[wolfiegirl]

Hi Riff! So glad you're enjoying it! Hrmm... what *is* with all this talk about Russian lenses??? Everyone's like obsessed!!

In an attempt to stop myself from trawling any longer I gave in last night and put the two dodgy lenses on my camera last night. I was really surprised that the fungus ridden ozunon 35-75 worked. It looked like it had gone through some wars and the front lens looked so dusty and tired.

And the Miranda 70-300.. wow! I got it to focus on this bitty thing I had hanging off a curtain from halfway across the room, at least 10 or so metres away. And it looks like a macro shot! And this is with hazey stuff on the inner lens!

Makes me wonder what all these other lenses rated 9+ are like!!!

I must say it's fascinating figuring out how these lenses work. It almost feels like cheating, going back to my kit lenses. What? I don't need to find the sweet spot where the picture comes into focus? What? I don't need to adjust the aperture so I can get a perfectly colour balanced photo? hrmmm....

[riff]

wolfiegirl,
I don't know anything about Russian lens! <shuffles toe around in the dirt>
I don't think there is a lens on the planet that someone here can't take a to die for shoot with.
Some buy lotto tickets some buy lens. I think there is a difference... isn't there.

I love wolves and am fortunate to live in an area that has the highest population of wolves in Canada. Unfortunately they are rarely see. hmmm maybe I need a longer lens. <sighs> I didn't wake up this morning thinking today was the day I'd admit to the world I need a longer lens.

I'm at the point where AF doesn't seem to all that and a bag of chips for most shoots.

Carry On Lensing!

[RioRico]

Hi Riff! So glad you're enjoying it! Hrmm... what *is* with all this talk about Russian lenses??? Everyone's like obsessed!!

Many of the Russian lenses are based on Zeiss designs and engineering. No surprise, since the Soviets hauled away some Zeiss factories (workers included) as WW2 booty. Later Soviet lenses were designed by VERY good mathematicians and engineers. Alas, camera manufacturing wasn't really up to outside standards, depending on how drunk the workers were. Kiev cameras, Hassy clones, generally must be rebuilt before they're usable.

Lens quality is usually pretty good though, and some are just gorgeous. And when supply isn't limited by Russian-Ukrainian cartels, prices are pretty low. Some of the justly famous FSU (Former Soviet Union) glass include the Helios, Jupiter, Mir, Tair, Zenitar, and Industar lenses.

WARNING: Some of these have odd mounts. Did you see what I posted about M39-L39-LTM threadmounts? These are all 39mm threads. Lenses meant for RFs (rangefinders) will fit standard M39-M42 or M39-PK adapters but WILL NOT WORK on your dSLR, except for extreme closeups. When considering an FSU lens, be sure it's specified to work with Pentax or Zenit cameras. If it's listed as being for Leica or FED cameras, avoid it.

Some of the Russian SLR lenses ARE built with standard PK mounts, no adapters needed. These may have K in their name, like my Zenitar-K2 16/2.8 fast fishy ultrawide. M42 lenses may have an M in the name, like my Helios-44M 58/2, a glorious cheap wonder. But when in doubt, ask the seller. And ask us. We know how to beat the truth out of them...

[wolfiegirl]

y'know Rico, the only good thing with all my bids atm is I'm getting outbid on practically everything! So my potential outlay of $500+ has now been reduced to $300 odd. Maybe this can just be a very scary lesson in 'only bid on what you need'? bwahahaha, oh who am I kidding? *fingers hover over 'place bid' button*

So you think most Russian lenses are on par with the Pentaxes? Innn-terrrrrrr-est-ing

I shudder to think how I'm sposed to remember/keep track of every lens ever made that could fit a Pentax. I want to try them ALLLLLL..... a person's mind could explode at the thousands of brands that are out there! Rico you're a fountain of knowledge!!

Oh, and Riff? Don't worrry, I won't tell. Anyway, birthday presents are exempt from the LBA count.. isn't that the rule? *snarf*

---

Last edited by wolfiegirl; 10-15-2011 at 04:15 PM.

[xjjohnno]

Soviet lenses, look here and make up your own mind wolfiegirl
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-clubs/31430-soviet-lenses-club.html

[wolfiegirl]

Thanks for the linky xjjohnno! *goes off to explore*

[RioRico]

So you think most Russian lenses are on par with the Pentaxes? Innn-terrrrrrr-est-ing

I don't know about *most* FSU lenses. I can say that the Mir-1 37/2.8 is close to the SuperTak 35/3.5; the tiny Industar-50/3.5 is close to the SuperTak 55/2; the Jupiter-11 135/4 is close to the SuperTak 135/3.5 -- when stopped down to similar apertures. The Jupiter-21 200/4 outperforms the SuperTak 200/4 (and weighs almost twice as much!)

