Paulie707
Member
Hello,
This is my first post so please be kind... I should also state upfront that I am no expert or tech whizz. I am someone who appreciates style and feel and the old way of building things that looked great.
So...to the point... I have had several Zorkis over the years. Currently I have a Zorki 1 that I seem to have had good luck with as the collapsible lens has given some great results (mostly portraits). I've just bought a 3m and I would like to invest in a really good lens, without breaking the bank. After a lot of research on here, I'm looking at the Canon serenar 50mm 1.8. Does anyone have experience of using this lens with a Zorki? And if so, does it noticeably improve results? It comes with a standard Jupiter 8 50mm and I know these can return great results. But I wondered if anyone could emphatically state that adding something like the Canon was a great idea.
Thank you!
This is my first post so please be kind... I should also state upfront that I am no expert or tech whizz. I am someone who appreciates style and feel and the old way of building things that looked great.
So...to the point... I have had several Zorkis over the years. Currently I have a Zorki 1 that I seem to have had good luck with as the collapsible lens has given some great results (mostly portraits). I've just bought a 3m and I would like to invest in a really good lens, without breaking the bank. After a lot of research on here, I'm looking at the Canon serenar 50mm 1.8. Does anyone have experience of using this lens with a Zorki? And if so, does it noticeably improve results? It comes with a standard Jupiter 8 50mm and I know these can return great results. But I wondered if anyone could emphatically state that adding something like the Canon was a great idea.
Thank you!
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Zorki was produced in two stages. Yearlier are same as earlier Leica, would have lens individually shimmed to match individual camera. After War Leicas were made with kept standard. Zorki as any FSU - never. They would measure it on factory for each camera and write actual number in the camera passport to be included in the camera box. You might have perfectly aligned Industar lens for Zorki. Maybe it was mated on factory or in the service after purchase.
Buying any other lens for Zorki will require to check it for focus accuracy. The faster lens is the more affected images could be.
IMO, Canon is better built, but this is it. J-3 or J-8 is way to go with FSU
Buying any other lens for Zorki will require to check it for focus accuracy. The faster lens is the more affected images could be.
IMO, Canon is better built, but this is it. J-3 or J-8 is way to go with FSU
Paulie707
Member
That's really interesting - thank you. So you don't really believe that a canon lens will automatically improve the performance of a Zorki but that it's better to stick with the lens that was coupled with it when it was produced?
I have read something similar before, but I had hoped that a better lens would equal better pictures. Having said that, I have proved to myself that the little collapsible lens that came with my Zorki 1 is capable of some great shots.
Anyone else think a Canon Serenar 50 would improve a Zorki 3m?
I have read something similar before, but I had hoped that a better lens would equal better pictures. Having said that, I have proved to myself that the little collapsible lens that came with my Zorki 1 is capable of some great shots.
Anyone else think a Canon Serenar 50 would improve a Zorki 3m?
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
I agree about the Jupiter 8. I once owned a Serenar and although it is a bit faster than Jupiter, OMHO it isnt that much better than a good Jupiter 8, at least on B/W film.
Cheers
Cheers
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Is it an industar 22/50? Ive one of those and sometimes I use it with my IIIb. Mine is multicoated and its a joy to use
wolves3012
Veteran
There is a slight technical difference between the Leica standard (which the Canon is built to) and FSU standard. In most real-world shooting scenarios, it doesn't matter but with a fast lens and closer-end focus it can matter. The speed advantage of f/1.8 vs the f/2 of the Jupiter 8 is nominal in almost all situations so I would not let that sway you. Frankly, I'd try out the Jupiter 8 first and see what you think. The Canon is possibly better, technically (although I can't state that from personal knowledge) and it could probably be re-shimmed to work properly on the Zorki if necessary.
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
Get a Jupiter-8 before the next wave of art lens remaking. Shoot test shots directly or check focus accuracy by the ground glass/matte-finish tape method (It's a pity you can't do this with Z-1). If the lens is good then you are good to go. If it's no good you can tinker it or trash it and get another one.
My personal experience is the black version has little to none need of (re-)shimming, while the early silver one has more problem in this aspect, even on FSU bodies. Other people may have different experience.
My personal experience is the black version has little to none need of (re-)shimming, while the early silver one has more problem in this aspect, even on FSU bodies. Other people may have different experience.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
It's a matter of luck with all second-hand lenses that you get a good, bad or indifferent one. It's not just ex-USSR stuff and the fact that the lens may be 60, 65 or 70 years old and had 10 owners might affect it. BTW, there are some that think only ex-USSR lenses can be dropped and damaged but I'm not one of them...
Dare I suggest you show us one or two of your good shots and then we can comment properly?
BTW, it doesn't cost much to get a camera and lenses' registration checked and adjusted. FWIW, I use an Industar-61 on the Leica M9 a lot more than my posher lenses that were made for it, mostly because I like the results. And the 61 is the plain version and is used just as it came off the USSR made camera.
Regards, David
It's a matter of luck with all second-hand lenses that you get a good, bad or indifferent one. It's not just ex-USSR stuff and the fact that the lens may be 60, 65 or 70 years old and had 10 owners might affect it. BTW, there are some that think only ex-USSR lenses can be dropped and damaged but I'm not one of them...
Dare I suggest you show us one or two of your good shots and then we can comment properly?
BTW, it doesn't cost much to get a camera and lenses' registration checked and adjusted. FWIW, I use an Industar-61 on the Leica M9 a lot more than my posher lenses that were made for it, mostly because I like the results. And the 61 is the plain version and is used just as it came off the USSR made camera.
Regards, David
css9450
Veteran
I have both the Canon 1.8 and the Jupter-8 50mm. I can't tell any difference between the photos from them! The Jupiter is attractive because it cost just a fraction of almost everything else I own. Tremendous value for the money.
Paulie707
Member
Thanks everyone - this is really helpful stuff. I would love to post some links to my 'better' efforts but I am in the process of re-doing my Flickr page where they were all housed. I will see if I can do that this weekend though. Hopefully I'll also have the Zorki 3m by then too!
I wonder if this is much like playing the guitar, in that Hendrix could get a tune out of my rotten old, bent-neck, 12 string while I make it sound like a screaming cat. In other words, it's perhaps more about my technique than assuming a 'better' lens will improve things...
I still LOVE the look of the Canons though!
I wonder if this is much like playing the guitar, in that Hendrix could get a tune out of my rotten old, bent-neck, 12 string while I make it sound like a screaming cat. In other words, it's perhaps more about my technique than assuming a 'better' lens will improve things...
I still LOVE the look of the Canons though!
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
If it's any help, you have to make really large prints for the lens quality to start affecting things. Most people, according to the local 1 hour lab., prefer 4"x6" and I doubt if any differences will notice at that size. Although on forums people talk as though they are doing posters and demand that quality, at enormous expense.
What's most likely to affect the lens quality is what the previous owner(s) did with it, how often they dropped it or, worse, took it to pieces to clean. OTOH, dropping lenses can sometimes improve things but it's rare.
I have a friend who was expecting weeks in hospital to deal with a back problem and then one day slipped on some ice and was cured. Like I said, it can happen but not very often.
Regards, David
If it's any help, you have to make really large prints for the lens quality to start affecting things. Most people, according to the local 1 hour lab., prefer 4"x6" and I doubt if any differences will notice at that size. Although on forums people talk as though they are doing posters and demand that quality, at enormous expense.
What's most likely to affect the lens quality is what the previous owner(s) did with it, how often they dropped it or, worse, took it to pieces to clean. OTOH, dropping lenses can sometimes improve things but it's rare.
I have a friend who was expecting weeks in hospital to deal with a back problem and then one day slipped on some ice and was cured. Like I said, it can happen but not very often.
Regards, David
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I have used Canon lenses on a Fed 5c and on a Zorki 4, a 25mm and a 35mm Canon lens but despite the greater depth of field leeway some lens/camera combos worked ok and some did not. I personally think that overall, FSU cameras work better with FSU lenses.