50mm lenses test

[Fotohuis]

Leica Summicron 50mm F=2,0

Jupiter-8 50mm F=2,0

Industar-61 52mm F=2,8

Industar-50 50mm F=3,5


Test film: Retropan 320 soft E.I. 320 in HC-110 9:00 minuten (20C). Gelijke omstandigheden met daglicht en reflectie scherm. Universele lasertool gebruikt om de beer en testkaarten precies planparallel uit te richten. Alles op statief met draadonspanner waarbij niet in het Schwarzschild effect van de film is gekomen.

The translation I will do later.

 

[Fotohuis]

Same circumstances, daylight with reflection screen. Universal laser tool to align the bear and test charts to the camera (parallel). Tripod with remote release and shutter times not in the Schwarzschild effect (reciproke) from the Retropan 320 Soft film.

 

[Fotohuis]

Interesting is the resolution and sharpness from the Eur. 20,- I-61 F/2,8.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

No reason for Elmar 50 2.8 if sharpness and resolution is all what needed from the lens.

 

[Fotohuis]

I do not have the asferical version of this Summicron 50mm. Otherwise you will be even more in shock: Eur. 6000,00 versus Eur. 20,00 for this Industar-61. Ok I have paid Eur. 30,- for a FED-3 with this lens for a complete C.L.A.
The regular price for the standard Summicron is around Eur. 2000,00. What you have paid is what you get: The Summicron is the best at the widest aperture then followed by the I-61.

The question is what all lenses are doing at e.g. F/4. But then I have to print another 4 negatives. These are examples in Split Grade made with an enlarger with top Rodenstock optics at F/8.

 

[Sid836]

Surprised that the cheap Industar-61 does a lot better than the more expensive Jupiter-8. It even fares up well against the Summicron. Is it the L/D version?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm not surprised about results of tests like these. I'm completely agree about 20 vs 6K price difference, but no difference on scans of test card shots.
And in real world pictures I'm questioning my desire for Canadian Cron while J3 and J8 did all I need in terms of OOF, bokeh and rendering.

 

[mfogiel]

I thought that light would only be allowed to pass through Leica lenses, but surprise! Even the Russian lenses managed to expose film !!!

 

[Fotohuis]

The Industar-61 is a Zebra version, 1966.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I performed a similar test but used my Leica M 240. I used 'live view' for focusing and DNG files so no compression.

I compared the Summicron v5 against the J-8, J-3, Industar-26, Industar-50, Helios-103, and Industar-61 L/D. I found the Summicron was the best lens overall. Center-to-edge sharpness was very impressive. The Soviet lenses did well with center resolution but tended to be soft in the corners.

Of all the FSU lenses I tried, the J-8 and J-3 were the best. Also, the Helios-103 was excellent.

But of course, if you are comparing a Summicron against a FSU lens, it makes you wonder: is the price / performance difference that significant? After all, even a used Summicron is $1400, but a good J-8 or I-26 can be found for less than $50. So in a way, you can argue that a FSU lens provides 90% of the performance of a Summicron for 5% of the price.

If anyone is interested I can post my results here on this thread.

 

[Brian Legge]

But of course, if you are comparing a Summicron against a FSU lens, it makes you wonder: is the price / performance difference that significant? After all, even a used Summicron is $1400, but a good J-8 or I-26 can be found for less than $50.

...but you might have to buy several J8s/I26s to find one that either works well out of box or is shimmable to focus correctly through at all distances.

Don't get me wrong here - I love the results from a good FSU lens - but it seems like a large percentage of the ones for sale at this point have issues. Perhaps people hold on to the good ones and resell the ones with issues more frequently? I spent a while trying to find a good clean collapsible I22/I50 that also focused correctly. It can be frustrating.

 

[Fotohuis]

All second hand materials can have issues, the same for the FSU cameras. Most of my gear had a C.L.A. or even a complete overhaul but it can be sometimes expensive, yes. I paid sometimes more for the repair than the camera costed.

 

[David Hughes]

...but you might have to buy several J8s/I26s to find one that either works well out of box or is shimmable to focus correctly through at all distances.

Don't get me wrong here - I love the results from a good FSU lens - but it seems like a large percentage of the ones for sale at this point have issues. Perhaps people hold on to the good ones and resell the ones with issues more frequently? I spent a while trying to find a good clean collapsible I22/I50 that also focused correctly. It can be frustrating.

Hi,

I've been reading the same comments about these lenses for many years. And reading about people having duds and selling them on but I wonder how many there are out there or is it the same lenses continually changing hands?

It could be advertised, bought, tested and sold on in a matter of 2 or 3 weeks and then in a year as many as 20 people could be annoyed about the same lens (or same dozen) and then rant away on a forum.

The answer is to collect the serial numbers or else make it illegal to sell them without a certificate from a testing station... I can't see it happening.

Regards, David

 

[Wulfthari]

Surprised that the cheap Industar-61 does a lot better than the more expensive Jupiter-8. It even fares up well against the Summicron. Is it the L/D version?

In my experience the I61 is sharper and more contrasty than the Jupiter 8, and it's not a surprise since it's a much more modern design with a Lanthanium element.

 

[nukecoke]

All at f/2.8, center, my i-61 is (only) slightly sharper than all my j-8s, but no sharper than my j-3.

 

[Fotohuis]

At F=4 I-61 and J-8 is almost the same.

All lenses at F/4,0:

Summicron 50mm F/2,0 F=4

Jupiter-8 F/2,0 F=4

Industar-61 F/2,8 F=4

Industar-50 F/3,5 F=4

 

[Fotohuis]

Instead of the L/D I tested the Zebra I-61 version.

And the last lens: I-50 (F/3,5-50mm)

 

[rfaspen]

Shown is an L/D I-61.

 

[Fotohuis]

Shown is an L/D I-61.

Correct, but tested is a 1966 I-61 Zebra model.

In the mean time I do not have any recent FSU stuff anymore because I found out that most materials after approx. 1980 is out of tolerances, not very well made anymore. More or less crap!

I was already lucky I have a good working Kiev-4AM with J-8M from 1980 because after that time era the Q.C. went down very rapidly. I had a FED-5B either, almost new but together with that I-61 L/D (1990) it was hopeless, even in repair.

Further all my lenses except a very few not yet, had full service. The same for my cameras. My FED-3 from 1967 (1917-1967, 50 years October revolution) was the worst with a new R.F., new take up spool, a few missing screws, alignment and a full C.L.A. incl. this I-61 Zebra.

The best was this I-50, almost new from 1962 (together with a Z-6). Renewed all grease further nothing, in perfect shape even with all lens test.
The Leica Summicron F/2,0-50mm is from 2005.

 

[goamules]

Bobby makes a good point. Is a lens that costs 10 times as much, but only 2 times better worth it? But you quote $1400 for a 50mm Summicron? They are about half that now (I compare 1950s lenses to 1950s lenses, not to modern Summicrons made recently). And J3s are about $200, so the good FSU lenses are only about 1/3 the cost. Not 10X cheaper, anymore.

I like most FSU lenses, and I've had a few. I've never had the proverbial "bad one" that people talk about, but never show examples from.