon
11-28-2007, 01:07
I will see what I can do. ;) It may take a week or two as things are rather hectic at the moment. I may just have a dSLR body. (or 3 :o )
Kim
Yes please! How about some side-by-side with the same film, and just to make it interesting, some with the K10D. You don't have a digital rangefinder body too? I know the crop will be different, but I'd like to see what you make of it. For the film shots, B&W or colour?
Kim Coxon
11-28-2007, 01:12
I was quite surprised with the lens both in LTM and SLR format. It is not that useful on the dSLRs with the crop factor being around the equivalent of 65mm, too long for a "standard" and a bit short for a "portrait". However, with the SLR, it makes a very good pairing with the 31Ltd. With the M6, I find it a very useful combo with 25, 43 and 75. Otherwise, I would go for 28, 50 and 90.
As to the size, it feels about the same as the 50 Cron and if anything is slightly smaller than the 50 Nokton. In SLR terms, it is a very compact lens verging on being a pancake.
Kim
The lens is looong, so it was also my suggestion that it's the SLR lens design. Just amazing that PENTAX never made any Rangefinder lens in history, except this one... For my feel it's a bit too long, so it wasn't my choice and I choosed to buy a UC-Hexanon 35/2 recently. Anyway I'm more familiar with the 35mm than the 40mm focal length (my Rollei 40/2.8 in LTM). But whoever need a 43mm in between to the 50mm??
Yes, 43 is an odd length for the dSLR, which is why I've never chased one. I do have the DA40 pancake, and even it is an odd length with the 1.5 crop, a long normal rather than a short telephoto. I like it on the DS; makes a very compact package.
Yes, 43 is an odd length for the dSLR, which is why I've never chased one. I do have the DA40 pancake, and even it is an odd length with the 1.5 crop, a long normal rather than a short telephoto. I like it on the DS; makes a very compact package.
Delurking to mention that the 43 is a great lens on a film body, but yes, it is odd on digital. I really really want to like it on the K100D, but it is a little odd. I use it on an old MX, and THAT is a great combo. When I want a compact SLR, that's the body/lens combo I reach for. Of course, that's the whole idea of a RF...
I would love to try the LTM version.
sepiareverb
12-07-2007, 18:08
Isn't the 43 in K mount an ASPH? My LTM version never said ASPH on it, only Special.
Isn't the 43 in K mount an ASPH? My LTM version never said ASPH on it, only Special.Pentax's terminology for an Aspheric lens is "AL"... as in SMC Pentax-FA 1:1.8 31mm AL Limited. I believe this and the SMC Pentax-DA 1:3.2 21mm AL Limited are the only two of the Limited series that bear the AL label.
There are several other AL lenses but some knowledgeable folks say that Pentax has quietly used aspheric surfaces in some lenses without mentioning it. So it's entirely possible the 43mm has one or more aspheric surfaces, though Pentax doesn't claim it. As far as I can tell, the glass is the same in the K mount and L mount 43mm lenses, the difference being just the lens barrels.
Also, the L lens has 9 diaphragm blades while the K lens has 8. I measure the L lens at 46.8mm long from mounting surface to filter ring.
Finn - greetings and welcome to the forum. Glad we have drawn you out of lurking! I sometimes use my DA40 pancake on a MZ-5 body - that is very light and compact, moreso than Leica M4 with 35/2 Summicron.
Doug - I wonder about the extra blade in the iris. I suspect that has more to do with pandering to the perceived desires of the specialist Japanese market than any practical effect on image quality.
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?
Gabriel M.A.
02-02-2008, 23:09
Stay away from me, you tempter. I heeeeed yo to ree-pent. Hallebooya.
Ah shal not fall into temptashon, ow-lowd. Ah shal not!
Resistance is futile. What is the thread size for the filter?
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?49mm, a common and traditional Pentax size. You're going to love it... :)
Edit: 49mm for the SLR version, 40.5mm for the LTM version.
Doug - I wonder about the extra blade in the iris. I suspect that has more to do with pandering to the perceived desires of the specialist Japanese market than any practical effect on image quality.Back to Chris's comment... It's been my observation that good SLR lenses tend to have fewer diaphragm blades than good RF lenses. And I believe this due to weight/inertia reasons. The SLR blades are spring-loaded to snap back when released, as of course they close down and reopen each exposure. Total weight of the blades would slow response and more blades also add friction. This of course is not an issue for RF lenses.
Don't know about the SLR version, but the LTM has a 40.5mm filter thread.
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?
I'm confused: 40.5mm or 49mm for the filter diameter for LTM?
I'm confused: 40.5mm or 49mm for the filter diameter for LTM?Sorry, misread your question! Threaded for 40.5mm filters for the Leica-mount L Special, and 49mm for the FA mount Limited.
Sorry, misread your question! Threaded for 40.5mm filters for the Leica-mount L Special, and 49mm for the FA mount Limited.
Got it, thanks!
sepiareverb
02-03-2008, 08:06
40.5 is correct I believe. It is not 49mm. I had this lens for a while, and interestingly the Rollei 80/2.8 Hacker, they are both wonderful.
Bob allowed me to try out his Pentax 43mm lens. I took two rolls of film with it, and I took another roll with the Summicron-c 40mm/2 for comparison purposes. Both lenses did extremely well. There was no clear superiority of the Pentax lens over the less expensive Summicron-C. Bob may have commented once about it.
Some photos with the 43mm:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706348
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706340
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706382
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706381
a roll of film: http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=788521
Bob allowed me to try out his Pentax 43mm lens. I took two rolls of film with it, and I took another roll with the Summicron-c 40mm/2 for comparison purposes. Both lenses did extremely well. There was no clear superiority of the Pentax lens over the less expensive Summicron-C. Bob may have commented once about it.
Raid, what about flare? Isn't the Cron 40mm uncoated?
sepiareverb
02-04-2008, 18:21
My 40/2.0 was coated if I'm remembering correctly. We're talking 70's, so some coating must have been on there by then.
I didn't see surprising flare with either the 43 or the 40, and I shot the Pentax a lot in late day light.
The Summicron is coated, so there were no problems with flare.
xayraa33
02-04-2008, 18:53
most lenses made after WW 2 were coated.
Sorry to ask another stupid question. Is the 40 Cron single coated then vs the Pentax multicoating?
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!
have fun, Frank
According to Mr. Gandy, "[c]ontrary to some claims, best evidence indicates [the 40/2 Summicron] was not a multicoated lens, unlike the later 40/2 Rokkor for the CLE."
http://www.cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm
Sorry to ask another stupid question. Is the 40 Cron single coated then vs the Pentax multicoating?
sepiareverb
02-05-2008, 12:55
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!
have fun, Frank
We'd need someone from Japan, Pentax USA had zero idea what I was talking about when I tried to get anything about this lens. I was told that Pentax had never made such a lens.:bang:
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!Looks like a Planar (SLR type) relative to me...
I believe the L Special in the ltm mount was not marketed in the US; not so surprising then that Pentax USA didn't know about it. :)
sepiareverb
02-05-2008, 15:51
Way to go Doug. Very Eastern Washington?
Supposedly, the Rokkor 40/2 was multicoated whereas the Summicron C was single coated.
Way to go Doug. Very Eastern Washington?Thanks! Not so far east as to be closer going westward! I got my lens from a Canadian RFF member who got it somehow from Japan.
The rearmost glass surface is well-recessed into the mount, as the SLR glass is remounted in an LTM barrel (rumored to have been supplied by Cosina), which needs the extra length at the rear to make up for the thinner Leica body vs the Pentax SLR.
The lens diagram resembles many other Pentax lenses in the mid-range focal lengths including 85mm as well as the Zeiss Planar ZK.
Finally got one via an RFF member in Japan. Not too bad:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2372340937_1fc88b11f9_o.jpg
Parchiao
03-29-2008, 23:09
Finally got one via an RFF member in Japan. Not too bad:
I can't take it anymore! :bang:
You seem to have every lens that I crave for.
I can't take it anymore! :bang:
You seem to have every lens that I crave for.
Pure coincidence my friend :o.
sepiareverb
03-31-2008, 04:19
The rearmost glass surface is well-recessed into the mount, as the SLR glass is remounted in an LTM barrel (rumored to have been supplied by Cosina), which needs the extra length at the rear to make up for the thinner Leica body vs the Pentax SLR.
Thus explaining the length of the 43/1.9 LTM, it is about the same size as the Konica Hexanon 50/2 in M mount, perhaps even a tad longer.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3037/2442739342_b8da2b1abc_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2442119097_1d3e9b070e_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2283/2442948392_8c8115ea87_o.jpg
Hacker,
This looks like it's in pristine condition!! The black and red theme across the lens, camera, case and strap is so matching!
Anymore pictures for this rarity?
Cheers,
Kim Coxon
04-26-2008, 14:49
Your wish is my command!
http://pentax-manuals.com/temp/m3_5.jpg
http://pentax-manuals.com/temp/m3_6.jpg
Kim
Hacker,
Anymore pictures for this rarity?
Cheers,
I got inspired by Kim and folks here and a very kind member here sourced and worked out the logistics of sending the lens from Japan to me.
sepiareverb
04-27-2008, 06:59
Found these on a hard drive (knew they were somewhere). A few shots for a size comparison.
35 Summicron ASPH & Pentax 43:
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff221/sepiareverb/3543.jpg
40 Summicron & Pentax 43:
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff221/sepiareverb/4043.jpg
Pentax 43 with VF:
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff221/sepiareverb/DSCN1331.jpg
Very nice photos, thanks for sharing.
With the exception of the 3rd and 4th below, which are very sharp, it appears that there might have been some off focus, or off-scanning done in your samples, as they are just not as sharp as examples 3 and 4.
I've found that focusing wide open can vary even when different LTM to M adapters are used (if at all) on an LTM lens so maybe that is a factor as well.
Some photos with the 43mm:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706348
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706340
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706382
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706381
a roll of film: http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=788521
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.