Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Zenitar MC 2/50
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:45 pm    Post subject: Zenitar MC 2/50 Reply with quote

Hello,

Many many times I heard talking about the famous Zenitar 2.8/16 fisheye (yes I understand why, being I think, the most affordable fisheye lens, and also pretty good), and nothing or almost nothing about the Zenitar 2/50 lens which I think, cames with the Zenit KM and 412 , 312 or 212 models as kit lens.
First impression, well is is made of plastic, at least the exterior, the filter screw is also plastic (unfortunately it has 46mm filter diameter , not 49 like most of the M42 , 50 mm lenses). The diaphragm ring is also plastic. Only the screw mount is metal (I do not know the interior).
Is this lens an original russian lens ? I mean, is a copy of some german or japanese lenses or not. May be some of you know the answer.

In the mean time I post here some samples (some with 100% crops):






100% crop



100% crop




PS. The shots were made with the Zenitar mounted on a Pentax K100D body.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow! This is a great lens! Can you make a picture from the lens itself?


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
...Can you make a picture from the lens itself?

Here we go





PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi!
Nice shots! Seems to be a good lens!

Did you resharpen the crops? If yes, please don't. Otherwise a real judgement about lens quality is impossible. Smile


Carsten


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

weird shape of the lens, looks like a toy Confused

But the optical quality seems good Smile


(nice shot of the blossoms by the way)


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't worry. I didn't make no modifications on them (pictures). The shots were taken in RAW mode and adjusted the compensation, about +0.3 , +0.5 and converted to jpeg.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Answer is simple Russian inside , Chinese outside LOL. Looks Canon kit lens that is also crap looking and the optics crap too. This lens has excellent optical quality I will looking ...


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Canon kit lens that is also crap looking and the optics crap too.


Not entirely. There is a lot of bad talk about the kit lens by the snobbish people who only use "L" lenses.
In reality, Canon's kit lens is a decent beginners lens - with some shortcomings on the wide end, more than decent on the long end, and like most kit lenses, pretty good when stopped down to f/8.
I have taken nice pictures with it when I was still unaware of the existence of the adapters.
Don't believe everything that the "L lenses" snobbish folks tell you Wink


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smile Okay!


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
...Don't believe everything that the "L lenses" snobbish folks tell you Wink


That's absolutely right, Orio!
I have seen "photographers" who spent a lot of money on L-lenses and were not able to present one good picture, just because they obviously did not have the right talent.

I also had the kit-lens and although it really is a plastic toy, its optical quality is surprisingly good! I just sold it, because I did not feel good when I used, I was afraid to break it. Wink
BTW, I have a EF 1.8/50 II and this also is a plastic toy, but with very good optical quality. It is called "plastic fantastic". Right, it does not have the "feeling" and "character" of some classical 50mm lenses, but it is quite a nice AF-lens.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This lens is on my wish list for a long time. Sadly not old enough to go for a few euros like the Helios 44M-somethings. Very Happy

Thanks for showing these pics. I fear I have bid a little bit more in the future for this lens.

Michael

P.S.:
I agree with the comments about the L-lens. Seen too many ***** with L-lens. Last one I talked with had his camera configured to produce the strongest compressed jpeg. He tries to convince me that there is absolute no difference to see. Rolling Eyes It was the ex husband of my wife. Her comment: there are worser reasons for a divorce. Very Happy

Michael


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Borges wrote:
This lens is on my wish list for a long time. Sadly not old enough to go for a few euros like the Helios 44M-somethings. Very Happy

Thanks for showing these pics. I fear I have bid a little bit more in the future for this lens.

Michael

P.S.:
I agree with the comments about the L-lens. Seen too many ***** with L-lens. Last one I talked with had his camera configured to produce the strongest compressed jpeg. He tries to convince me that there is absolute no difference to see. Rolling Eyes It was the ex husband of my wife. Her comment: there are worser reasons for a divorce. Very Happy

Michael


Smile Is he can say any good ? Smile