[Jools]

Thought about posting this in the Soviet Lenses Club but hoping the general lens folks will have some info.

About to plunge into the Industar 50-2 f3.5 (Russian Pancake) and the Industar 61 L/Z 50mm f2.8 macro. Read a few threads here on PF and looked around on the internet (MFLenses.com best of the rest).
Just wondering if anybody has examples or experience with either of these relatively inexpensive but interesting lenses?
I am looking to buy both at the same time to save shipping charges and time.

[Lloydy]

I've got an Industar 50-2, and it's an interesting little lens. I haven't spent a great deal of time with it yet but here's a couple of pictures from my first try with it.







It's a bit of a fiddle to use initially, but once you get used to the small size and layout it's a nice lens to use.

I need to do a shootout with this and the Helios 44M and 44-2 that I've got.

[Jools]

Lloydy, thanks for the photos. I am amazed at its sharpness. And that seems to conform with other images I have seen.
Lens looks nice on the K20d as well.

[Ira]

The Helioses are amazing works of art with the most distinct and funky bokeh on earth.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

and the Industar 61 L/Z 50mm f2.8 macro.

The I61 L/Z is a close-focusing lens, but not a real macro lens. I doubt it reaches even 1:2. Not saying you shouldn't get it - I like all Russian lenses I tried, but don't expect an actual macro lens.

[RioRico]

My I61s and I26s are ALL macro lenses, because they're all LTM mount and are only good at around 8 inches. On 50mm of tubes, working distance is about 3 inches. I usually use my I50 (M39 but with Pentax register, luckily) on tubes; I might as well leave the Jupiter-8 50/2 and the I26s and I61s on tubes too, and stop deluding myself that I can ever use them otherwise. (No, you may NOT ask how I ended up with two I26s and three I61s -- average cost, US$18 each.)

I am not certain about J8, I26, I61 optics, but I've read that the cheap I50 is apochromatic, highly color-corrected, and I certainly get nice crisp images with it, when I bother. Now that I have an old MacTak 50/4, with a Tak 50/1.7 on the way, I don't bother so often. Sans tubes, the I50's close focus is only .65m. Nominally, the J8 and I26 and I61 are all worse, with close focus of 1m. Most all my German and Japanese 50-55's focus rather closer than those, as does the Helios-44 58/2.

I've read many positive comments about the I50. I haven't seen any about the others, but I haven't looked. Anyway, a general warning about Russian lenses: some have M42 and M39 mounts with Pentax register, but many have L39/LTM mounts with Leica register. The x39s can be hard to distinguish -- until too late. Know what you're getting. Or get a FED or other Leica-clone body, for the mistakes. That FED-5 up on my shelf is just begging for film...

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Nominally, the J8 and I26 and I61 are all worse, with close focus of 1m.

I think the I26 only exists for rangefinders. On those cameras, close focusing below 1m doesn't make much sense because the rangefinder is not accurate at close distances. I expect this is also why your I61 has the 1m mfd.

There are versions of I61 in M42 mount that focus down to 0.3m - the L/Z one, for example. And the Volna focuses down to 0.24m and is designated as a 1:2 macro, which is why I made my previous comment.