Which is your favorite FSU "normal lens" and why?

Which is your favorite FSU "normal lens" and why?

  • Industar 22 (50mm f3.5)

    Votes: 38 6.8%

  • Industar 50 (50mm f3.5)

    Votes: 29 5.2%

  • Industar 26 (52mm f2.8)

    Votes: 15 2.7%

  • Industar 61 (52mm f2.8)

    Votes: 91 16.4%

  • Jupiter 8 (50mm f2.0)

    Votes: 249 44.9%

  • Jupiter 3 (50mm f1.5)

    Votes: 147 26.5%

  • other

    Votes: 38 6.8%
  • Total voters
    555
I like the Jupiter 3 50/1.5. When one is shimmed right for whatever camera, only much more expensive lenses can out preform it. MOF wide open it's better than most any Canon rf lenses & I have seen. Besides it looks awesome on my silver & black Bessa R. I have several russian lenses & one lens I wish to try more is the rigid 50/3.5. It'a a great portrait lens that I found out quite by accident.
 
wdeskiew said:
My absolutely favourite is Helios-103.
Click to expand...

Are these any good ? I've got about a dozen plus the one on a Kiev 5.

I shall just have to try a couple.

Here's a photo with a '66 I-61 panda from last year.

f74e2dc3.jpg
 
The only problem with the Helios-103 is that the aperture blades are shiny and can produce an off flare. I blackened the ones in my copies.
 
Helios 103 - using a Sharpie

Helios 103 - using a Sharpie

Brian Sweeney said:
The only problem with the Helios-103 is that the aperture blades are shiny and can produce an off flare. I blackened the ones in my copies.
Click to expand...

Yes Brian, I read your informative sticky post about three years ago using a Sharpie.

I would prefer to read the post again before attempting the 'operation'

I've seen some excellent photos on RF taken with the 103.:)
 
I have owned a FED 50/3,5, colapsible Industars 22 and 50, a 1975 Jupiter 8 and a Leica Summar (not FSU). I prefer the Industars 50 and 22 for there great performance, flare resistance (especially when compared to the Juptier 8), contrast and collapsibility. As far as bokeh is concerned, the winner is the Jupiter 8 but - as previously said - it is really prone to flare even with a hood and its aluminium construction made it less durable. The Summar was a bokeh machine but not versatile enough.

My current
 
Hi Guys, My favorite "Normal" lens is two lenses actually. So I don't know why
the query is restricted to 50-52mm sizes; My two all time favorite normal lenses
are the Helios 103 53mm-f1.8 on my Kiev and the Helios -44M 58mm F2 on my Zenit TTLs
and my Zenit 12xps. These lenses just make better images than my other
"Normal " FSU lenses. I have 2-3 examples of all the FSU lenses listed in the
poll. They also are very good performers.
Yes I know, the Zenits are SLRs...but that Helios - 44M is darned good...

Tony
 
Last edited:
I voted for the I 22 perhaps because I got a good one and my I 50 is not as nice. I love the small size of these lenses. More often I use a J 8 with a focusing tab. It has really clean glass and delivers wonderful images. I think it's from 1956 Joe
 
Any of those lens can produce excellent results. I have every russian 50 except the j-3 and the I-26/22 and I really have a hard time deciding wihich is best. the Bokeh on the J-8 is fantastic and the helos-103 is so sharp. it really is hard to beat in that catagory. it reminds me of some zeiss glass I own. and it has great color rendition, plus its so cheap compared to German and Asian Glass. it really cant be beat!!!!!!!! Brian, great photos!!!!!!!!!!!!! Kievman
 
In my time I've owned a J8 and a J3.
The J8 was great, easy to use, great results.

However, I then got a J3 (quite possibly from Krosya). I guess I got lucky, but it worked a treat on my Bessa R. I really loved that lens. Why did I love it? Because it gave me shots like this:

Stephy by Tom Swanborough-Nilson, on Flickr

I'm actually currently looking for a J8 to go on my new Bessa. Unless I find a J3 at a bargain price. Currently it seems that it's cheaper for me to buy a Zorki with a J8 than a J8 on its own. Odd.
 
Without a doubt it's the Industar 61, the sharpest 50mm class lens for the money I've ever seen. However it's quite often badly made and said to be radioactive, so my vote actually went to the Industar 22, an amazing bargain of a lens (if the condition is acceptable).
 
I voted for Jupiter 8 and Industar 22. The J-8 I like very much but I prefer the I-22 when minimum bulk is needed and the light isn't poor. I'm also impressed by the I-61 and very impressed with the H-103. Actually, come to think of it, I have *no* bad FSU lenses!
 
I have used Industar -50 (collapsible) and -61, Jupiter-8 and Helios-103. The Tessar-types I-61 and I-50 are sharp and pretty serious lenses. The Jupiter-8 has the best OOF, while the Helios-103 is, IMHO, the best overall lens - considering sharpness, contrast and OOF rendition.

I know, I should try the Jupiter-3!

The Helios-44 mentioned above is also an excellent normal lens, but it is for the evil SLR Zenit series.
 
POssibly jupiter-8. But I also enjoy my I-26, quite sharp and loved how the photos come up. I sold it with my zorky-4. My jupiter 8 contax mount is going today with the kiev 4 and now I down to my trusty J-8 (ltm).
 
I agree with Greg.

My choice is a 1953 J-3 re-lubed and shimmied for Leica-M, then close-focus modified. This is a fantastic all-rounder regardless of the price.

It's fast. It's very lightweight. It looks like a cheap old lens, and nobody objects to having their photo taken with it. It's almost like they look at the age of the lens and subconciously understand that every facial blemish will not be recorded in exacting detail.

At 1.5 or f/2 it is just great for portraits and low light work. Not too sharp, but not soft either. Lots of "glow" in black and white. In good light I mostly shoot this lens at f/2 for depth of field reasons, but I really appreciate having an extra stop when I need it in low light.... which I frequently do.
By f/5.6 onwards it is a different lens - properly sharp and precise. I really value this for landscapes and detail shots. Because the character changes so much when stopping down, it's almost like having two lenses in one. I have never had a lens that changes it's character so much, and I find that I am considering this change of character for creative reasons just as much as depth of field. So it really is a lens that affects the way I visualise a scene. Hard to explain, and kind of weird for a "standard/boring" focal length, but it has wormed it's way into my brain for sure.

Criticisms....
1) It can flare spectacularly on occassion. I am talking about a full-on curved rainbow streaking across the bottom of images. I use a vented hood, and I only see this effect in very bright backlit scences, but it sometimes gives such a strange ambience to a scence that I just have to bin the shot or .
2) I wish it had a focussing tab ..... any ideas Brian???
3) No apperture stops, and they work in the wrong direction for my VF exposure meter. Not a deal-breaker, but something I would put right if I were designing a new one.

This is my first 50 sonnar, and I am pretty much in love with what it offers for such a small size. If I ever have the misfortune to do anything horrible to it, I would very seriously consider the ZM 50 sonnar because i love what the J3 has given me, but would like the above three drawbacks addressed. But unless I actually break the J3 I simply cannot justify the cost of a new ZM given my extreme satissfaction with the J3.

After my experience with the J3 I really do consider the 50mm sonnar design in general to be the perfect walk-around standard lens for me on a 35mm rangefinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom