KMZ MC Zenitar M2 / M2s

[no-X]

Zenitar M2s MC 50/2



Zenitar 2 series was developed as a successor of Helios 44 series. One year before launch of the last Helios 44 (44M-7 MC), S.B. Byshkin won selection procedure of new optical design and a few years later the first Zenitars (K2 nad M2) went to production. The first batch of K2 versions had resolution slightly over 70/45 (>double the 44-2!) and resolution of later batches had to be slightly lowered, because film didn't manage it very well. Resolution of final batches differs form 60/30 to 68/44.

E.Y.Rybnikova was responsible for the nice plastic design (it corresponded to plastic body - Zenit 412)

I've just recieved this gorgeous jewel. Despite it's ultra-cheap design and low price, this lens shines. Not only the resolution, but even it's bokeh seems to be better than on Helios... Shortes focusing distance is 35cm (1:5).

All samples are 1:1, untouched by photoshop, just converted from RAW via SPP2.5 (sharpness set to 0)


f/8




f/7.1




wide-opened:

[montecarlo]

I had once one but sold it. Mainly for its plastic construction and the 46mm filter thread. I bought instead my M42 Porst body and 135mm Porst lens (heavy metal ).
Yes, it has a very good resolution and , being new I liked how smooth the photographer can focus with the lens.

[themoleman342]

yes, the build quality has kept me away from this lens for a long while. The pictures look impressive but it's just not 'beefy' enough for me. I have heard the internals are metal though. Maybe it's more robust and reliable than I previously imagined.

~Marc

[no-X]

some f/2 samples:



100% crop:







100% crop:

[themoleman342]

I just got one!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&item=150307443558

I figured it might make a great replacement for the Industar 50-2 when I need a small, sharp lens that's a little faster. Hope I made a good buy. What does everyone think about the price?

~Marc

[themoleman342]

[no-X]

I don't know, but some sources tells this - photographers didn't like it. Maybe cheap Russian films from early '90 were too grainy and such a sharp lens caused harassing results...

Anyway, it's still a sharp lens and $5 + shipping is excellent price!

[Poolhall]

Got a Zenitar f1.7 50mm might see if I can pick an f2 up, its intrigued me for a while and I already own a 46-49mm step up for the lomo 1.8 so what am I waiting for Seriously though any idea how it compares to the Zenitar 1.7?

[themoleman342]

I wish I could tell you. I've always wanted the f1.7!

[no-X]

50/1.7 is the fastest Zenitar made for M42. There is even a 50/1.4, which is available with Pentax mount, but I think there's no M42 version of this lens. The same for 85/1.4 Zenitars

[Poolhall]

Yes I have the lomo volna 1.8 in Pentax mount but I've never seen the other 2 though I know they exist, I think they were all made for the Almaz, but when it died so did they, at least very few were made, which is a pity as the lomo is good and the 25-45 Variozenitar is excellent. Still there is maybe an obscure shop in Kazakhstan that has all the stock , can always hope anyway

[Riku]

Which one is the best in your opinion:

Volna 1.8/50
Helios 1.8/50
Helios 2/58
Zenitar 1.7/50
Zenitar 2/50

Zenitar 1.4/50 for Pentax K? I would love to have that!

[no-X]

Here is a picture and some details:

http://www.optyczne.pl/749-CCCP_MC_Zenitar-K_50_mm_f_1.4-specyfikacja_obiektywu.html


I have Helios 58/2, Helios 50/1.8 and Zenitar M2s 50/2. Both Helioses are very similar, sharpness depends on version (there are many versions of 58/2), but majority of them is less sharp than 50/1.8 (only 58/2 44-6 and 44-7 can be sharper). Zenitar 50/2 is quite different. It hasn't biotar/helios-like bokeh - OOF objets are rendered differently, but the results are good. Sharpness depends on exact copy, mine is very sharp in center, but edges are not as good - I've seen pictures from other samples, which were more uniform from center to edges.

[Riku]

Thanks for the link! I have Volna 1.8/50 and several Helios 2/58. Volna has smoother bokeh. For some reason russian lenses seem to have better colors than japanese. Is it because of the coating?

[Poolhall]

In terms of all round performance and value the Helios 44's have it hands down, whichever version, there is no better standard lens for the price paid, but personally I would rate the Zenitar 1.7 above them, and the Volna slightly better than that- mostly for the bokeh, as Riku says, but also for sharpness and colour. Cool polish web site btw djekuje bardzo pan

[themoleman342]

The lomo volna does come in screw mount since there was a almaz camera with m42 mount. It is rare. I don't think your likely to ever find the Zenitar 1.4/50mm because as far as I can tell it was never put into full production. I believe the 1.7/50mm is the fastest standard the soviets ever put past the prototype stage.

Can you elaborate on the "different" rendering the zenitar 2/50 does in comparison to the helios'?

[no-X]

[themoleman342]

I'll amend my statement and say the f1.7 was the fastest SLR standard lens ever put into full production (of course I realize the difference between 1.7 and 1.8 is indistinguishable). The Jupiter-3 was indeed faster but for rangefinders. The other lenses you mention were all prototypes.

Not sure why they never were produced on a large scale...maybe they were beyond the means for some of the soviet plants. Though I can't imagine if they were about to produce to helios 40 they couldn't produce a standard of the same caliber.

[no-X]

Is there anything what prevents to use M39 Jupiter-3 on (D)SLR via adapter?

[themoleman342]

No, but the register distance is different so the Jupiter would effectively become a macro lens.

[no-X]

Well. This lens is for M39 28.8mm (rangefinder M39). But there are some Russian M39 45.2mm lenses (SLR M39?). Is there any list of them or any way to distinguish them?

[themoleman342]

http://www.commiecameras.com/sov/35mmsinglelensreflexcameras/lenses/index.htm

The m39 and m42 tabs are on the side there. They aren't all there but the most common ones seem to be.

~Marc

[n6mod]

My FS-12 kit came with one of these (a bit of a surprise, I was expecting another H-44)

It doesn't have an A/M switch, though, so I can't use it except wide open on the Pentax, since the adapters don't have a flange to hold the pin. Is it easy to modify this lens to be a manual lens? Or should I just get an adapter with a flange and use it on the Canon (no IS) or Oly (smaller crop)?

[themoleman342]

I'm not sure how the pin mechanism is set up exactly. There is always the permanent solution of gluing it down.

[dr.volkan]

i have just bought mc zenitar-M2 what is the difference between M2 and M2s?