Zenit TTL Test

[farlymac]

A gift from a friend, it came in handy for Red Oktober on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/groups/octfsu/

Thanks, Ron.

Fresh Out by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Water Tank In Sun by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Got You Covered by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Notes Of Passing Through by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Zenit TTL with Helios-44M by P F McFarland, on Flickr


More photos at https://flic.kr/s/aHsknkuabs

PF

 

[littleearth]

Solid results.
My first SLR. Great lens but the camera had the worst viewfinder ever.

 

[Wulfthari]

I have a 12XP, bare to bone camera but you can get good pics.

 

[Marihino]

I had a Zenit 11 (pretty much the same, but with external non-ttl meter, not functioning anyway) and took some good pics with it. Those Helios lenses have a signature swirly bokeh when shot wide open against the light.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I own a Zenit 122 with Helios-44 lens. Built like Soviet tank. Simple, easy-to-use. Can take good photos!

 

[farlymac]

I own a Zenit 122 with Helios-44 lens. Built like Soviet tank. Simple, easy-to-use. Can take good photos!

Hope to get one of those someday. I just like the modernized design so much.

PF

 

[Wulfthari]

Too be honest I prefer the 19, it's the most complete Zenit you can find.

 

[farlymac]

Too be honest I prefer the 19, it's the most complete Zenit you can find.

Oh, I just wanted one for the looks, especially the grey anniversary model. Haven't made up my mind yet on which one I'd want as a user.

PF

 

[pvdhaar]

I had a Zenit-E with a Helios-44. Great camera, great lens. Worked for over 20 years without a single hick-up, and I wasn't babying it.

 

[oftheherd]

Was it a Zenit model that was sold in the States by another name? I know Spiratone sold them, but I don't recall the name. One of the photo mags of the day blew the whistle on them being USSR made. As far as I recall, they worked alright.

 

[farlymac]

Was it a Zenit model that was sold in the States by another name? I know Spiratone sold them, but I don't recall the name. One of the photo mags of the day blew the whistle on them being USSR made. As far as I recall, they worked alright.

My Kalimar SR200 is a renamed Zenit E, and the B was sold as the SR100. I'm pretty sure Cambridge had a house brand series of Zenits too. Zenit cameras in general work fine, as long as the shutter doesn't come apart, which they are want to do. My E, and another TTL have this problem.

PF

 

[xayraa33]

A gift from a friend, it came in handy for Red Oktober on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/groups/octfsu/

Thanks, Ron.

Fresh Out by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Water Tank In Sun by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Got You Covered by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Notes Of Passing Through by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Zenit TTL with Helios-44M by P F McFarland, on Flickr


More photos at https://flic.kr/s/aHsknkuabs

PF

Second last photo has that American Civil War bokeh, no need for a Petzval lens with the Helios 44 lens.

 

[MRohlfing]

I had a Zenit-E with Helios-44

The lens was good, but the light meter could have been better. The range of shutter speeds is very limited: B, 1/30 - 1/500

And the viewfinder, oh yes, that viewfinder! Coverage of 78% (!!) or so! 😀

 

[bobby_novatron]

Second last photo has that American Civil War bokeh, no need for a Petzval lens with the Helios 44 lens.

That's a very common feature I've noticed with many Soviet-made prime lenses, some of them have a swirly bokeh with oblong flattened ovals in the background. Seems common to a lot of Soviet lens designs, intentional or not.

You can see it in the background with this photo I took using the Helios-103 53mm F1.8 rangefinder lens (in Kiev / Contax mount).

 

[bobby_novatron]

One more photo to celebrate the victorious Socialist technology that is the Zenit SLR! Unfortunately I had to use imperialist decadent American color film in my Communist camera, but in typical fashion the Zenit camera worked perfectly.

Zenit-122, Helios-44M 58mm F2 lens, Kodak Gold 200 (expired 2010)

 

[gb hill]

That camera reminds me of Larry Dressler aka joker. I like Larry but he shoots quirky camera's & to me this looks like a camera he'd use.😀

 

[xayraa33]

That's a very common feature I've noticed with many Soviet-made prime lenses, some of them have a swirly bokeh with oblong flattened ovals in the background. Seems common to a lot of Soviet lens designs, intentional or not.

You can see it in the background with this photo I took using the Helios-103 53mm F1.8 rangefinder lens (in Kiev / Contax mount).

I have both FSU lenses and find that swirly Petzval lens type bokeh to be more pronounced using the Helios 44-2 lens, as opposed to the Helios 103 on my Kiev camera.

The Helios 44-2 lens was a direct copy of the Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2 lens and both examples make great portrait lenses.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I have both FSU lenses and find that swirly Petzval lens type bokeh to be more pronounced using the Helios 44-2 lens, as opposed to the Helios 103 on my Kiev camera.

The Helios 44-2 lens was a direct copy of the Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2 lens and both examples make great portrait lenses.

Thanks for the info about the Helios-44, I wasn't aware of its heritage. No big surprise that the Soviets copied the Germans' design.

 

[xayraa33]

Thanks for the info about the Helios-44, I wasn't aware of its heritage. No big surprise that the Soviets copied the Germans' design.

It could very well be that the Soviets acquired the right to manufacture the lens legally through war reparations from Germany after WW 2.

The Kiev RF camera and it lenses were gotten this way, as they carted off many pieces of machinery from Jena and the Germans even built them assembly lines to be shipped to the USSR to make the Soviet made Kiev camera, which was a re-labelled Contax. They even got hold of Zeiss technicians and made them come to the USSR to train the Soviets in building these cameras and lenses.

 

[locheeboy]

Thanks for the info about the Helios-44, I wasn't aware of its heritage. No big surprise that the Soviets copied the Germans' design.

Well, one man's copy is another man's derivation. The Biotar is a double Gauss design, copied (derived from) the Gauss of the early 1920s, in turn derived from an even simpler Gauss telescope objective. Almost every lens manufacturer worldwide has/had a double Gauss design in their portfolio. The Russians didn't invent copying in photography.

Everything new in photography has already been done by the early years of the 20th. century (ecxept digital).

Hi Farley, good shots but ye need a filter on that lens (or mebbe the metering's a bit off?)

Ah have several Helios lenses

44 -13 blades ( silver) M39 screw
44 - 8 blades (black lacquer)
44-2 (KMZ) 8 blades
44-2 (MMZ) 8 blades
44-2 (Valdai) 8 blades
44-M (kmz) A/M switch - kit lens on Zenit EM)
44-m-4

They are all double Gauss, differences being in coatings from different factories, although some coatings look the same colours but appear tae be different thicknesses (thin-nesses).

The different numbering denotes different optical resolutions; the higher the number the greater the resolution.

Ah find that choice of background+aperture by the photographer determines the bokeh tae a greater extent than the lens model.

PS Not many folk know that the American Zeiss operations were "nationalized" and run by the US government from WW2 'til 1960.

Russians weren't the only Socialists copying photographic engineering...😱😎

PPS Ah'll try and get time tae put up shots from the different lenses...

My Zenit, bought new in 1980 - Had a Zenit B and a Zenit E before this...

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31085243/DSC01690.JPG