Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Compact 50ish M39......overwhelmed
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 6:57 pm    Post subject: Compact 50ish M39......overwhelmed Reply with quote
Well I just got into the M39s with a CV skopar 35mm.

So stupidly I thought, why not get a small 50ish as well.

My head is spinning with the options, from elmars to industars to serenars.

The smaller the better, but I would consider a compact f/2 or f/1.8.

Preferably under 200USD, cheaper the better.

I consider the jupiter 8, but it seems to need a few stops to get sharp, while in some samples the industar 50 f/3.5 seems sharp right off.

Canon Serenar f/1.8 also looks nice for alot more money--but maybe worth it.

N-61 L/D seems very light, which I like, but like so many russian lenses, they ship from russia--takes for ever. Crap shoot in copy quality.

Anyway I know these 50s have been done to death, but help me narrow it down!

TY sirs

Last edited by uhoh7 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:17 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
for use on what camera?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rbelyell wrote:
for use on what camera?


Nex-5 APS-C w/m39 adapter

TY

Here are some pics with M39s on a nex:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1042&message=37488532&changemode=1

I actually have a summilux f/1.4 on long term loan, but it's heavy as hell--weighs more than the body.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I use the J8 on my NEX as a 50(75)mm lens and I am very happy with it.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
I use the J8 on my NEX as a 50(75)mm lens and I am very happy with it.


I am leaning to this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37888941@N00/4792811568/in/set-72157624366388939/

about 35USD shipped to USA

People rave about the sharpness and super high contrast.

Is a J8 as light?--well I read they are the same weight.

here is j8 vs i-61 l/d thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9482


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
J-8 is made from aluminum + glass small and lightweight yes. It has a pair Industar-26 same size same everything I guess. I like them pretty much.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My recommendation is either Jupitor-3 or Canon 50/1.8, the both are L39
(ie. Leica L-mount) and small. I think you can obtain either one under $200,
though you need L->M adapter which is not too expensive.

Good luck


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
koji wrote:
My recommendation is either Jupitor-3 or Canon 50/1.8, the both are L39
(ie. Leica L-mount) and small. I think you can obtain either one under $200,
though you need L->M adapter which is not too expensive.

Good luck


I did always pass J-3 due higher price , is it only faster lens (don't need to me really) or better too than J-8 or Industar-26 ?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've been quite happy with my Canon Serenar 50mm f/1.8. I'm using it on my old Canon rangefinder, though, and not anything else.

It's a little slow, but I also highly recommend the old Leitz 50/3.5 Elmar. It's one of the sharpest 50mm lenses ever made.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I paid $200 in Tokyo for Jupiter-3, BUT it was 2001.... Hahaha.... Embarassed

But I only paid $100 for Canon 50/1.8 in 2008, so it will be still less than 200.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I've been quite happy with my Canon Serenar 50mm f/1.8. I'm using it on my old Canon rangefinder, though, and not anything else.

It's a little slow, but I also highly recommend the old Leitz 50/3.5 Elmar. It's one of the sharpest 50mm lenses ever made.


I'd very much like a copy of each of those, but I am STOPPING!!!!!

with this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rt=nc&nma=true&item=330523483729&si=qMtTkjvR3CbHigxahGnFrGYGh%252BY%253D&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT

That gives me an RF set owned and borrowed of:

28 elmarit (80's)
36 CV Skopar f/2.5 (2010)
I-61 L/D
Summilux 50 f/1.4
Elmarit 90 (80's)

I would like one more wide and maybe a 135ish but I'm not not not going to get one!!!
well maybe if I can find a jupiter 11.......


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Industar 61 L/D looks really cool on the Oly EPL1.


Seems to be sharp even wide open as well (of course f2.8 is not especially fast for 50mm). Also good contrast and no fringing. Pity the build quality is so poor (but for £13 one can't complain too much)



Crop




Mark


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:
rbelyell wrote:
for use on what camera?


Nex-5 APS-C w/m39 adapter


No need to shun the Jupiters (or indeed any FSU lens) there. They have back- or front-focus issues on the Leica, being Contax standard lenses with a slightly longer effective focal length. But that is entirely irrelevant on SLR and EVIL cameras, as these use no Leica-standard rangefinder.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
SXR_Mark wrote:
The Industar 61 L/D looks really cool on the Oly EPL1.
Seems to be sharp even wide open as well (of course f2.8 is not especially fast for 50mm). Also good contrast and no fringing. Pity the build quality is so poor (but for £13 one can't complain too much)

Mark


TY, how do you notice the poor build, aisde from performance?

Mine is on the way--will take weeks.

Am excited about the very light weight---but just hope I get a sharp copy.

Re jupiter and evil

TY I would really like to find a good J11 for leica 39 mount---they are not as cheap as they used to be---a very good looking copy they want like 65us plus at least 20 shipping, which seems a bit crazy.

Any other light, sharp 135mms I should think about in the LTM mount?

TY sirs


PostPosted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You don't need to get these from outside US. Just search ebay for Zorki or FED cameras - some come with these lenses and you'll get a classic body as well.

Re: build. I don't get what people are complaining about. I have the Jupiter-8 and the Industar 26M and they're both very well built. The grease used on the focusing can deteriorate over time, but that can be fixed; otherwise these lenses are as tough as they come.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:

TY I would really like to find a good J11 for leica 39 mount---they are not as cheap as they used to be---a very good looking copy they want like 65us plus at least 20 shipping, which seems a bit crazy.

Any other light, sharp 135mms I should think about in the LTM mount?


I have the J11 in m39 - it's very small - the problem is that i do not have appropriate lens hood and it flares a lot giving the picture kind of low contrast. Otherwise the colors are very nice, the sharpness is ok and the bokeh is very nice as it is a sonnar.

If you correct the pictures they look good.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:


Re: build. I don't get what people are complaining about. I have the Jupiter-8 and the Industar 26M and they're both very well built. The grease used on the focusing can deteriorate over time, but that can be fixed; otherwise these lenses are as tough as they come.


My comment of poor build relates to the mechanical design. To allow the focus ring to rotate relative to the the screw mount, the mount has a flange that runs in a groove in the focus ring. There is no proper bearing, and the only thing that stops the mount rattling is grease. This arrangement is bound to wear with use and increase the amount of radial play in the lens when it is mounted on the camera. I can wiggle my sample a small but noticeable amount when it's on the camera, though I admit it's not a major issue.

Furthermore, the mount is clamped into this groove with a ring held by three tiny screws which screw into the aluminium focus ring. On my sample of the lens, a previous re-greasing had left these screws with only a very tenuous grip. If the screws do not hold tight, then the lens can easily be pulled off the mount. I recommend anyone taking these lenses apart to re-grease them to be very careful not to over-tighten these screws.

From an engineering point of view, this arrangement is very poor indeed.

Mark


PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
SXR_Mark wrote:
This arrangement is bound to wear with use and increase the amount of radial play in the lens when it is mounted on the camera. I can wiggle my sample a small but noticeable amount when it's on the camera, though I admit it's not a major issue.


Radial play could come from a bad CLA, which correlates with your observation that previous greasing left some screws improperly tightened. You can't generalize from one experience. For example, I had a Takumar that had uncharacteristic play in the focusing ring - that doesn't mean anything about Takumars in general. I have a bunch of Russian lenses and some came with clear signs that they were opened previously and then were incorrectly assembled - this is the risk with buying old used stuff, but it's not the fault of the original manufacturer.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1