Best Collapsible Lenses - Leica Industar Or Fed? 5 Collapsible Lenses On Test! Plus BB2 BLOWER TEST!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ต.ค. 2024
- Today I test five collapsible vintage lenses, worth from £50 to £300, with some astonishing results!
Collapsible lenses are small and beautiful, and they make fantastic images too - but should you buy Leica, or are the MUCH cheaper Former Soviet lenses equal - or better - in quality?
There are five collapsible lenses on test today:
1. Leica Elmar 50mm f3.5 uncoated
2. Fed 10 50mm f3.5 uncoated
3. Fed 10 50mm f3.5 coated
4. Industar 22 50mm f3.5
5. Leica Summitar 50mm f2
The results of this test astonished me, and they may surprise you too - but only if you watch the video!
There's also a feature on the Nitecore BB2 electronic blower/brush system, a fantastic little piece of kit from Nitecore that will make all of your camera and photographic equipment sparkle! Its variable speed system means it can vary its output to suit the job, and its filters make sure the airstream is clear and clean.
Check out the segment in the video!
These are some of the most beautiful lenses ever made, and the best of this group is not expensive! Check out the video to see which one it is!
If you like the content on this channel, why not become a patron at www.patreon.co...
Thanks for watching!
Buy the Nitecore BB2 Blower System here:
Link:
US:
BB2: www.amazon.com...
BB2 with cleaning pen: www.amazon.com...
BB2 with 2PCS Lens Cleaning Brushes: www.amazon.com...
Filter of BB2: www.amazon.com...
UK：
BB2：www.amazon.co....
BB2 with cleaning pen：www.amazon.co....
BB2 with 2PCS Lens Cleaning Brushes: www.amazon.co....
BB2 with filter：www.amazon.co....
Thanks for the nice review Nigel! However, the Elmar is for sure a coated one. First of all it has the international aperture number scale 3.5-5.6-8-11-16-22 with was introduced after WWII when all lenses were coated and seondly the elements have the typical blue color of the fifties coatings. Uncoated Elmars do have the german aperture scale 3.5-4.5-6.3-9-12.5-18.
Best regards
Alex
thank you for sharing your value opinion around these collapsible lenes, really enjoy watching your video, and surprisingly i don't feel it is a 40min long video. many thanks!
Thank you for this review.
Early Elmar and Fed-10 have similar look, as fed/industar collapsible lenses were all copied from Elmer's exterior build, however, though based on Elmar, they used slightly different optical formula in Fed-10 in terms how it focused, thus able to decrease the size a bit. Later Industar 22, 50 and Fed 50 had improvements to their optical formula that resembles Tessar optical formula with modified rare element group, that is similar to one of the Hektor designs, thus producing some sharp results in a small package. Soviet optical engineers researched and experimented with different formulas, modifying their designs. They failed measurably with a few designs in the pre-WWII era, but after the war they managed to surprise the world with such beauties as Mir, Tair and Era, to name a few. With best collapsible lens being probably Industar-50, out of all of them.
Very timely! I have a new camera coming, and I am trying to decide whether to use an Elmar, an Industar 22, or the 50mm Summitar. Based on your recommendations, I think I'll start with the Elmar. Thanks for the info!
Glad it was useful!
The only collapsible lens I have used was a f2. 8 Elmar on a Leica M2 back in the 1960s. Very nice if you can afford one today.
Today I have my 1958 Zenith C with a fixed 50mm f3. 5 Industar with wonderful coatings.
I also have a Jupiter 8 50mm f2 from 1974. Excellent quality results with great bokeh. I use it on my poor man's Leica M2 copy, the Zorki 4k.
Great video as always. I own the Jupiter 3/1951and Industar 22/1954 both lovely lenses and frequently used. In the cabinet I have the Jupiter 11/1953 and Jupiter 8/1968, rarely used. Regards
Thank you for the review! An excellent rendering from these pre-WW2(?) lenses. No reason to be reluctant when considering buying these lenses with such nice image quality. And a very fine demonstration of the difference between using and not using a lens hood.
