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

Volna 3?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:18 pm    Post subject: Volna 3? Reply with quote
Voe's great pics of Sydney started me thinking again about the Volna-3 2.8/80mm for MF. Does anyone know how it compares to the Volna-9 ?


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a Volna-3, but not an adapter for it, so can't really give much of an opinion of it.
Some rough and ready shots with it held in front of the camera throat, it looks ok. I'll nip out and take some more later.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's a completely different lens, Peter.
The Volna-3 is an 80mm standard lens for medium format.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Right, but if Peter manages it to find an adapter, it could be a possible solution for his 80mm lens gap. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I already have a P6/EOS and a P6/M42 adapter. I realised it was an MF lens, I thought I mentioned that. I wanted to know if the image quality is equal to the V9


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
I already have a P6/EOS and a P6/M42 adapter. I realised it was an MF lens, I thought I mentioned that. I wanted to know if the image quality is equal to the V9


It's a very different lens.
First, it's a telephoto lens (once mounted on a 135 or APS-C camera)
Then, the optical rendition is different. Volna-9 has a little glare wide open, is very saturated, the sharpness is good but it still also keeps a good volume to the objects.
The Volna-3 is a bit soft wide open, very sharp stopped down, normal saturation. it looks to me like a more standard lens than the Volna-9. But of course this is my personal feeling with the lens. Optically it's certainly an adequate lens, so it's really up to the personal liking.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
I already have a P6/EOS and a P6/M42 adapter.

Oh, good!

Follow these links...
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m221/subsilla/2007_3/korvat.jpg
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m221/subsilla/2007_3/vikaportti.jpg
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m221/subsilla/2007_7/sienii2.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3625368-lg.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/17/93668395_40bda1c31a.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/125/430298918_383b7687ee.jpg?v=0
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/50/143350504_2c9b18e4cd.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3244/2296415107_76b8c8ce7f.jpg?v=0

All shot with a Volna-3. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
See

http://www.pentaconsix.com/StandardLens.htm


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
peterqd wrote:
I already have a P6/EOS and a P6/M42 adapter. I realised it was an MF lens, I thought I mentioned that. I wanted to know if the image quality is equal to the V9


It's a very different lens.
First, it's a telephoto lens (once mounted on a 135 or APS-C camera)
Then, the optical rendition is different. Volna-9 has a little glare wide open, is very saturated, the sharpness is good but it still also keeps a good volume to the objects.
The Volna-3 is a bit soft wide open, very sharp stopped down, normal saturation. it looks to me like a more standard lens than the Volna-9. But of course this is my personal feeling with the lens. Optically it's certainly an adequate lens, so it's really up to the personal liking.

Thanks. It sounds similar to the Vega12, my copy of which is VERY soft and glowing wide open and sharp stopped down. But I think there is a defect as the contrast is very poor and it's very flare prone. Everything looks fine but I have a feeling the coating might have been polished off the front element.

There's a V3 going in 3 days time, £49.99 with an EOS adapter and no bids yet. I don't trust the seller so I won't go for this one, but is this a fair price? Click here to see on Ebay


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
50 pounds for a Volna-3 + adapter is a good price

(if it was lens alone I would have judged it a bit pricey)


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks, that's useful info.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's some pics today from the Volna-3. Turned out it fits into the P6 adapter, but has to be hand-held and foot-zoomed.

At f8


At f2.8. Closest focus is 0.6m.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow Dave, I like that. So sharp and the colours are superb.

Thanks for the links Carsten. Several of them are the kind of picture I take a lot of in my job so I can judge them easily, and I really like what I see, especially this one. Look how sharp it is! I guess the square format means it was taken with a MF camera, but it would give similar results on any camera wouldn't it?


PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
Look how sharp it is! I guess the square format means it was taken with a MF camera, but it would give similar results on any camera wouldn't it?


Not necessarily. The sheer size of the negative in medium format counts a lot in the final result. The smoothness of tonal gradations and the feeling of overall sharpness can be much higher on a picture carefully taken on a medium format camera than on a smaller format camera (including multi megabucks "full frame" digital cameras).

For example, check this picture (warning 5.9MB download), which was taken (not by me) with a 6x9 Fuji camera equipped with an ultrawide 50mm lens (same field of view as a 21mm lens on a 35mm camera). Sharpness is not optimal as the picture was taken at F/32, so there is a fair amount of diffraction, and it was scanned with a consumer grade flatbed scanner (Epson 4990) but I don't think you can take a picture that looks as good with any 24x36 camera equipped with a 21mm lens!

Cheers!

Abbazz
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1