SLR M42 lenses - undiscovered gems (or not)

santino said:
I think, that it is safe to say that every 50 (maybe except for the Domiplan) is decent (I know that there is one user who will probably disagree in regards of all soviet lenses and cameras btw 😜).

Wide angle wise the already mentioned 2.4 35mm Flektogon is a gem but it can develop problems with the automatic diaphragm, since there are some plastic parts.
Click to expand...
I completely agree regarding 50 mm, especially for those with brightness below 1.8.
As for the 55 mm helios, I have owned 3 different versions: 44-M, 44-M4, and 44-M6. Mine were all very good in both sharpness and bokeh.
 
I had a good experience with the Chinon Auto Reflex 55 f 1.8 (it should be the same lens marked as Petri... (if I'm not mistaken)
 
I don't think the last of the Chinon lenses have been mentioned. Operate at full aperture on the last Chinon SLR cameras, no stopping down to meter or other manipulations. Really good lenses but limited range and pricey when you find them.
 
On some M42 cameras the mirror is so close to the mount that any lens with the rear lens group protruding behind the lens mount cannot be used. Are there any wide angle lenses that does not have this overhang? This problem affects some normal (50mm) lenses as well.
 
Out to Lunch said:
Not just legacy lenses: TTArtisan just came out with an M42 1.5/75 lens -based on the Zeiss-Jena 1.5/75 Biotar. A review here:


​

Click to expand...

But no aperture stop down pin! :). Apparently, at least certain folks approached TT and requested that they make a version with the stop down pin, but it was not interested. The original Biotar did not have one either, I think. But c'mon -- how hard would it be?
 
Kai-san said:
On some M42 cameras the mirror is so close to the mount that any lens with the rear lens group protruding behind the lens mount cannot be used. Are there any wide angle lenses that does not have this overhang? This problem affects some normal (50mm) lenses as well.
Click to expand...
Yes, Pentax bodies made prior to the 1963 Spotmatic have the longer mirror that will impact the rear element of the new 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar made for the Spotmatic. I haven't heard of other lenses having this issue. The same H3v bodies (SV outside the US) made in the Spotmatic era have an orange R on the rewind knob to signify that these have the same shorter mirror of the Spotmatic so the f/1.4 lens is safe to use on these.
 
An unusual one I think that might be of interest....

On the filter ring it's identified as a ГEЛИОC-44М 2/58 with the brand symbol for Lomo.

Seller's auction statement:
I bring to your attention rarity USSR Russian black photographic collectables lens Helios-44M f2/58mm with a spring-elastic diaphragm, M42 groove to Zenit-EM, Zenit-TTL, Zenit-12sd, Zenit-12xp, Zenit-122, Zenit-11, Zenit-ET, Praktica etc, LOMO, Leningrad (St-Peterburg). All features have been tested and work properly. Glass on lenses is clean, no fungus. Lens is in condition good, only for a long time laid in a stock! This lens is a stylish acquisition for collectors, good present or for everyday use!
S/n: 8207656
* Diaphragm: 2/2.8/4/5.6/8/11/16
* Focusing, m: 0.55 to 10 and infinite

This lens does have a full-auto diaphragm with the Practica-Pentax push-pin actuation, and an auto/manual pivoting switch for checking depth of field. There are 6 elements in four groups, nearly symmetrical. It's a copy of the pre-war Zeiss Jena Biotar, an early forerunner of the Planar I think. Lenses later than this with naming such as Helios-44M4 and 44M6 have an area opposite the diaphragm pin cut away for the movement of an internal peg that probably keys the set aperture to the camera body, but those lenses do not have the lens-mounted auto-manual switch. An earlier model without the M (Helios-44) has a manually pre-set diaphragm stop-down. It carries the cemented-pair logo of MMZ (Minsk Mekanicheskiy Zavod?), a factory subsidiary to GOMZ (LOMO after 1962) in Leningrad, and which in 1971 became BelOMO (Belarus Optiko-Mechanicheshkoye Obyedinenie, or Belerussian Optical-Mechanical Union) and subsidiary to KMZ (Krasnogorskiy Mekanicheskiy Zavod).
 
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 4/20 super wide angle 20mm lens, f/4-22 for Pentax M42-mount 35mm SLR camera.

