View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:53 pm Post subject: How to find a good Industar-10 or Industar-22? |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
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
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, 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 |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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. In fact, I don't think I own any 50mm lenses sharper than my Industar-50s. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
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 |
|
|
fotomachi
Joined: 02 Feb 2008 Posts: 638 Location: Estados Unidos de las Esferas Ultraterrenales
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fotomachi wrote:
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 |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
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:
_________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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 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
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, 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 |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I have three Industar-22 RED P I did try only one that was stunning far better than cheap Leica Summar, Summitar. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
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:
_________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it!
Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Thu May 03, 2012 11:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
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
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
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 |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
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. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mo
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 Posts: 8979 Location: Australia
Expire: 2016-07-30
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
mo wrote:
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
Fuji XE-1,Pentax K-01,Panasonic G1,Panasonic G5,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 Takumar 2/58 Preset Takumar 2.8/105 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 CZJ Pancolar Exakta 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 Primagon 4.5/35 Telemegor 5.5/150 Angenieux 3.5/28 Angenieux 3,5/135 Y 2
Canon FL 58/1.2,Canon FL85/1.8,Canon FL 100/3.5,Canon SSC 2.8/100 ,Konica AR 100/2.8, Nikkor P 105/2.5
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
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. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
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? 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 |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
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
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, 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 |
|
|
Drack
Joined: 27 Feb 2011 Posts: 735 Location: Lithuania
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Drack wrote:
From what I have tried out of collapsible Russian lenses I`ve only got wonderful results. As I know up until 1964-5 when the Russians started releasing Industar`s 61 and later 61L/D the RF lens industry lost it`s quality in good lenses. However up until then basically every lens was made really well.
I think that the person who has tested the I-10 ( http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113110 ) might have a poorly repaired model. Very often , when an inexperienced repairman fails to center or clean the lenses properly you might not get the quality that the lens could actually produce.
Anyway . I still think that you could get at least a dozen Industars for the price as the elmar so why not go for it. You will find at least one that fits you needs _________________ I have many great Russian cameras and lenses for sale on my ebay account, please check it out: http://www.ebay.com/sch/piksius/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=25&_trksid=p3686
Forum members are olbigaded to a discount
DSLR: Pentax K-x + 18-55 kit + f4 35-75mm
Mirrorless : Samsung NX-20 + 18-55 kit
M42 lense: Helios 44-2 , Helios 44-3, Helios 44m , Tair 3 Phs , Mir-1B , Jupiter-37a, Industar 50-2, Industar 61 L/Z, Tlear-N .
Currently using:
Minolta X-700 + MD f1.7/50mm + Rokkor-X f2.8/28mm + MD f3.5 35-70mm MACRO
Zorki-4K + J-8 f2/50mm + J-12 f2.8/35mm
EXA 1A + CZJ Tessar f2.8/50mm |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Olivier
Joined: 18 Feb 2009 Posts: 5078 Location: France
Expire: 2015-08-06
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Olivier wrote:
Looking at photohistory.ru, I find the following resolutions :
I50 resolution for W (center / edge) : 38/22
I22 : 32/22
I10 : 30/18
Maybe Ian you could sell one of your industars to Forenseil ? _________________ Olivier - Moderator
Dslr : Olympus Pen E-P2 - Fujifilm X-Pro2 - Canon 5D MkII.
SLr and MF lenses : for feedback and helping people, cameras and lenses I own : full list here http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1442740.html#1442740 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|