My most special lens

[Krosya]

Well, I decided to spend some time with a lens that is very special to me - my very first RF lens EVER - Industar-22. I think it's from 1950s. Still works great, smooth. Glass is full of tiny cleanning marks, yet I don't see it in pictures, unless I have sun in a frame.
It's been a while since I got this baby out, as It's a slower lens - f3.5 and I mostly prefer faster ones. but it's tiny size is really something I like a lot about collapsable lenses.
I have many other lenses that are better, faster, easier to handle, yet I know - this - I will never get rid of this lens. Even if I have to sell all of the others. Sentimental? - yes! And it can hold it's own too - with (from what I understand) it's Tessar formula:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2439664758_00eacb1077_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/2439664850_84353c49cc_o.jpg

both pics at f3.5

[robin a]

Hi,one can't argue with those results! Very nice..............Robin

[xayraa33]

Wow, those are nice photos.
Lovely crisp centre, with that right amount of softness at the edge of the frame.
I can see why you would never sell that lens.
The I-22 is the most Elmar-ish lens the Soviets made.

[Brian Sweeney]

Beautiful photographs, and a very nice lens. I'll have to get past my J3's some day!

[hans voralberg]

Wow very saturated, and lovely ;D

[Krosya]

Thank you everyone for your comments. It's funny how sometimes such a simple lens can be so satisfying.

[sebastel]

i also learned to like tessar type lens ... :-)
have a lot of fun!

[leica M2 fan]

Those pictures are outstanding, I can see why you like it! I have the I-50 iteration and like it very much, very good lenses.

[ruben]

Really really outstanding pics.

Time to reveal a little secret. There is a place in my heart for the Fed 2 models, mostly because of these collapsibles. But I never imagined such high levels of performance. Hmmmmmm.

But it is precisely the lens, not suited for hoods what I don't understand. Obviously if you put any kind of hood you will not be able to comfortably manipulate the f/stops scale. And for me, not using any hood in a lens is the biggest blasphemy I cannot overcome.

Can any one rescue me ?

Cheers,
Ruben

[xayraa33]

make snap on lens hood.
snap it off to adjust the aperture and then put it back on the lens.
I made one out of a bottle cap and a cylindrical piece of aluminium covered in black tape.
it works.

[Krosya]

I don't use a hood on mine. In most situations it's just fine the way it is. But when I shoot against the sun here is what I get(rather cool effect if you ask me):

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/107/280031573_fba0fdf780_b.jpg

But if sun is not in a picture it works well for me without any hood:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/96/280035471_2f6658d9c5_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/111/280034550_ce6927d2b4_b.jpg

[xayraa33]

Very resourceful! Do you have a photograph of your handiwork? It sounds like a usable- and much cheaper solution.


Regards,

Alex.

here is the home made lens hood on the I 22

[xayraa33]

And here is a pic of the I-22 lens hood from the back showing the clip on plastic bottle cap part.

[oftheherd]

Those photos are nice. I really like number 2. Sharp and painterly, if that makes sense.

[ruben]

I don't use a hood on mine. In most situations it's just fine the way it is. But when I shoot against the sun here is what I get(rather cool effect if you ask me):

But if sun is not in a picture it works well for me without any hood:



Well, all these is very strange, and Rabbi Sweeney will have to intervene. The point is that to my experience and understanding, when you point a camera towards a sun agle that may strike the lens, even a hood will not be enough to save you from flare.

And here you come with all impunity, walking your uncoated lens nude amidst nature and with great results.

But the really interesting point is that the whole design of the collapsible Elmar shouts loud "no hood".

Strange, very strange.

Cheers,
Ruben

[Brian Sweeney]

No hood can stop flare if you are shooting into the Sun. A hood prevents Sunlight that is out of the field of view of the picture from straying into the optics.

I don't use a hood with the Elmar on the Leica or Tessar on the Contax. If I'm shooting into the sun, I shade it with my arm or top of the camera case. I saw that latter trick in a 1940's book called "35mm Technique". Shows how to hold the camera and use your Pinkies to position the top of the case as a lens hood.

That shot with the lens pointed into the sun is spectacular.

[dvdsince98]

Some very nice images here.

There's "something special" about these lenses don't you think? Something that's missing from more modern lenses on big name SLR's. I'm not saying that newer lenses are no good or anything but they do have a different look/feel. Something in the way that highlights are captured maybe? Hard to describe.

[ruben]

No hood can stop flare if you are shooting into the Sun. A hood prevents Sunlight that is out of the field of view of the picture from straying into the optics.

I don't use a hood with the Elmar on the Leica or Tessar on the Contax. If I'm shooting into the sun, I shade it with my arm or top of the camera case. I saw that latter trick in a 1940's book called "35mm Technique". Shows how to hold the camera and use your Pinkies to position the top of the case as a lens hood.

That shot with the lens pointed into the sun is spectacular.

Hi Brian,

In order to follow you better let's agree that none of us is speaking about pointing the camera towards the sun.

Now how these non coated lenses achieve these results ?

Cheers,
Ruben

[xayraa33]

the Leitz universal lens hood, Fikus, is no better at the aperture ring access on the Elmar than the home made lens hood.
I know that Leitz had a dedicated Elmar 50mm lens hood that one could manipulate the aperture control from the outside.

[andrealed]

The standard hood for elmar is easy to use. You can change the aperture quite simply with your fingertip.

[ruben]

The standard hood for elmar is easy to use. You can change the aperture quite simply with your fingertip.

Once I made my own home made. Compared to the original I can better understand why mine was not so comfortable.

The original is short and slightly conical, the outer side seems to be slightly smaller than the basis. By these way you can have a shorter hood shadowing as a larger conventional one.

And by having it short, the access of our finger becomes easier.
Clever.

Cheers,
Ruben

[ruben]

Hi Krosya,

Would it be fair to say that with such a lens you take into more special consideration the light direction as another technical factor like speed and aperture ? I notice that in you first BW photo here you seem to downward the camera a bit, while in the other BW images the sun is by your side or slightly behind.

But what would happen in a street environment full of reflections from every side?

Cheers,
Ruben

[Krosya]

Hi Ruben,
Well, I'm not really sure how this lens would react under those conditions. With any lens I try to consider different factors, like reflections, direction of the sun, etc. So, yes, it is possible that it wouldnt handle some things as well as a new lens with modern coating. Yet so far I didn't come across that particular situation or didint notice it.
So, I can't say that I take more consideration with this lens vs others. I think I do it more or less on the same level. If I get the shot - good, if not - oh well.
Hope this answers your question.

[Kapa]

I got my first Fed 2 quite recently- in fact I haven't got round to figuring out what version (sn: 174746). It came with the Fed 50 f3.5 collapsable lens, plus a B+W 36 UV filter and Omag K36 lens hood. It is a bit of a pain having to take off filter "and" hood to change aperture....

[Highway 61]

the Leitz universal lens hood, Fikus, is no better at the aperture ring access on the Elmar than the home made lens hood.
I know that Leitz had a dedicated Elmar 50mm lens hood that one could manipulate the aperture control from the outside.
It's the Leitz VALOO.

It was primarily a darkroom accessory, not an actual hood. The Elmar 50/3.5 was often used as an enlarger lens. Problem, the aperture setting dot, concentric to the front lens element, was even more a *pita* to use with the Elmar fitted vertically under the enlarger platine, than what it was with the Elmar casually mounted on a Barnack Leica.

Hence the VALOO design, with that clever trick of driving the Elmar aperture setting dot from the hood itself thanks to a right-angle rotating cam and a ring on the hood to drive the cam.

Then, Elmar owners and users figured out, that the VALOO was a very capable lens hood for in-the-field picture taking, too. What it is, no doubt.

Although being (frankly said, no pun intended) plain ugly... :p

The Elmar 50/3.5 regular hood is the Leitz FISON.

Really really outstanding pics.

Time to reveal a little secret. There is a place in my heart for the Fed 2 models, mostly because of these collapsibles. But I never imagined such high levels of performance. Hmmmmmm.

But it is precisely the lens, not suited for hoods what I don't understand. Obviously if you put any kind of hood you will not be able to comfortably manipulate the f/stops scale. And for me, not using any hood in a lens is the biggest blasphemy I cannot overcome.

Can any one rescue me ?
Hey, from what I've read recently, you don't have a FED or Zorki etc, but a Kiev, right ?

Hmmm... just look at eBay item 260234622475.

Here you have a great chance to get both, and more. I mean, a lens that isn't coated, which is collapsible, and which will fit the camera you already have.

Plus, it's up for sale by a FSU stuff seller... ;)

Neat, isn't it ?

:)

[mh2000]

The I-22 is a coated lens.

Hi Brian,
Now how these non coated lenses achieve these results ?