Construction - 10 elements, 6 groups
Angular field - 93°
Minimum focusing distance - 0.16m
Diaphragm action - Fully automatic
Minimum aperture - f/22
Filter size - 77mm screw-in type
Push-on diameter - 80mm
Weight - 320g
Barrel length - 59mm
 
I think, that it is safe to say that every 50 (maybe except for the Domiplan) is decent (I know that there is one user who will probably disagree in regards of all soviet lenses and cameras btw 😜).
Click to expand...

Even the Domiplan can take reasonable pictures, when stopped down to about f8. This photo was taken with an early Domiplan from the sixties with the mark Q1.

A thing with the (standard) lenses made in Gölitz is that they often have the rear element centered with three screws, and often someone has loosened them in the past to clean a sticky aperture. Re- centering has to be done in a workshop with proper optical testing equipment. And these workshops are very rare nowadays...


53523021814_59940d46e5_c_d.jpg


The Jena Pancolar is one of my personal favorites. (made on Provia 100f slide film)

53844312509_f3d67754e7_c_d.jpg
 
I have a few M42 lenses, such as the Pentax SMC 85mm/1.8 and the SMC 50mm 1.4 plus the 50mm 1.4 Pentax-M converted to Leica M mount. I also have the SMC 35mm 2 and the cheap but supersharp Pentax 28mm 3.5.
 
I would NOT recommend for street photography the Pentax 500mm 4.5 M-42! It weighs a ton.
I used a Pentax 500mm/4.5 (with a tripod) on a Canon F1N with an adapter. Most likely, I used Fujichrome 100 here. It was sunrise over the Gulf of Mexico. I exposed for the sun, on purpose, to get this effect.

U3565.1633456544.0.jpg


I sold this lens after a few rolls of film. It was a huge and heavy lens. I got the Canon FD 500mm 4.5L.
Not my lens here:
Takumar_500mm_f4_5.jpg
 
Such a rare lens is not very useful, in my opinion. I have used a Canon 85/1.5 ltm for many years, but I sold it in the end. The lens is not tack sharp, and it is heavy and bulky. Same seems to be here with the Ennalyt.
 
I have owned several standard M42 screw mount lenses. In my experience, which is based only on BW film with ISO 400-800, there are many of good quality. I am referring to the various Exaktar 55/1.8; Pentacon MC 50/1.8; Chinon auto reflex 55/1.8; Super Takumar 55/1.8 or 55/2, Fujinon 55/2.2.
They are all lenses of more than good quality as long as you close the aperture down to at least at f4-5.6, while at full aperture the quality is decidedly reduced. The only lens that really stands out wide open is the Super Takumar 50/1.4, both in the 7 and 8 lens versions.
However, I have no experience with other lenses with a maximum aperture of 1.4 such as Fujinon Revuenon and Yashinon.
 
Speaking of M42 mount gems, has anyone tried the new TT Artisan 250/5.6 mirror lens? It appears to be a copy of the RF Rokkor 250/5.6, which is a highly regarded lens. I really want to get one 🤓
 
Fujinon lenses mostly seem to escape internet hype, but obviously somebody knows they have value if the sales prices are anything to go by. I have the 28mm EBC lens, and the 2.2/55 which has recently gained some notice for its unusual boke' when used wide open.

I can think of a few 50mm lenses worse than the Domiplan. The Steinheil 2.8/50 Cassaron might be the very worst 50mm lens ever made for an SLR. This is a front-element focusing triplet with ineffective coating, so expect super soft corners, low contrast, and bad color reproduction (my copy was not a fluke, I've had three copies pass through my hands and all of them were terrible). ISCO made a front-element focusing triplet that's not much better, which they marketed under a bewildering number of names (Iscotar, Iscolor, Iscovitar, etc.). There are also a few bad Japanese lenses in the 50-55mm range, but most of these are so rare it's not worth mentioning them. A good condition Domiplan will give good performance if you stick to the basic f16-11-8 range of apertures.

Somehow the Schneider Xenon never seems to get the credit it deserves here. I have one in M42 and two copies in Exakta mount. It is the only 50 I have that is sharp right at max aperture (albeit only in the center, the corners are quite soft wide open). Stopping it down doesn't make it sharper, except in the corners. The Xenon has beautiful color rendering and is well corrected. I prefer the older big barrel version, the "compact" version from the 70s is really small, true, but the focus ring is too small to get an easy grip on and it's also easy to accidentally change the aperture while focusing.

Untitled by Berang Berang, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom