QUAsit said:
Hi Jamie
This is KMZ Jupiter-3 made in 1952. It is single-coated - do not worry. .....<SNIP>
- sometimes coating on glass was not recognizable actually, and glass looked like - it is uncoated one, but after a couple of shots in color - everything were ok. No flares, no wrong colors.
Hi
I agree that the 1950s lenses are really excellent. I noticed though, that these lenses tend to have colour biases going towards yellow-green. My Jupiter, Industar, and even Helios from the 1950s with blue-coloured glass consistently produce this cast. Among these, the J-9 and Helios make the strongest yellow cast, with the Industar the least.
This yellow cast was not easy to spot when I was shooting with these lenses on colour negative film. The printing process took away the casts. However, when I started using these lenses (first with digital SLR, then lately, with digital rangefinder), the colour casts were readily seen. Post processing largely removes the casts.
Shots with 1950s Russian lenses stand out readily stand out - even from other shots made with later Russian lenses- because of the yellow colour.
Another odd quality I noticed is that the older Industar lenses tend to make really brilliant reds. This was very evident on shots made on colour negatives; on digital, it's even more. Perhaps so that
red banners photograph better?
😀
And by the way, i got one uncoated Industar 50/3.5 from pre-War FED-1 - that lens was clearly uncoated, Firstly it was hard to see diaphragm blades inside lens due to reflexes, secondly impression was that lens are made from window glass =))))) Same feeling i got from uncoated pre-war Elmar 35/3.5
I love using uncoated lenses. I have several FED-1 uncoated lenses, mostly pre-WWII and perhaps a couple of postwar (ca 1948). They make lovely BWs.
Too bad it's impossible to fit these lenses on later cameras. Ancient objectives on digital sensors make an interesting pair!
Jay
