What's the logic in Russian lens names?

[pvdhaar]

some recent posts here got me wondering..

I see references to Jupiter lenses like J-3, J-6, J-8, J-9, J-11 and J-12. I've already figured out that they're not all the same aperture, but they're also not all the same focal length.

Amazingly so there seem to be no J-2, J-4, J-5.

Has anyone ever figured out where the numbering comes from?

[ZeissFan]

Not an answer, but the current trend seems to be to add as many initials as possible. I guess that imparts a sense of quality or justification for astronomical prices.

Regarding the Soviet names, perhaps it's because all factories were run by government bureaucrats, and I think bureucrats haven't been known for creative thinking.

[back alley]

"...and I think bureucrats haven't been known for creative thinking..."

ouch! glad i'm not a government bureaucrat.
of course i have to agree with you...

joe

[mikeb380]

Originally Posted by pvdhaar

some recent posts here got me wondering..

I see references to Jupiter lenses like J-3, J-6, J-8, J-9, J-11 and J-12. I've already figured out that they're not all the same aperture, but they're also not all the same focal length.

Amazingly so there seem to be no J-2, J-4, J-5.

Has anyone ever figured out where the numbering comes from?

The numbers are model or sequence numbers. Just as in Aircraft for the armed forces, the missing numbers represent lenses which were under design and dropped. ie F8 and then jump to F11 the F9 and F10 never got off the drawing board. ( just picking numbers out of the air)

[ErnestoJL]

The names (I guess) are assigned to a particular group of lenses:
All Jupiter named lenses are copies of pre war Zeiss designs, then the numbering would be assigned either by project date or by the project group who "redesigned" it.

Leitz designed lenses were also copied, but none of them was named Jupiter (instead they were called Industar). Jupiters were also fitted to Zorkis and FEDs redesigning the mount, but no Industars were made in Contax/Kiev mount.

Perhaps some of the missing numbers (J2; J4 or J5) were originally assigned to lenses which the soviets dropped: collapsible Tessar 2.8 and 3.5 and Sonnar 2 (which AFAIK were never made in the USSR), or versions of same lens in another mount.

Ernesto

[xayraa33]

Industars are a Zeiss Tessar design also.

[ZorkiKat]

Originally Posted by ErnestoJL

Leitz designed lenses were also copied, but none of them was named Jupiter (instead they were called Industar). Jupiters were also fitted to Zorkis and FEDs redesigning the mount, but no Industars were made in Contax/Kiev mount.



Ernesto

As xayraa33 mentioned, the Industar were based on the Zeiss Tessar. The Industar line were all Tessar-triplet types. There seems to be no Soviet lens which was copied from any Leitz design (maybe the Soviets had finer tastes and knew better ), the only elements 'borrowed' from Leitz are the collapsible barrels of the Industar, the 39mm lens mount, and the Leica II derived bodies, shutters, and rangefinders of the FED and Zorki.

Aside from "Industar", there were other Soviet lenses whose names don't have any cosmic connections: "Triplet" (on Lubitel, Smena, Vilija), "Ortagoz" (on Fotokor), "Tair" (telephoto or long focus lenses), "Mir" (unless the cosmonaut crafts are considered), FED (Industar which were never labelled as Industar), "Peleng", "Arsat" (Mir or Vega rebadged, from Arsenal), "Minitar", "Korsar", "Volna", "Granit" (zoom), "Zenitar" (non-Sonnar derived or modified 50mms for Zenit SLRs), "MTO" ('Maksutov Tele Objektiv? after the designer?), "Kalejnar" (for Kiev 6x6 and 35mm SLRs), etc.
...and perhaps many more.
Jay

[xayraa33]

how about the Russar ?, this was suppose to be a total Russian design.

[physiognomy]

Originally Posted by ZorkiKat

As xayraa33 mentioned, the Industar were based on the Zeiss Tessar. The Industar line were all Tessar-triplet types.

I thought that all Tessars were 4 element designs? The Zeiss triplets I know of are the Triotar lenses on cameras like the early Rolleicords & Rollei B35...

Tessar link (click)

Peter

[Michael I.]

all the industars(including LF) are derived from tessars
jupiters from sonnars(I think)

russar is considered to be a russian design - it was used in aerial cameras long before it was mounted on RF(I've seen one in a '38 catalogue!)

[ferider]

OK, Just for reference:

Russar: 20/5.6
Orion: 28/6 (Wide-Field Ektar or 28/6.3 Hektor?)
Fed 28/4.5 (?)
J-3: 50/1.5 (Sonnar)
J-6: 180/2.8 (Sonnar, SLR only?)
J-8: 50/2 (Sonnar)
J-9: 85/2 (Sonnar)
J-11: 135/4 (Sonnar)
J-12: 35/2.8 (Biogon)
Industar: 50-55/2.8-3.5 (Tessars and/or modifications)
Helios: 50-85 (f down to 85/1.5, Biotar)
Other Elmar copies, like 100/5.9 macro

I must have missed other lenses ...

Roland.

PS: 10:58 PST: trying to keep the table up to date as the thread continues ...

[ZorkiKat]

Originally Posted by physiognomy

I thought that all Tessars were 4 element designs? The Zeiss triplets I know of are the Triotar lenses on cameras like the early Rolleicords & Rollei B35...

Tessar link (click)

Peter

I was expecting this sort of thing

"Triplet" in many references do not necessarily describe the number of elements, but rather the lens design, ie, three "working" groups. Many writers classified the Tessar as a triplet-type lens. For instance, the "Leica Manual" 12th edition by Morgan & Morgan described the Elmar as a 'triplet' type. Triplets, whether three or four-element types do the same thing, in as far as correcting aberrations is concerned, with a three step action described by some as 'converge-diverge-converge'. In a Tessar, the third and fourth lens elements are joined to work as one.

There are of course the three-element triplets and the 4-element Tessar "triplet" types. Has anyone encountered the term 'quadruplets' for describing a type of anastigmat with four elements?

[VinceC]

Roland,
The Orion is f/6.

(And it's Leitz-equivalent was the 28/6.3 Hektor).

[ZorkiKat]

Originally Posted by ferider

OK, Just for reference:


And as said above Industars are Tessar variants. There are also Elmar copies (the Elmar itself a derivative of the Tessar). There is also a a 100mm Fed macro lens.

I must have missed other lenses ...

Roland.

One marked difference which make 50mmIndustar not exactly Elmar 50mm is the position of the diaphragm. The Industar has its aperture in the same place as where the classic Tessar have it, ie, between the 2nd and 3rd groups. The Elmar 50mm have their aperture blades placed after the first (forward) group. The Elmar 90mm, though, have the blades positioned according to the original Tessar configuration as well.

[xayraa33]

the Zeiss Tessar was a Paul Rudoph design from 1902 that actually evolved from his 1890 Anastigmat design.
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A100537AB...256D01002B5E45

[ferider]

Originally Posted by VinceC

Roland,
The Orion is f/6.

(And it's Leitz-equivalent was the 28/6.3 Hektor).

Thanks, Vince. Corrected the table.

Roland.

[ferider]

There are also the Helios lenses that are Biotar copies.

[VinceC]

FED also made a 28mm f/4.5 lens during World War II. It's just marked FED, with no particular name.

[mikeb380]

Originally Posted by ZorkiKat

"Zenitar" (non-Sonnar derived or modified 50mms for Zenit SLRs), "MTO" ('Maksutov Tele Objektiv? after the designer?), "Kalejnar" (for Kiev 6x6 and 35mm SLRs), etc.
...and perhaps many more.
Jay

Actually you are over simplifying, the zenitar is more than a 50mm lens for the zenit. Zenitar make various focal length lenses and for more cameras. I have a zenitar 16mm f2.8 on my 300D and they are available in many other mounts. I think Zenitar also made lenses for the 6x6 cameras. Vega was also a lens for 6x6. I think the zenitar WA are Russian designs, not copied. Same for the Peleng WA 8mm lens. Maksutov was the designer of the Maksutov Cassegrain telescope which was an advance from the Schmidt Cassegrain. There is not ( to my knowledge) a maksutov russian lens. I think the M in MTO is for mirror.

The 16mm Zenitar is a fish eye with 180 degree coverage in a rectangular format. The Peleng 8mm is also a 180 degree coverage but in a circular format. I've had my 16mm for over a year and I really like it. The coating is excellent and does a great job of combatting flare and distortion is so little I can't detect it.

Also Jupiter build a j36v and a J36B 250mm lens for 6x6 cameras, the v for the Kiev 88 and the B for the Kiev 6 and 60, etc. Tair make a 133 mm lens for the Zenit and a 300mm lens for the 6x6 formats. From what I've read, the Tair 300mm is a pretty good lens as are the J36s. I want one of the 250s to mount on my 3ooD, and of course on my Kiev 88cc. There are other lenses not touched on here, such as a 150, a 200, amd a Jupiter J9 85mm f2 in a 42mm screw mount ( pentax) There are also lenses in Nikon mount and as I said earlier there are converters to use lenses on different bodies. I can use the 85mm on either my 300D or my canon F1. It does a good job on the 300D, haven't had a chance to shoot it on the F1 yet.

