Why are Industar lenses so cheap?

[andyw]

As per title really. I have seen some 50-2 and 61 lenses on ebay for silly cheap money. What's wrong with them?

[themoleman342]

They're actually fantastic lenses. Reliable Tessar designs. Demand is just much lower than the supply. They were produced in the millions and there are 'better' options.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

[andyw]

Thanks. I have looked and there are big differences in image quality between different users. I think I'll leave it

[WolverineX]

industar 61 L/Z je sharp little lens, with small minimum focusing distance, i can recommend it, just be careful not to mistake it for L/D version in m39 mount

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Industar_61

[Sevo]

The Soviets obviously read in some Western camera rag that the average amateur has three lenses to each body, and to bring the Soviet workers closer to Western standards, it was decreed that the production of 50mm Industar lenses and J-8's has to outnumber that of bodies by factor three...

Just kidding. The USSR was more successful at meeting their lens plans than at meeting the corresponding body plans - and while the lenses were good, many of the bodies were of lousy quality and have perished since then, so that we now have lenses outnumbering bodies by bizarre dimensions. With some sellers, you have to pay extra if you want the body with a body cap rather than a Industar (or J-8M, in the case of Kievs).

Sevo

[Attila]

[Lloydy]

I've got the tiny 50-2 and I paid next to nothing for it, probably about £5 with a Zenit stuck on the back of it.

It's a lens I rarely see for sale at the regular camera fair, and they are cheapish there, maybe £15 to £20.

But it's a lens that people have stopped me in the street and asked me to sell them the lens. I could have easily quadrupled my investment, but what other lens can deliver so much for so little?

It's still in my collection, and at the moment on an old Practika.

[aoleg]

[aoleg]

[eeyore_nl]

[martinsmith99]

My 50-2 is a very sharp copy, my 50 is not bad. I also have the older 5cm and that is softer and vignettes, but has a great character about it.

I'd say grab one as they look great on a big DSLR.

[RioRico]

I had some L39 Industars that I bought a couple years ago, didn't use (not the right camera), and sold a few months ago, for zero profit. The I-26-M's and an I-61 were around US$20, the I-61-L/D's were around US$12. I actually made money on a J-8 -- bought for US$25, sold for US$41.

I've had two I-50's, a sticky alu M39 that I bought for US$14 shipped and sold for US$25, which paid for it's replacement, a smooth black M42 I-50-2. Both were great for macros on tubes, quite usable for general photography, and TINY! At 60g (M39) and 70g (M42) the only other I have that's so light is an Enna Sandmar 35/4.5 (Argus C3 mount, 60g). Even the Meyer Helioplan 40/4.5 (Exaklta mount, 100g) seems large in comparison. Only a few non-focusing enlarger lenses are in the same neighborhood.

Speaking of EL's, the Industar-58U 75/3.5 enlarger (or projector?) lens is quite strange. It's in trumpet-shaped hood (turn the hood to change the aperture) that weighs 470g. Mine cost US$21; I've set it in a 1m fixed-focus mount for close portraits. A one-trick pony, but it turns that trick well.

[pat donnelly]

It depends on access whether lenses are plentiful or not. If they are regarded as terribly common and cheap no one has any interest in them, right!?

But those things that are undervalued, while being acknowledged as excellent and compact, often disappear as they are cheap, until one day they are no longer so cheap!

I should declare an interest. I bought 30 L/D's for $300, inc postage, from Ukraine. I got 33! Vendor details elsewhere on this site! I have about ten of these from other sources and maybe 25 44s of all types, mainly M42s. Overkill? Sure, but they will more than hold their value.

I also get to spend long evenings trying to organize to test them all. When they do appear on the market, I may be dead or else they will be good but not quite as good as the ones I retain!

Slime alert! You have just encountered the thinkings of a warped mind. You may need counselling!

These lenses are fabulous value! Please do not buy them until I have finished cornering the market! I can't resist them.

I ..... need ...... professional .... help!

[pat donnelly]

Did I forget to say that the 61 is also a macro lens? On a converter, the threading allows more mag.

When all cameras are mirrorless, then we will be looking for suitable manual lenses.

Now do you anyone with some to spare??????

[uhoh7]

I've been acumulating all sorts of glass for my little nex-5.

Any mount works so there are no limits.

Once I finished with a nice selection of SLR glass, I thought I was done, but then decided I needed to get an RF set--for extreme stealth.

My big plunge was the CV 35 skopar which I found almost new for 250.00

I wanted a light sharp 50ish. But I was not going to spend the big bucks.

So I read up and finally settled on what looks like a good copy of the I-61 L/D for 16 bucks + 20 shipping.

I won't see it for weeks, but I'm as excited about it as much as I have been about any of my fancier lenses.

129grams!!

I confess I also crave a serenar 50 f1.8--just saw a sweet one go for 150.

But my little Koncia AR 50 1.8 is so small and light it can be my fast RF lens for now. Also very cheap and pretty sharp.

[pat donnelly]

I use an ep-1, so c mount lenses are my favourite, as they are lighter still. Some of the telephoto c mount lenses may cover the NEX sensor?

The Ukraine/Russian RF lenses do seem to offer excellent bang for the buck. The mirror-less designs will increase demand for them and prices are rising already. The Sony Nex seems to be an advance on the Oly and now we have the Pana GH2.

Many former Soviet Union, FSU, lenses have never been used!

[andyw]

[LittleAlex]

[pat donnelly]

I think some people are talking their book!

The 61 is a macro lens, but not really magnifying very large in normal rf use. On an ep1, the thread will enable the user to focus even more closely as the lens goes away from the body, without any bellows or rings etc. I was using a 25mm cosmicar c mount the other day and did this to close focus to half the normal distance.

The L/D is the smaller version and suits modern mania for micro and is more discreet, unless in the jazzy silver black versions!

The Industar 50 is also a very compact lens, far more so than the excellent Helios 44. The loss of a stop is no handicap, as for street work it will be stopped down anyway. In fact, the slower the lens the more attractive it is as size and modern iso ranges make it moire usable than hereto.

Congrats on the purchase!

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

[shauttra]

In Russia and eastern Europe nobody will pay big money for russien optics. All cameras and lenses are available for some 10-30 USD, with exceptions some rare or fast lens...

[pat donnelly]

Laurentiu

Thanks!

But I did say it was not as good a macro as some?

[aptem59]

Industar lens is cheap, because they produced with a very large number in the USSR.
Second, quality may be diffrent from one lens to another.

[pat donnelly]

True!

Sadly, it is best to buy two or three, test and recycle with pics!