The Industar-50 still goes for around US$25 or less. Cheap macro toggers love it, mounted on tubes. My Vega and Industar enlarger lenses are IMHO comparable to EL-Nikkors and Schneiders. The Zenitar 16/2.8 just isn't matched by anything near its price (under US$200). And the Helios-44 58/2 (still available for US$30 or less) is beloved for its crazy bokeh.

Some... are different. My Jupiter-9 85/2 has very thin DOF wide-open and is good for soft dreamy mushy romantic portraits. The huge Helios-40 85/1.5 (wish I had one!) is even softer, and it NEEDS it on-body tripod mount. And this is a given: nobody builds mirror lenses like the Russians. They are just great. And heavy. My Rubinar Makpo 1000/10 weighs about 1.8kg.

Anyway, check out the Russian Lens Club and see for yourself. You might start off with just an Industar-50, a set of M42 tubes, and a cheap safe wide-flange M42-PK adapter. Then you'll snap-up the ubiquitous Helios-44 58/2, the kit lens for zillions of Zenit SLRs. Then a Tair or Jupiter 135mm will come your way. Then you'll crave the Zenitar FE. Oh yes, it's the pathway to doom. Pack a lunch.

[wolfiegirl]

Anyway, check out the Russian Lens Club and see for yourself. You might start off with just an Industar-50, a set of M42 tubes, and a cheap safe wide-flange M42-PK adapter. Then you'll snap-up the ubiquitous Helios-44 58/2, the kit lens for zillions of Zenit SLRs. Then a Tair or Jupiter 135mm will come your way. Then you'll crave the Zenitar FE. Oh yes, it's the pathway to doom. Pack a lunch.

bwahahaha.

And there I'd gone and just talked myself out of the Helios 44... I was reading how they said it had a bit too much flare and was quite similar to the Super Tak 55. Since I've somehow accidently acquired 2 Super Taks, I figured, why have a third?

I might go and investigate the Industar 50 though. Hrmmm....

Geez.. Talk about corrupting the poor innocent newbie! *snarf*

[chalion]

Very good read here.

Maybe you would also look at telescope/microscope adapters too............

Thanks for the reminder of M42 adapters..........needed 3 more.

[RioRico]

And there I'd gone and just talked myself out of the Helios 44... I was reading how they said it had a bit too much flare and was quite similar to the Super Tak 55. Since I've somehow accidently acquired 2 Super Taks, I figured, why have a third?

I might go and investigate the Industar 50 though. Hrmmm....

There are various versions of the Helios-44, a whole pile of subspecies. Is it a 44-1 or -2 or -4 or -M or -K2 or what? Some are said to have better or worse coatings, be more or less susceptible to flare, etc. Flare can be squashed with a good hood. All those have the good bokeh. My Helios-44M is NOT like my SuperTak 55/1.8 or f/2. The Industar-50 images do NOT look like M50/2 shots.

When I said that these Russians are "close to" some Takumars, I meant in terms of optical quality, not the same rendering or bokeh, nor build quality. The images will be sharp but different. And Taks are often better built. Many Russians are just fine, and some aren't, and you can't tell till they're in your trembling hands. If the build isn't great, don't worry, someone will pay more for it. All the Russians I've sold brought me a nice profit.

In other words: Don't sweat it. Surrender to the Dark Side. Buy, buy, buy...

[wolfiegirl]

There are various versions of the Helios-44, a whole pile of subspecies. Is it a 44-1 or -2 or -4 or -M or -K2 or what? Some are said to have better or worse coatings, be more or less susceptible to flare, etc. Flare can be squashed with a good hood. All those have the good bokeh. My Helios-44M is NOT like my SuperTak 55/1.8 or f/2. The Industar-50 images do NOT look like M50/2 shots.

When I said that these Russians are "close to" some Takumars, I meant in terms of optical quality, not the same rendering or bokeh, nor build quality. The images will be sharp but different. And Taks are often better built. Many Russians are just fine, and some aren't, and you can't tell till they're in your trembling hands. If the build isn't great, don't worry, someone will pay more for it. All the Russians I've sold brought me a nice profit.

In other words: Don't sweat it. Surrender to the Dark Side. Buy, buy, buy...

you're incorrigible Rico! I think it might also depend on what price you paid too, in terms of profit?

The one I was eyeing is a MC 44K-4 f2 / 50mm. I've put in a bid so we'll see. Interesting how you say all Helios 44 aren't the same. When I looked at the reviews, there was only one listing for the 44/50mm?

Oh, I surrended to my impatience today and went out to Floriade, which is this flower festival and took along my 2 dodgy fungus lenses. I couldn't handle it anymore, having 2 lenses that I couldn't use (coz the right k100d at the 'right' price has yet to fall into my hands) and put the two lenses to work. The Ozunon.. wow! Despite the fungus and the funny dirty scraping sound when I turn the focus, came out with some killer shots (I thought anyway). I was amazed at the colour saturation and clearness/sharpness. Least in the viewfinder anyway. Am about to look at them in photoshop to see what the 'real' verdict is like. But so far, so good! I'm learning if nothing else a 28-75 is a pretty good range to have, as the 50 is a bit of limitation when I want to zoom in a bit. I'd forgotten how slow a photography session can go though! It's been a while since I've gone to take photos for the sake of taking photos, rather than just snapping for identification, etc.

Lost a few more bids while I was out, but managed to only spend $96 or so on a Spotmatic and 3 lenses:

ASAHI OPT.CO.JAPAN SUPER-MULTI -COATED TAKUMAR 1:3:5735 6067346 WORKS

ASAHI.OPT.CO .JAPAN SUPER-MULTI -COATED TAKUMAR 1:1:8755 6285213 WORKS

LARGE LENS FORTAR 1A 72:ZOOM 1:3.5 F=28-80MM 814521 72# AUTOMAKINON M C WORKS

I'll be curious to see what state they come in. I'm pretty sure they're m42s. My m42 adapter's been ordered but don't think they'll arrive before the lenses do. Might go and check out the camera shop tomorrow to see how much they charge (and if in fact they have one). Hopefully these lenses will arrive in as good a condition as the listing claims and I won't have another 3 lenses with fungus in them. *rolls eyes*

I'm really excited to see what kind of pictures they will take, as they were two of the Taks you recommended!

[xjjohnno]

LBA done, no way known.
What's in the kit to get pics of those sulphur crested cockies, galahs, rainbow lorikeets, blue wrens and the lesser speckled bum frumps?
I'm getting this psychic emanations that you'll be wanting some decent long lenses for bird pics sooner then later and the longer the better.

[wolfiegirl]

umm bit confused by your q xjjohnno! which kit are we referring to? the kit that came with the camera? or the kit that i just won off ebay?

my original kit came just with an 18-50mm sigma, which I'm starting to realise has a few limitations (although stepping down the av does absolute amazing things as I've only just recently realised!)

i then bought a pentax 50-200mm which has a much better IQ than the sigma, but again the 50 beginning is a bit frustrating. i always want to zoom out just a *little* bit more. i've also used it to try and take pics of the rare black cockatoos i have on my property with fairly disappointing results.

i did recently win off ebay a new/old miranda 70 - 300mm which has a macro mode on it. still learning the ins and outs of it. so far i'm finding it gives amazingly sharp pictures at less than 10 metres away, but that's not going to help me if i want to take snaps of those rare cockies.

but yes! you have amazing super power xjjohnno! a proper telephoto *is* on the list, albeit not as high up there as a macro... although hrm, spring *is* here, and the birds *are* out.... hrmm....

[Raffwal]

The irony is that none of these lenses that I've purchased and am bidding on is in fact one that will suit my macro needs. Don't believe me?

When I quickly read through your post, I was just wondering that you did not seem to get one single real macro lens. Yes, that is irony. But up to a point I can understand the lure of old glass. Like some of the Takumars are mechanically finer than any modern lens I could afford. But on the other hand, many of the old lenses I've bought end up being not used for some reason or another and that makes me wonder why the heck did I buy them to begin with?

[wolfiegirl]

Hi Raffwal,

Yes, no proper macro lens is in my arsenal at the moment. I think I started off doing a 'macro' search on ebay and came up with lots of expensive options which I wasn't prepared to pay. The Miranda 70-300 has a macro option on it though, which I used today. I'm currently going through the images to see whether or not I'm happy with them.

I think I got sidetracked very quickly on the search based on pricing alone. I started panicking fairly quickly after I started winning auctions and realising that none of the stuff I had bought was what I needed. But I ended up justifying it, telling myself either way these old glasses will give sharper images, and therefore be a step up from my current zooms.... or so I'm telling myself? And if I learn how to manipulate the lenses (getting closer to subject etc) at the end of the day I'll still be taking better 'macro' pics than what my 18-50 sigma can provide?

And I really do want to start branching out and learning what other lenses have to offer.

Having said all that, I did get a 30-75 zoom with macro lens which I used today, and OMG some of these flower shots are AMAZING. I am a PRO! *snarf* Who says it's the user and not the lens that's responsible for the pictures? *cackles*