In search of some soviet lenses for my Zorki 6

[Klikkie]

Hello,

I'm searching for Soviet lenses for my Zorki 6 rangefinder.

Right now I've got a Industar 61 and a Jupiter 8 (the plastic black version). I'm curious if there are more beautiful lenses for that camera that are compatible and focus without problems. Any ideas are welcome!

I've heard that the older version of the Jupiter lenses are problematic in combination with a Zorki 6, because they don't fit right or won't focus properly.

I'm thinking of buying a Industar 61 L/D, but online I found out that sellers on ebay sell those lenses that are put together form various different lenses... So I'm a little confused about that.

Also I'm very interested in the different soviet Zeiss copy's and the history.

I've also been told that the older (metal) versions have better glass because of the original Jena parts. Too bad I've got the later plastic ones, but can you tell the difference...?


Thanks a lot in advance!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Plastic?

From where you are getting those lies?

 

[Klikkie]

Plastic?

From where you are getting those lies?

Not plastic glass... Black plastic body of the lens

 

[Valkir1987]

Made with the late black version of the Jupiter-8 on a Zorki-6. Provia 100f film.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Not plastic glass... Black plastic body of the lens

So, where this .. comes from ?
Reddit? Coffee Shop patrons ?
What they were smoking?

 

[Klikkie]

So, where this .. comes from ?
Reddit? Coffee Shop patrons ?
What they were smoking?

My own lens.... Maybe it's a coating, but it sure feels like hard plastic

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My own lens.... Maybe it's a coating, but it sure feels like hard plastic

What if I tell you it is metal?
Because I worked on this lens as many others?

Not enough?

This is on first page of Google search return for Jupiter 8 lens.

Jupiter-8 50mm f2 LTM Lens Review — Soviet Bunker

The day has finally come where I review a 50mm f2 lens. Why is that significant? Well just look at the domain! Have I picked a good lens for this milestone review? I don't know about that but it will certainly start a new series called ,"Soviet Bunker",.

50mmf2.com

 

[css9450]

Every Jupiter 8 I've seen has been either chrome-plated brass, or aluminum, to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Klikkie]

What if I tell you it is metal?
Because I worked on this lens as many others?

Not enough?

This is on first page of Google search return for Jupiter 8 lens.

Jupiter-8 50mm f2 LTM Lens Review — Soviet Bunker

The day has finally come where I review a 50mm f2 lens. Why is that significant? Well just look at the domain! Have I picked a good lens for this milestone review? I don't know about that but it will certainly start a new series called ,"Soviet Bunker",.

50mmf2.com

Please don't take one aspect of my post and be all hostile about it. Yeah, maybe I think it's plastic because of the feel. I'm no expert and fairly new to the hobby, so play nice

 

[Coldkennels]

@Klikkie, the Industar 61 L/D isn't bad, but you're not going to notice much difference over the Industar 61 you already own. Also, the 61 L/D was made quite late in the Soviet era, and a lot of them are pretty poorly made inside.

Bit of a blow-by-blow of your options:

20mm f/5.6 Russar: very expensive, but reportedly very good. The only lens here I've never tried due to the cost.
28mm f/6 Orion: expensive AND slow. Poor corner performance. KMZ-made ones reportedly much better. Still a decent lens if you can get one for a reasonable price.
35mm f/2.8 Jupiter 12: generally quite good. Prone to flare. Much improved with a small 40.5mm hood for wide angle lenses.
50mm f/3.5 Industar 22: collapsible. Good performer. My favourite of the Industars.
50mm f/3.5 Industar 50: did come in a collapsible version, but more often than not it's the M42 "pancake" lens with a small extension tube. Optically decent, but hard to justify over the benefit of the collapsible I-22.
50mm f/2.8 Industar 26m: by far the lesser of the 50/2.8 lenses. Nice haptics with the focusing tab, though.
50mm f/2.8 Industar 61: solid standard lens. Not exciting, does the job.
50mm f/2.8 Industar 61 L/D: supposedly improved coatings over the 61. Not sure I ever really noticed any difference. Does have click stops, though.
50mm f/2 Jupiter 8: lots of hype. Decent enough Sonnar. Lots of sample variation. A good one is very nice, a bad one is terrible. Early KMZ ones are much better made.
50mm f/1.5 Jupiter 3: almost exactly the same notes as the Jupiter 8, but with a much higher price tag. Not sure I'd pay current prices and gamble on one on eBay these days.
85mm f/2 Jupiter 9: fantastic lens. Very heavy. Make sure you don't get the SLR version (shorter and fatter). You need to make sure your rangefinder is bang-on at both ends of the focusing scale to get the best out of it.
135mm f/4 Jupiter 11: another fantastic lens, often overlooked. Again, make sure you don't get the SLR version - the one for the Zorki is long, thin, and straight-sided. Terrible minimum focusing distance (2.5m, if I remember right), but it's the only 135mm lens you can use on a Soviet rangefinder (even if you adjusted the rangefinder to Leica spec, all LTM 135mm lenses will get stuck on the cam follower). Bloody good lens, though.

