Some Pictures with the Hybrid Canon/J-3 lens on the Zorki-3C

[Sonnar Brian]

Been home sick today, got around to doing some scanning.

These are with the "extremely-Hacked" Canon 50/1.5 that was missing the rear module. I used the rear module from a J-3, and played with the element spacing vs main shim. The trick was to get the RF to agree with the actual focus at a near and far set-point. I used 5m and 2m.

It works, and I use it on a Zorki 3. The "signature" is not quite like the Canon or J-3.

Setup on the LEFT used for these.

Anyway, here are the pictures.

Spring Leaves at Sunset. Wide-Open. Full-frame, and Tight crop. It "actually" brings the image into Focus!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Dogwood Blossoms, wide-open.

This lens has less contrast than the Canon or J-3. Sonnar's are usually known for higher contrast, as they have so few air/glass layers.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Stopped down to F2.8 for these. Images at infinity and F1.5 were in focus. More "incredibly" the field-of-focus was as flat as a Sonnar gets. Shot of backyard is compressed a fair bit for the 300K limit. Print looked sharper.

 

[Peter_Jones]

I love the look of the image in your second post on this thread, a real "dreamy" quality.


I feel inspired enough to hunt out lenses at car boot sales tomorrow, just to see if I can cobble something together (if I succeed it will be pure luck) 😀

 

[raid]

Another innovative job well done, Brian. Such a project allows you to "think" about the role of the glass elements for certain levels of contrast and the for the overall fingerprint, as "they" call it.

Raid

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I really got lucky on this one. The J-3 is a slightly longer focal length than the Canon, and the rear group is noticeably larger in diameter. I just thought of it as a "zoom lens" that needed to be fixed in place. I though the center would be infocus, and all sorts of bizarre stuff would happen at the edges. I am very happr with the outcome.

 

[raid]

How would you rate your lens compared to the Canon 50/1.5?
Is it a 9/10?

Raid

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I'm going to do a "side-by-side" test one of these days soon. On the long list of things to do.

Quick "feel": the Hybrid is lower contrast, both have creamy Bokeh. The real lens is sharper wide-open. At F4, both do well. The Hybrid may be "creamier" looking as it is lower contrast. The odd thing about the Hybrid is the extra back-focus. It's almost 2mm more than the original. As the Focus agrees with the Rangefinder, the effective focal length is the same.