[ZorkiKat]

Originally Posted by mikeb380

Actually you are over simplifying, the zenitar is more than a 50mm lens for the zenit.

...Also Jupiter build a j36v and a J36B 250mm lens for 6x6 cameras, the v for the Kiev 88 and the B for the Kiev 6 and 60, etc.....

The enumeration was not necessarily meant to define the focal lengths which a particular lens name would have. The 50mm was meant to be an example of the several FLs which lenses named 'Zenitar' in M42 and Zenit K mounts would have. The post in question simply enumerated the non-cosmic names used by other Soviet lenses.

....Maksutov was the designer of the Maksutov Cassegrain telescope which was an advance from the Schmidt Cassegrain. ... I think the M in MTO is for mirror.

M in MTO is "Maksutov", after its inventor. See these pages:

http://www.telescope-service.com/maksutovs/MTO/MTO.html
http://www.pauck.de/marco/photo/stuff/mto/mto.html
http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/mto-1000.html

According to the KMZ Zenit (maker of the MTO) site, the letters "MTO" stands for "Максутова Теле-Объектив" (Maksutov Tele-objektiv=Maksutov Tele lens) or "Менисковый Теле-Объектив" (Meniskoviy Tele-Objektiv=menicus tele lens?). Definitely not mirror. Mirror in russian is зеркало.
The MTO CAT lens is virtually the same CAT telescope by principle, albeit with a camera mount, instead of an eyepiece on the other end.

There is not ( to my knowledge) a maksutov russian lens.

KMZ made Maksutov Tele-objektiv in their factories since 1958. That would make this Maksutov lens Russian, wouldn't it?

Zenitar make various focal length lenses and for more cameras. ...
...Also Jupiter build a j36v and a J36B 250mm lens for 6x6 cameras, the v for the Kiev 88 and the B for the Kiev 6 and 60, etc.....

And Zenitar do not make lenses. The Zenitar is a lens which KMZ and, perhaps other factories made/ make.

Likewise, Jupiter did not make lenses. Jupiter is the name given to various lenses of various focal lengths made for various camera formats in various camera mounts made by various optical factories- eg, KMZ, Arsenal, Lytkarino, etc.

[mikeb380]

Zorki, thank you. Looks as though I shoved my big foot in my mouth. I've learned a bit from you and I guess that's the good part of making a mistake if you let yourself learn. I just wish the Zenit site had some english. I can spell out a little Russian but not enough thati it makes sense to me. I did bookmark those pages and will be going back to them. Maybe I can get my nephew to read the zenit page to me.
Michael

[ErnestoJL]

Jay:
Thank you for the correction.
I was convinced, as well as many other people here (in AR) that Industars are Elmar copies. Physicasl similarities help to think that way.
Thinking in a simple way, it would be logical if the russians "borrowed" some basic design from Leitz, why no to do the same with lenses?.
But from a practical point of view (and they were), having all the Zeiss info and tooling at hand, they simply placed the lens in a different barrel/mount.

Cheers

Ernesto

[varjag]

Russar is named after Mr. Rusinov, who invented that particular optical design.

Korsar name is considered an insider joke by Arsenal engineers. At the time of its introduction in 1980s Mr. Korsakov was the chief bureaucrat in Soviet optical industry.

[xayraa33]

Originally Posted by ErnestoJL

Jay:
Thank you for the correction.
I was convinced, as well as many other people here (in AR) that Industars are Elmar copies. Physicasl similarities help to think that way.
Thinking in a simple way, it would be logical if the russians "borrowed" some basic design from Leitz, why no to do the same with lenses?.
But from a practical point of view (and they were), having all the Zeiss info and tooling at hand, they simply placed the lens in a different barrel/mount.

Cheers

Ernesto

I guess alot of people are fooled into thinking Industars are direct Elmar copies because the collapsable ones look so much like 50mm Elmars.

[arothaus]

Originally Posted by VinceC

Roland,
The Orion is f/6.

(And it's Leitz-equivalent was the 28/6.3 Hektor).

Hello,

the Orion-15 is a copy from the post war 4/25mm (sic!) CZJ Topogon. Both have a symmetric design with 4 elements.

The prewar 4,5/28mm FED lens has got 6 elements (regarding to Princelle). I guess it is a copy of the Leitz 6,3/28 Hektor.

Andreas