Industar 50 collapsible lens marked Zorki

[Roberto]

Did you ever seen one of those? How rare they are?
Thanks,
Rob.

 

[Roberto]

Did you ever seen one of those? How rare they are?
Thanks,
Rob.

Or even a I-22...
R.

 

[santino]

never ever. seem to be rare whether originals or not.

 

[Roberto]

never ever. seem to be rare whether originals or not.

Let me show you a picture..

 

[Roberto]

sorry forgot the attachement... 😱

 

[pauls52]

My understanding is that pre-war FED lenses (often referred to as Industar-10s) were Leitz Elmar copies (which were similar to Zeiss Tessars but with the diaphragm after the first element group rather than the second - bit of argy bargy between Leitz and Zeiss over patents but that is another story). After the war, the Soviets ended up with the legal rights to Zeiss designs and changed to the Tessar design, although outwardly, the physical construction continued to look like a copy of the Elmar.

The first post-war production of FEDs was undertaken at the KMZ plant. This was known as the FED-KMZ, closely followed by the FED-Zorki and then the Zorki 1a (this was the beginning of separate manufacture from FED). I think that as well as the Zeiss designs, the KMZ factory ended up with some Zeiss parts. It is not entirely clear from my reading but I think its these first Soviet Tessars which included Zeiss bits and pieces that got the Zorki name. When the Zeiss parts ran out after only a few months, production swung over to fully locally made Tessars. I am not sure at what point the name "Industar-22" was incorporated, whether at the beginning or some later point in the initial production run (FED just continued with its own naming convention even though under the skin, the FED lens was now also an Industar 22, the main difference being the aperature adjustment tab as opposed to ring on the Industar)

I am only new to FSU cameras and history so don't take any of this as gospel. However, it is likely that the Zorki lenses are pretty rare - certainly there is very little info about them.

 

[QUAsit]

One of early coated Industar-22 - something like c1949 production (in 1950 Industar-22 already has KMZ logo initialy prizm w/o arrow, then prizm+arrow view)

I got I22 of 1950 production it has full KMZ logo on place of `Zorki` label. (Very ugly condition, but image quality is superb)

Btw, check serial on lens screw - it has to clear the year of production.

Rare lens? Perhaps. But you should not expect to exchange it for Noctilux =)

Update: I opened Princelle, yes - Industar-22 of 1949 production.

 

[ZorkiKat]

My understanding is that pre-war FED lenses (often referred to as Industar-10s) were Leitz Elmar copies (which were similar to Zeiss Tessars but with the diaphragm after the first element group rather than the second - bit of argy bargy between Leitz and Zeiss over patents but that is another story). After the war, the Soviets ended up with the legal rights to Zeiss designs and changed to the Tessar design, although outwardly, the physical construction continued to look like a copy of the Elmar. ...
...FED just continued with its own naming convention even though under the skin, the FED lens was now also an Industar 22, the main difference being the aperature adjustment tab as opposed to ring on the Industar)


.

The FED I-10 copied only the collapsible barrel and diaphragm setting lever of the Elmar 50. The optical layout is more Tessar than an Elmar, though the Elmar itself is a Tessar derivative. The diaphragm is located after the second group (or between the middle and rear groups), just like in the Tessar.

The I-10 was the only collapsible LTM Industar which used a tiny lever to set the diaphragm. The post-war I-22 and I-50 used a ring in its place. The same setting ring is also found in the collapsible Tessars (not too common) made for Contax and some Tenax(?) cameras.

It also seems that the FED I-10 never changed in design. Physically, the optical block from a prewar FED I-10 looks similar to the last of the FED I-10
found on some of the early FED-2. The Industar collapsibles appear to be a tad longer.

It's also difficult to see where the differences in the optical layouts the I-10, I-22, and I-50 since they followed the same Tessar triplet-style (front-middle-rear) configuration. It's also hard to see how different an I-50 would be from an I-22 based on the pictures they make. However, I seem to be able to find something different with the FED 1-10. The I-10 seems to "draw" differently from an I-22 or I-50. This look is retained by all the collapsibles marked FED-50, though the later cpated versions look to have greater contrast.

 

[Roberto]

One of early coated Industar-22 - something like c1949 production (in 1950 Industar-22 already has KMZ logo initialy prizm w/o arrow, then prizm+arrow view)

I got I22 of 1950 production it has full KMZ logo on place of `Zorki` label. (Very ugly condition, but image quality is superb)

Btw, check serial on lens screw - it has to clear the year of production.

Rare lens? Perhaps. But you should not expect to exchange it for Noctilux =)

Update: I opened Princelle, yes - Industar-22 of 1949 production.

Would you be so kind to help me giving it a price?
Thanks,
Rob.

 

[QUAsit]

I don`t know. Here in Russia top price could be $20-25... ordinary I22 cost around $10-15

 

[pauls52]

I bow to ZorkiKat's greater experience and knowledge (I am seriously impressed by your collection) and as we all know, the net has loads of contradictory information. However, here are 3 of the sources I used which suggest that the pre-war FED design was a full Elmar copy with the glass changing to the Zeiss Tessar layout in early post war production.

The first is Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FED_(camera) under the lens info, the second is PhotoPedia http://members.tripod.com/pafas/cameras/ which is a hard to navigate site (but if you persevere, all the Zorki models are covered) and the third is a rather more esoteric discussion about Tessars and Elmars http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00C0hX including an off-topic quote by Oscar Barnack that Zeiss copied and patented the basic (triplet anastigmat) Elmar design as a Tessar after Leitz neglected to protect its design.

Both ZorkiKat and I noted that FEDs/I-10s had tabs for aperture adjustment whilst I-22s use a ring. Since then I have found various examples of early production I-22s with tabs. Here's one:

 

[pauls52]

I just noticed problems with the first two links. With Wikipedia, the hyperlink didn't pick up the URL final bracket - just add this manually in the address block that pops up. With PhotoPedia, you will have to manually navigate to KMZ and note that there are seperate FED-Zorki and Zorki sections and history sections. Unfortunately, the FED links further up the navigation bar are not populated. The third link works.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Hi Pauls52,

I have three prewar FED-50/I-10 lenses. These look 100% similar to my postwar FED, the only notable changes being the revised aperture scale and the modified locking tab, as well as the blue hue of the later coated optics.

What some internet sources say often contradict what you have on hand 🙂

I don't see any change however in terms of physical specs. The optical block is still the same- one from a later I-10 would fit into the barrel of the prewar versions. The I-10 barrels are shorter than the I-22 or I-50 barrels too.

The prewar I-10 resemble the Elmar only externally. The diaphragm position in my 1935 I-10 is the same as where it is on the last of the I-10: behind the middle component. Lens layout-wise, the I-10 is like the Elmar- 4E/3G, which is also the same as the Tessar.

Then there is also one more feature that the prewar I-10 which would make it
different from any Elmar: the helical pitch. A FED rangefinder/ focus follower calibrated for an early I-10 will not be accurate for any lens which follows the Leica 'standard'. The early 1-10 helical movement tends to be shorter.

However, postwar (starting with the coated ones) I-10 had the helicals revamped to conform with Leica helical standards. A later 1-10 can be used on a Leica and be expected to focus and RF-couple properly.

Jay

 

[soimless]

I know this isn't about the Industar 50 or 10 per say but it reminds me of seeing a picture of a FED 35mm lens that look akin to a Leitz Elmar 35 on the history of the FED commune by Oscar Frick. I looked somewhat hard for more information on the lens but couldn't find anything on it because I keep runing into FED 35mm camera rather than FED 35mm lens where ever I looked. It seems to be another unusual lens at the start of the FED/Zorki history.

http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/Pictures_150dpi/f16.jpg
http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_A.htm

 

[ZorkiKat]

I know this isn't about the Industar 50 or 10 per say but it reminds me of seeing a picture of a FED 35mm lens that look akin to a Leitz Elmar 35 on the history of the FED commune by Oscar Frick. I looked somewhat hard for more information on the lens but couldn't find anything on it because I keep runing into FED 35mm camera rather than FED 35mm lens where ever I looked. It seems to be another unusual lens at the start of the FED/Zorki history.

http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/Pictures_150dpi/f16.jpg
http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_A.htm

The 'shortest' lens (bottom left of the picture) is a 28mm FED. This sometimes appears on eBay.

Jay

 

[soimless]

oh, no wonder why I couldn't find anything about it. I think it would be a cool have but I'm in no positon to buy one yet. Thanks on the info Jay

 

[ZorkiKat]

oh, no wonder why I couldn't find anything about it. I think it would be a cool have but I'm in no positon to buy one yet. Thanks on the info Jay

The FED 28 fit only the early prewar FED. May not be a good idea to get one if you intend to use them on later FED or even other LTM cameras due to lens mount thread pitch, lens working distance, and even camming issues. Even with the early FED, the camera has to be recalibrated if lenses other than the original 50 that came with it is to be used.

Jay