General notes:

• Finding Soviet lenses that haven't been butchered is the toughest part. Lots of parts lenses floating around.
• Most of them will need the focusing helical regreasing. On some lenses that's a nightmare to fix (Jupiter 9). On others it's the easiest job in the world (Industar 22).
• Beware any lens marked FED. Early FED lenses were non-standard and won't work on a later FED or Zorki. Finding one that's been collimated to the Soviet standard is rare.
• KMZ made some of the best lenses - learn the manufacturer logos to know what to search for, because some lenses were made in multiple places. LZOS aren't bad either, in my experience. Brian Sweeney said the worst he ever worked on were Valdai lenses. I'm inclined to believe him.
• Lenses with plain aluminium barrels are generally better than anything with a black barrel - the quality control was much higher in that era.
• All of the lenses benefit from a lens hood - coatings weren't great back then. The only one I've never used a hood with is the Orion and the Industar 22 - something about those two seems to result in less flare than the others.

 

[santino]

The Jupiter 9 is a hard to reassemble lens. You are probably best off by buying one with stiff focus = nobody got inside of it. Then give it a proper CLA.

 

[p.giannakis]

I've used the industar -22, the jupiter-8 and the industar-61L/D.

All good, eventually ended up keeping the jupiter-8 as it was working well straight out of the box. The 61L/D had stiff focusing and with the industar-22 it was almost impossible to change aperture.

 

[css9450]

I like Jupiter 12s. I probably have about 6-8 of them, split between M39 and Contax/Kiev mount.... They're inexpensive and with one exception, all of mine perform very well.

 

[Valkir1987]

A lot has been written about sample variation. However: Soviet lenses have a higher tolerance or runout when it comes to the centering of indvidual lens elements. (to allow higher production numbers) alignment and seating of each element is done in the assembly. If a cleaning (or CLA) is done without proper testing equipment, the alignment is lost. A good optical workshop can do huge improvements on a lens.

Most lenses have been disassembled and cleaned in the past, and this explains a lot about the sample variation people experience. Another example is the Meyer Optik Görlitz or Pentacon 50mm lens. (This lens based on the old 2.0 Pancolar from Jena). The rear lens group on the Pentacon is seated and centered with three worm screws. Often the rear group has been removed to clean the aperture blades. That's how this lens got a variable reputation. Even tightening a normal seating ring for a lens element requires a certain knowledge and skill. It's not just a matter of putting it back and screwing it back.

 

[rfaspen]

I have a selection of FSU lenses I've accumulated over the years. Also a Zorki-6. I'd say get a I-22 and a J-12 to have a couple of classics. The I-22 is a reasonable "elmar like" experience. It's a pretty good lens if you get a good one. Collapsible is nice. The J-12 is a pretty good biogon copy. I know I have put it on my Z-6 and it worked fine. It's very nice to have a 35mm lens in your lens line up....

 

[Coldkennels]

If I could only have a three lens kit for my Zorkis, it'd be the Orion, Industar 22, and the Jupiter 11. The Orion would be the biggest expense of the three, and you'd be mostly be locked into daylight or flash shooting, but you could do a LOT with that kit - and it'd be very small and light considering the range it covers. Nothing against the Jupiter 12, but I find it hard to want to bother with it on a body designed for 50mm lenses; you're not getting much wider of a FoV, but you now need to mess about with the turret finder.

The Jupiter 3 and 9 both excited me a lot back in 2010, but I rarely feel like I need the f/1.5 and f/2 lenses now, and they add a lot of bulk (and extra expense).

I could probably swap the Industar 22 for an early tabbed Jupiter 8, but I do love that Industar 22. It's a great lens.