Lenses, lenses, lenses (or: does a wonky mount matter?)

[Coldkennels]

I fell in love with rangefinders - the Fed 2 in particular - last year, and finally got one at xmas. And it's a great user camera; it's taken me a while to get everything sorted (that's a whole other story), but the body's in great condition, feels fantastic to use, and the Industar 26 I have is capable of some really nice black and white photos.

Unfortunately, it falls short considerably whenever I use it for colour, as it's colour rendition is unreliable to say the least. I've had some great slides and some terrible ones.

And so I've been exploring loads of different lenses, and finally got my grubby hands on a '76 Jupiter 8 in reasonable condition. A few cleaning marks, but nothing major. The problem is it doesn't mount straight; the "top" of the lens is at about half past twelve as you look at it face on. How much of a problem is this?

Also - and bare in mind that I've not tested the lens for focusing properly at infinity yet - the rangefinder in the Fed doesn't seem to line up properly at infinity with this lens mounted. It's only a fraction out, but it's noticeable. Is this related to the previous problem? If so, is there any way to rectify it? Bare in mind that the rangefinder does line up when I use my Industar and my partner's Jupiter 8 - which, annoyingly, is in perfect condition, and I was the one who gave it her. If only I could get one that good for myself!

 

[fanshaw]

I'd be surprised if the industar-26 lens was responsible for poor colour rendition. Why not see if the Jupiter solves this problem before you worry about the alignment problems?

 

[Valkir1987]

I've had some great slides and some terrible ones.

That would suprise me too, if it would be the lens's fault. I took many slides with FSU lenses. Slides require a very accurate exposure. That means both the camera and the light meter must be in specs. It's better to have them a little underexposed, especially in bright circumstances.

The Jupiter 8 is a nice lens indeed, looks great too on the Fed2!

Maybe you can scan a few examples.

 

[Coldkennels]

I've done a whole bunch of tests; in the past months I've acquired an Industar 61 (that had a gummed-up focus ring, so has been returned for a CLA), an Industar 10 (that was set for the wrong film-to-flange distance, so was sent back for replacement) and an Industar 61 L/D (that couldn't focus to infinity on any rangefinder, so was returned).

Yeah, I've had a lot of luck with lenses. Hah.

But yes - I've done direct shot-by-shot comparisons, and often find the I-26 just slightly muddier and a bit more washed out than the I-61 and my partner's J-8. I did a test with all five lenses on some Ferrania Solaris, and while I can only attach three photos, you can see the difference between the I26, I61 L/D and J8 (and the fact that I got my numbers all mixed up!).

I guess these aren't typical results? All of these shots were taken at f/8 and 1/8, for what it's worth; the left hand one is the I-26, the middle a J-8 and the right an I61 L/D.

Also: I've now had chance to check the crooked-mounting J8 on an empty Zorki 4K - where it mounts, focuses and interacts with the rangefinder perfectly! How does that work, considering all the other m39 lenses I've got my hands on have swapped between the two cameras fine?

 

[Coldkennels]

In defense of the I-26, I have had some lovely stuff in B&W with it, so I think it's a keeper in that regard.



(Both photos shot on a roll of XP2)

 

[Valkir1987]

The images indeed show the poorer color rendition of your I26. Looks like it has some of the yellowish tint from the glass. Browsing through my scans of pictures taken with I-26 lenses I experience the same. I have the tabbed version now, and had two regular ones.

P.S. the castle on the picture is 'Kasteel de Haar' located on the west of Utrecht. Rebuilt in the 19th and 20th century in neogothic style by the architect Pierre Cuypers. A must to visit 🙂

 

[konicaman]

About the same results I got with my I26 and a collapsible I50 - only ever used them for color work once. The I61 rules for color IMO

 

[Valkir1987]

The Fed 3,5/50 known as the Industar 10 is also a great color performer. A coated one that came with a Fed1g, I keep as a gem. Oncoated examples do their job well to, but less contrasty.

https://picasaweb.google.com/107637355885206491327/FotoSMetRussischeCameraS#

Although my scanner is not that good, they look superb projected on a screen.

But once the lens has been previously cleaned improperly. And tiny scratches are found on the front surface, a good color rendition is out of the mood. Good for soft black and white pictures, but no less.

 

[Morfeus]

Same here. I am quite disappointed with the two I26 I have. Very low contrast, yellowish/greenish cast and very low saturation even with Fuji films.

 

[wolves3012]

I have used the I-26 and both versions of the I-61 and I don't see a big difference. All a little bit sharper and contrastier than my J-8s but this is my experience with a few samples and not definitive.

As regards the original question...if the lens mounts correctly and screws fully into the mount, then I'm not surprised at small differences in RF alignment. The quality control on these lenses was not the best, likewise the bodies. I often find a small error on using a different lens but I never found it enough to matter in normal use.

 

[Coldkennels]

Thanks, Wolves. I've had chance to check the J8 now, and the small variance doesn't seem to make any real difference.

re. the colour rendition discussion I inadvertently created: I've got a new I61 L/D (that focuses fine) and the gummed-up I61 was replaced with an untabbed I26 to partner my tabbed one, and did another test to compare them all. The results are a little weird - the original I26 still has some strange colour rendition, but the untabbed one seems to be a bit more true to life - and oddly, less prone to flaring than this particular J8, which only got a decent result when I slapped a hood on it!

I think I'm going to use an entire roll just testing each lens with a range of settings. Hood, no hood, skylight filter, no skylight filter etc... I guess it's the only way I'll know for sure which I prefer. There doesn't seem to be any real hard-and-fast rule with these things.

 

[Stuart John]

I had good luck with my industar 26 and B&W film. I doubt I will run any color film through any of my FSU cameras.

 

[kievman]

I recently purchased a I-26 and and did a lens test with kodak gold 200 color net film. Mine sure is not as sharp as my I61L/Ds I own 2 from the 1990's It certainly is not as sharp as my J-8's and I have many. I have not tried it with B&W film, so far I am not that impressed with the lens. I will have to try scanning few negs to see what the colors look like. I suspect he I-26 was really designed for B&W film as I am sure color film was rather rare back in the late 50's and early 60's Russia. Anybody have any info on the early russian color films? like when did the Russians come out with their first color emulsions? -Kievman

 

[fanshaw]

I doubt that any lens would be designed for B&W and not for colour. To get a sharp image in B&W the lens must focus coloured light. I have had excellent colour photos from the earlier I-22 lenses which were made when colour film was even less common.

 

[stevebrot]

I doubt that any lens would be designed for B&W and not for colour. To get a sharp image in B&W the lens must focus coloured light. I have had excellent colour photos from the earlier I-22 lenses which were made when colour film was even less common.

What you say is true in regards to chromatic aberrations, but is not true in regards to color rendition. Some lenses impart some real ugly color cast. Back-in-the-day, color corrected optics were a big deal and not all cameras had them. That being said; many, many lenses designed before color film work quite well with the medium.


Steve

 

[fanshaw]

What you say is true in regards to chromatic aberrations, but is not true in regards to color rendition. Some lenses impart some real ugly color cast. Back-in-the-day, color corrected optics were a big deal and not all cameras had them. That being said; many, many lenses designed before color film work quite well with the medium.


Steve

You may be right about this. Cynically, I have always assumed that 'colour corrected optics' was just a term used to market lenses in an age when colour photography was taking off. As you say many old lenses give very good colour rendition without the benefit of colour correction.