Russar 20/5.6 MP-2 lens...

[Vince Lupo]

Now that you guys have gotten me into these FSU cameras, I realized that I had a Russar 20/5.6 MP-2 lens, caps, case and viewfinder in my collection. From what I've seen from a bit of online research, these lenses seem to be fetching some decent money. Does that really only apply to the earlier chrome ones? Mine is a black one from (I'm assuming) 1989, based on the '89' as being the first two digits in the serial number.

I purchased it a couple of years ago from a small camera shop in Ghent in Belgium, and I seem to recall having paid something like 70 Euros. I'm planning on shooting with it this week with my newly acquired Zorki 4, so I'll let you know how it all looks.

Any insights?

 

[Roger Hicks]

The only two I've used (one owned, one borrowed) were among the worst lenses I have ever used: soft, flat, and with negligible edge definition. They used to be very collectable, with few examples outside Russia, but after the collapse of the Soviet Union they dropped massively in price -- one-half to one-third of the (equivalent of) the 200-500 euros they used to fetch.

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Hmm....this week's film should be an adventure then!

So I guess 70 Euros is about right, from the sounds of it. Though the lunatics at Photo Arsenal are offering one on eBay for upwards of $ 800.00.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hmm....this week's film should be an adventure then!

So I guess 70 Euros is about right, from the sounds of it.

Dear Vince,

Well worth having at 70€ for the fun of it, and there'll always be someone who's willing to take it off your hands for the same or more.

Besides, you might find that you like soft, dreamy ultrawides. Probably more fun in colour than mono.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Yeah for the money you're right, plus it's a nice memory from Ghent. I'll shoot with it this week and post a few results.

I just looked at a few shots online that someone took with this lens. They looked sharp enough, but a fair bit of vignetting. Ah well -- looks cool on the Zorki though, and that's important!

 

[laptoprob]

The finder alone is worth the €70. Clear and straight but a little on the big side.
I removed the clever swivel off mine in favour of a rigid one to get a more stable mount and better horizontality.

Do check out the lens. QC seemed to be problematic, but they can be decent afaik.

 

[Jack Ketch]

I completely disagree.

The lens is extremely sharp, and makes highly detailed, contrasty images. It's am excellent design. I've had four of them, and I never had a bad example.

The black one is exactly the same formula as the chrome one.

Currently, they go for around $400 on eBay. (for a lens and viewfinder set)

 

[Vince Lupo]

I completely disagree.

The lens is extremely sharp, and makes highly detailed, contrasty images. It's am excellent design. I've had four of them, and I never had a bad example.

The black one is exactly the same formula as the chrome one.

Currently, they go for around $400 on eBay. (for a lens and viewfinder set)

Jack - Do you have any shots from this lens that you might be able to share? I have a roll of XP2 in the Zorki 4 right now, and I'm testing the camera, 50mm Jupiter-8 and this 20mm lens with this roll. I'll be sure to post some of my results, but I'd be interested to see what others have done.

Always nice to feed that curiosity in photography, isn't it?

 

[raid]

I have the finder but not the lens. I use the finder with lenses in the range 17mm-21mm.

Enjoy the lens and don't worry at this stage about market value.

 

[QUAsit]

Many people claim that there is a stack of `fake` Russars made in 2001-2004 by a small team inside KMZ. These Russars are black and have filter screw 1.5mm longer than it should be on Russars made in 70-80s
Quality of such lenses is very poor.

For instance picture of Russar claimed to be `fake`:

 

[Jack Ketch]

This is not a wonderful example because I don't have my image files on the computer I'm using right now. It was also shot with an R-D1, so you're only seeing a cropped frame. You can see Alcatraz island on the right:



The RD-1 was sitting on the table. The lens was wide open. Again, these are not the greatest examples, just personal snaps I have on the laptop. This was taken a couple of days after moving into new apartment:

 

[Vince Lupo]

Many people claim that there is a stack of `fake` Russars made in 2001-2004 by a small team inside KMZ. These Russars are black and have filter screw 1.5mm longer than it should be on Russars made in 70-80s
Quality of such lenses is very poor.

For instance picture of Russar claimed to be `fake`:

Hmm...that lens looks a lot like mine. And I just measured the threads and they're 7mm deep -- is that too much?

 

[Vince Lupo]

This is not a wonderful example because I don't have my image files on the computer I'm using right now. It was also shot with an R-D1, so you're only seeing a cropped frame. You can see Alcatraz island on the right:

Boy that's a nice clear shot Jack. I guess the proof will be in the pudding if my shots turn out as nice!

 

[Jack Ketch]

Mine does not have an elongated filter screw like that.

I would suppose if they were "fake", they would still be fine, because they used the same lens elements from KMZ as "real" ones.

 

[QUAsit]

Lens elements could be same - that`s correct. But such wideangles with small number of elements inside are very prone to centering defects. So nobody knows about quality control of these `00x Russars.

 

[Jack Ketch]

This is the first time I ever heard of "bootleg" Russars. I don't think there could be any chrome "bootlegs", but a black one could be possible.

Does anyone have a link where this is discussed?

* I believe my current Russar is a 1982 example. I have the box, the factory signed "passport", and the two bakelite cases for the lens and finder.



.

 

[QUAsit]

Then yours sample is KMZ officially made.

Frankly, information about `bootleg` Russars appeared on Russian rangefinder forum here:
http://rangefinder.ru/club/viewforum.php?f=9&topicdays=0&start=30

And two different persons (quite esteemed and reliable) said about such samples.

 

[Jack Ketch]

Thanks, unfortunately, my Russian is limited to ordering Kvass, Baltika beer, and Borstch on Brighton Beach.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]

 

[Vince Lupo]

Don't know about mine. Serial number is 890260, came with front black cap and deep rear cap, the 2cm 24x36 viewfinder, and the bakelite/plastic container with the screw on lid. Don't know if that means anything at all. My lens says '5.6/20', 'MP-2' and 'PYCCAP', so your guess is as good as mine - maybe better!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Whether it's great or lousy, you can't go far wrong at 70€ including an excellent finder.

Reports seem to be evenly divided. Of the few others I know who've tried this lens, half agree with me and half with Jack Ketch.

Tashi delek,

R.