Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch|Quick search    MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  Rss feed   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
How to find a good Industar-10 or Industar-22?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index -> Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ForenSeil



Level 4

Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2710
Location: Kiel, Germany.


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:53 pm    Post subject: How to find a good Industar-10 or Industar-22? Reply with quote

Hello!
I'm lookinging for a lens which are producing the retro-look of the pre-war Elmar 50/3.5 or Summitar 50/2
So the Industar-10 and Industar-22 came also into my mind. According to some reviews they can be as good as the Elmar and produce a similar look (despite that they have a different optical design, the Industars are Tessars)

The problem seems to be the quality spreading. Many Industars seem to be crap compared to the Leitz lenses.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113110

I already had several Industars but always bad luck with them.
Can anyone give a hint how to find a good copy?

Bye the way - is there also a USSR counterpart for the Summitar? (I like the Summitar for his bokeh and character)
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester Smile
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite vintage lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Tamron SP 500/8, Celestron C8 2000mm F10

Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Sony 135/1.8 or Leica- or Zeiss Apo 135/2), Minolta/Sony 16/2.8 Fisheye or Nikon 16/2.8 AIS Fisheye, Nikon 200/2 ED

My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language)


Last edited by ForenSeil on Thu May 03, 2012 11:17 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12788

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All three of my Industar-50s are superb so I don't know where the notion that the Elmar is better comes from. In fact, I don't think I own any 50mm lenses sharper than my Industar-50s.
_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
fermy



Level 3

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 2224


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think there is any sure way except buying in person. Otherwise, you just play a lottery and sometimes you get lucky.

I have Industar-22 and Industar-61 l/d, which IMHO are very good. Still I don't use them too often due to having too many great 50s. I can sell you either of those for 30 Euros + shipping (which will be 5 Euros since we are both in Germany). Here's the thread with my I-22 shots http://forum.mflenses.com/industar-22-t48796.html

Btw, I have plenty of lenses that I can sell if there is an interest. Here's the list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aoe2xJlyKORrdHhzeUR3dFhSOGxCVmR4YnIzWUcybGc#gid=0 I was planning to do a marketplace post, but never found the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
fotomachi



Level 3

Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 663
Location: Estados Unidos de las Esferas Ultraterrenales


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can't know until you try for yourself. A lens may look mint from the outside but may be a complete lemon at the inside, and vice versa.
I was lucky recently with a Kazan Industar-22 recently. I have noticed somewhat of a variation between different versions, years, fabrication sites, etc, but I have never encountered a really bad copy.
_________________
:::[ f o t o m a c h i . M X ]:::

:::[ F o T o M a C h i . C o M ]:::

:::[ M y . l e n s . c o l l e c t i o n ]:::

:::[ M a c h i g l a z k i . О п т и к . B l o g ]:::
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12788

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I still don't understand where these ideas about only some copies of Russian lenses being good comes from, if there are all these lesser copies out there, where are they? I have three I-50s, an I-22, an I-26 and two I-61s, ranging from 1954 to 1989 in date and every one is great, all very sharp. My personal favourites are a 1959 I-50 collapsible and a 1966 I-50 rigid, but to be honest, it's almost impossible to tell any of my Industars apart. I've got 7 or 8 Tessars too and I wouldn't say any of them was better than the Industars.

I-50 1959 on NEX:



I-50 1966 on Zorki-6:


_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
ForenSeil



Level 4

Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2710
Location: Kiel, Germany.


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
All three of my Industar-50s are superb so I don't know where the notion that the Elmar is better comes from


I think the link I've posted above is very representative for the quality spreading problem.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113110

As said I also had several Industars and not one made me really lucky. In my experience they have a large quality spreading. For example I had a unused one which was very soft while I had a very old and abused one which was a lot sharper but had very low contrast and very bad flare control compared to some other industars I had and so on and so on.

Maybe it's a problem that people see "sharpness" slightly different.
Sharpness is always a subjective perception which is consisted of acutance, resolution (details), overall-contrast and so on. In the link above the resolution between the two lenses are is about the same - but anyway the Industar looks bad to me while the Elmar produces the kind rendition I'm looking for (also not very good compared to modern lenses though).

Here's little comparision I shared some months ago: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1189957.html#1189957
And the opinions where also different there about which is the best lens

Can anynone tell me which is the best collapsible Industar?
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester Smile
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite vintage lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Tamron SP 500/8, Celestron C8 2000mm F10

Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Sony 135/1.8 or Leica- or Zeiss Apo 135/2), Minolta/Sony 16/2.8 Fisheye or Nikon 16/2.8 AIS Fisheye, Nikon 200/2 ED

My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language)


Last edited by ForenSeil on Thu May 03, 2012 11:38 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
Attila



Level 4

Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57258
Location: Austria,Hungary

Expire: 2016-11-18

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have three Industar-22 RED P I did try only one that was stunning far better than cheap Leica Summar, Summitar.
_________________
http://www.filmferrania.it/
------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay

35mm: Konica A4, Konica IIIA, Konica FC-1
MF: Konica Pearl I,II,III 6x4,5 Konica Semi Pearl
Film: Foma,Kodak, Fuji DIY development C41, FOMA LQR
Scan: Epson V500, scanassist (http://www.scanassist.org)
Shutter tester: LCD tester from member vfmoto
Digital: Panasonic G1, Sony Nex-3, Samsung NX100
Lenses: Konica Hexanons,Carl Zeiss,Carl Zeiss Jena,Meyer-Optik,Minolta MD,Yashica ML,Nikon,Olympus OM
DIY E-6,C41 and B&W
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12788

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ForenSeil wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
All three of my Industar-50s are superb so I don't know where the notion that the Elmar is better comes from


I think the link I've posted above is very representative
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113110

As said I also had several Industars and not one made me really lucky. In my experience they have a large quality spreading. For example I had a unused one which was very soft while I had a very old and abused one which was a lot sharper but had very low contrast and very bad flare control compared to some other industars I had and so on and so on.

Maybe it's a problem that people see "sharpness" different.
Sharpness is always a subjective perception which is consisted of acutance, resolution (details), overall-contrast and so on. In the link above the resolution between the two lenses are is about the same - but anyway the Industar looks softer and (to be honest) like sh*t to me while the Elmar produces the kind rendition I'm looking for (also not very good compared to modern lenses though).

Here's little comparision I shared some months ago: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1189957.html#1189957
And the opinions where also different there about which is the best lens

Can anynone tell me which is the best collapsible Industar?


Buy an Elmar then, it has a red dot so must be a good lens.

Meanwhile, I'm happy knowing my Industar-50 collapsible is excellent.

If you look at published MTF figures, the I-50 is the sharpest of the Russian RF lenses. I forget where I found the table now, but it was 42/38 and the Jupiter-8, which is also a sharp lens was only 38/32.

This is my 1959 I-50, solid chromed brass, cost me 6ukp:



_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran


Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Thu May 03, 2012 11:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
ForenSeil



Level 4

Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2710
Location: Kiel, Germany.


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
...
Buy an Elmar then, it has a red dot so must be a good lens...

That sounds angry. Sorry. I'm not a Leica-snob or anything like that, I only want to know how to find a good Industar. (I always had bad luck the last times on the contrary to you)
I think I never tried an I-50, only 50-2 (which was M42, so not interesting for me anymore as I wan't to use it on an Rangefinder)
Where do/did find these MTF charts? I'm very interested.

And what does the red dot mean? Is it the coating? Aren't most Industars also coated?
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester Smile
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite vintage lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Tamron SP 500/8, Celestron C8 2000mm F10

Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Sony 135/1.8 or Leica- or Zeiss Apo 135/2), Minolta/Sony 16/2.8 Fisheye or Nikon 16/2.8 AIS Fisheye, Nikon 200/2 ED

My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
fermy



Level 3

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 2224


PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can find resolution figures for any Soviet optics here:
http://www.photohistory.ru/1207248187299134.html

It helps if you can read Russian, but if not google translate should help. However, IMHO, these figures are interesting only from historical point of view. With optics that is 60 years old ( as with anything) the performance today will be determined by the quality of assembly, and the conditions in which the lens has been kept much more than by the theoretical calculated resolution (which is what these figures are).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12788

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh I wasn't angry, just making a little joke.

The figures I saw weren't theoretical, they were measured by someone, they measured all the Russian RF lenses they owned. I can't for the life of me remember what site it was on, but it was an English language one.
_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
mo



Level 4

Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 8134
Location: Australia

Expire: 2015-07-30

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian, you are coming across a little strong.
I wish there was a surefire way to get a good lens...my only thought is buy from someone who has used the lens and has shown it to be a good copy.
_________________
Moira, Moderator
Pentax K-01,Panasonic G1, Pentax K200D(broken),Pentax MX
Ricoh Singlex TLS,KR-5,KR-5Super,XR-10

Lenses
Auto Rikenon's 55/1.4, 1.8, 2.8... 50/1.7 Auto Takumar 2.2/55, 3.5/35 Super Takumar 1.8/55...Macro Takumar F4/50... CZJ Biotar ALU M42 2/58 CZJ Tessar ALU M42 2.8/50 CZJ DDR Flektogon Zebra M42 2.8/35 CZJ Pancolar M42 2/50
Auto Mamiya/Sekor 1.8/55 ...Auto Mamiya/Sekor 2/50 Auto Mamiya/Sekor 2.8/50 Auto Mamiya/Sekor 200/3.5 Tamron SP500/8 Tamron SP350/5.6 Tamron SP90/2.5
Primoplan 1.9/58 Angenieux 3.5/28 Angenieux 3,5/135 Y 2


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
martinsmith99



Level 4

Joined: 31 Aug 2008
Posts: 6679
Location: S Glos, UK

Expire: 2013-11-18

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have an I-22 that I've never used. I don't see the attraction with them as they're annoying to use.

I have three I50s that are all very different. It may be because of the years they were made or QC, but there is variation.
_________________
Martin - Coincidental Thread Killer

MF Lenses User Real Names (add yours)
MF Lenses User Self Pics (add yours)
Gear: Canon EOS 5Dmkii, EOS 50 & 620, T90, AE-1 SLRs, FED2, Zorki6 & Canonette QL17 Giii RFs and stacks of lenses
ms-imaging
My Blog
My Flickr
Old Lens Fanatics Facebook Group
Cynthia Pictures
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
Nesster



Level 4

Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 5792
Location: NJ, USA

Expire: 2014-02-20

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One problem I have is that I may believe too much what other people say. There is a lot of psychology involved when reading opinions, especially when it comes to large price differences. And I don't mean fan-boy ego stuff, I mean our expectations often condition our experience.

I haven't had a really bad example of a Russian lens - though in general the Kiev mount lenses have all been excellent, and the LTM ones not quite as good. And we have to remember that when talking pre-war there's a lot of life experience variation on top of whatever state of the art, German or Russian, was in place at the time.

Based on my limited experience and the greater experience of - and sample photos from - many of the members here, I would agree that when it comes to older lenses, the Russians are as good or better, on average, than others of the same design era. Newer glass, maybe not? Very Happy Also, I've been lucky and patient, so I've bought my lenses all in the USA - at the camera show, or on ebay - and so far no lemons. Plus, a lot cheaper given I didn't pay for the long distance shipping.

But really, the beautiful thing here is that the Russian lenses are inexpensive enough that one could buy a few and be picky between them, and then sell off the rest, and still not spend much money.
_________________
-Jussi
Camera photos

Print Photographica
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  No rate
Share
ForenSeil



Level 4

Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2710
Location: Kiel, Germany.


PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to this site: http://www.baierfoto.de/russobj/objektive/industar.html
Resolution is I-50 > I-22 > I-10
Unfortunately they don't have stated the resolution for all Industar lenses (like I-61)
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester Smile
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite vintage lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Tamron SP 500/8, Celestron C8 2000mm F10

Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Sony 135/1.8 or Leica- or Zeiss Apo 135/2), Minolta/Sony 16/2.8 Fisheye or Nikon 16/2.8 AIS Fisheye, Nikon 200/2 ED

My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language)


Last edited by ForenSeil on Sat May 05, 2012 5:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index -> Manual Focus Lenses All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group