PDA

View Full Version : Which version?


dll927
12-30-2004, 13:18
Looking at Zorki 5s and 6s on eBay, it seems apparent that the Industar-50 lens came in both collapsible and non-collapsible versions. Various shots show one or the other version.

Three questions:

1) Is there any difference - that is to say, is there reason to prefer one version over the other?

2) Since I'm fairly new at the Zorki game, what other lenses come in these two versions?

3) Anyone have a clue as to how these compare with the Jupiter 8 lens, which seems to have been standard on other models of Zorki?

It seems rather interesting that Zorki 3s usually came with the Jupiter (f2) lens while later models had an f3.5 lens. Assuming they are essentially interchangeable, was this a marketing ploy to lower the price of the camera?

Roman
12-30-2004, 13:45
ad 1) The rigid version of the I-50 is the 'ugly duckling' of Russian lenses, even in black it looks rather weird; theoretically, the rigid version might be slightly better, since there cannot be any problems related to loose extension tubes... Since the only advantage of the I-50 over other Industars or Jupiters is the size of the collapsible version, getting a rigid one does not make a whole lot of sense to me.

ad 2) I think there was a very rare rigid version of the I-22, as well (not sure...).

ad 3) The LTM industars are all Tessar clones, whereas the Jupiter 8 is a Sonnar clone - both have the various advantages and disadvantages of their designs:
The Tessar types can be rather sharp (esp. in the center, and esp. stopped down to around f/8), and are pretty flare resistant (for their age); thier typical bokeh is acceptable, but not great (though tastes differ in this field): blotchy, outlines of out-of-focus objects are still recognisable.
The Sonnar-type Jupiter-8 is faster (f/2 vs. the f/2.8 and f/3.5 Tessar-type Industars), is much more flare prone, and can be very sharp (except wide-open), and has much superior bokeh (really smooth, creamy out-of-focus area, everything vanishes in a blur).
Since they are all so cheap, you might get one each of the following types (my personal favorites) for their singular qualities:
I-22 or I-50 collapsible for their size on a carry-at-all-times camera;
I-61 L/D (with lanthanum glass) for its superior contrast and high subjective sharpness as a general purpose lens;
and Jupiter-8 for its speed (f/2) and super-smooth bokeh as an available-light and portrait lens.

Roman (who has 4 J-8s, 2 I-61 L/Ds, 2 I-22 collapsibles, 2 rigid I-50s and a sack full of I-26m s for reference)

rick oleson
12-30-2004, 14:36
As Roman says, tastes vary. For me, though the Jupiter/Sonnar is surely a sharper lens, the atmosphere and bokeh of the Industars is something I find extremely attractive, and that I don't see in Tessars.... I can't put my finger on it but I like the I22 and I50 a lot.

I don't know if these photo links will work or not - they're not mine, but from a photo.net discussion .... these were shot with a Fed and an I26 f/2.8 lens, which looks more like the 3.5s to me than the results I've gotten with my own f/2.8 Industar:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/image?bboard_upload_id=21122284

http://www.photo.net/bboard/image?bboard_upload_id=21122084

rick :)=

jon_flanders
01-02-2005, 18:25
I just got an Industar 61l/D for my Fed 2. I think it is pretty good, see attached shot, but not all that much different than the 26.

Don't have a 3.5 so can't comment on that. I have a J8 with the Zorki 4, also a very nice lens. Roman is much more an authority on these issues.

The cool thing about the Fed 2 is that it looks and feels great to carry around, and there are no electronics to worry about. Just grab it and go, and maybe get a picture that you would have missed on a day you wouldn't have let your Canon freeze or bake in the car.

Jon Flanders

Laika
01-02-2005, 21:51
1) Is there any difference - that is to say, is there reason to prefer one version over the other?

Optically they are the same (rigid ver collapsible) but to look at they are worlds apart, I really like the collapsible versions but the rigids are... kinda ugly. I have most of the versions but the rigids donít make it off the shelf very often.

2) Since I'm fairly new at the Zorki game, what other lenses come in these two versions?

Zorki's were sold with Ind-22, Ind-50 & J8 ... Not with the FED lenses like the Ind-26 & Ind-61

3) Anyone have a clue as to how these compare with the Jupiter 8 lens, which seems to have been standard on other models of Zorki?

I think the J8 is the best all round Soviet 50mm, the Ind-61 L/D is the sharpest and has the most contrast (can be too much for some) and the Ind-50 is very good also but the slowest of the bunch (f3.5)Ö. IMO all of the Soviet lenses are good enough to produce great photos if the photographer does his part.

It seems rather interesting that Zorki 3s usually came with the Jupiter (f2) lens while later models had an f3.5 lens. Assuming they are essentially interchangeable, was this a marketing ploy to lower the price of the camera?

I see the Z3/J8 as the peak of the Zorki line, later models often have the cheaper to produce f3.5 lenses, painted on makings instead of engravings and late models like the Z6 lack the slow speed settings.

pshinkaw
01-03-2005, 10:32
I'm not sure that "marketing" was a concept employed in the USSR. Diversifying the product by offering it with more than one lens might have been related to meeting production goals. Not enough Jupiter-8's? Start shipping Industar-50's Gospodin!

-Paul