Thanks Nigel! The Summitar is one of my favourite lenses. My copy is from 1942 with coating, presumably applied after WWII. It may not be the sharpest wide open but stopped down to 2.8 and beyond it's great in the centre with some field curvature that can be worked around.
I collapse the Summitar on my Sony A7 and NEX camera without any concern. If you mount the Summitar on an adapter and then collapse the lens, you'll see that the back of the lens when collapsed barely extends past the end of the adapter mount, even with the infinity focus lock engaged. I'd be more concern with the Elmar 3.5 as it looks like the length of the barrel is longer so it would probably extend further into the camera body. None of these lenses when collapsed should come anywhere near the sensor assuming the adapter is the correct length; if that were the case then it would also have contacted the shutter mechanism on a rangefinder body of the period. It might crash into the baffles around a digital crop sensor though!
Hello. And thanks for taking the time to produce your excellent reviews.
I've the industar 50 both collapsible (fed1) and fixed (zenit 3m) both later lenses. How would they compare to the earlier models? .
The 3m is a beautiful camera so underrated. A review would be wonderful. Thanks.
Nice comparison Nigel! I own the little industar and it's really a thing shooting with this glass in my sony A7RII. You said nothing about the minimum distance focus, that is really, really high compared to modern standards, about 1m. It's funny how this glass resolves the high resolution sensor, it looks more or less nice!! Thank you, see you soon!
Have you considered filling the Elmar’s scratch with black paint? I got the idea from astronomers who have been known to paint scratches in the mirrors of big research telescopes to cut down on scattered light. It might not work well, but it would mage a nice experiment.
When it comes to size: Elmar vs Fed, as far as I know, the difference is that Fed is Tessar-type lens (four elements in three group), and Elmar isn't copy of it (it's fife elements i three group). The thing is Leitz coulnd't use Tessar-type lens because of Zeiss copyright, so they made Elmar lens. It's hard to say better or worse, but the fact is that Tessar-type lenses have become more popular. After the war, the Russians didn't have to worry about copyrights and gave tessar lenses to their Leica copies. Hope I didn't mess something up :)
No, the Elmar is also a Tessar type lens with 4 elements in 3 groups. the last 2 elements are cemented. The only difference between an Elmar and a Tessar is the position of the aperture. The 50mm Elmar has the aperture directly located behind the first element, whereas the Tessar (and Industar) has it between the 2nd and 3rd element.
The FED is a Tessar ( like the Industar) not an Elmar. The Elmar is not a Tessar even it might look similar. Elmar's iris is after the first elment , Tessar ( Industar and Fed) has it in the middle. There was a court case between Zeiss Ikon and Leitz when the Elmar was introduced.
Hi Nigel, great video thank you.
Interested in the blower as plaged with dust in the darkroom, would you consider using the blower to clean negatives?
Thanks
Tony
So when you consider a coated fed 10 would that be single coated or m/c coated
btw I have a Industar 22
and also a Jupiter 8......
I also like Industar 50mm lenses with 10 aperture blades too.......
Thanks for the video Nigel!
Thanks for the video. Yes, the lubricants are causing more problems these days and you must either dare to try yourself or invest money to get it back to working order. I just received my 1952 sonnar 85/2.0 back from service which was so stuck that i was afraid to ruin the cameras bajonet on my contax back from service. paid more for the service than i paid for the lens 30 years ago and was searching some time to find a workshop doing these where i can take it myself. but i didn't dare to try it myself, afraid to ruin it even further. all these uncoated where made when colour film was not at all widely available at prices average amateurs were able or willing to pay and processing including printing was still a job for many people to do at home. best albrecht
Cpllapsible lenses? I think they are more suited to the Fuji x-e series (the rangefinder type) rather than looking a bit lost on a larger camera?
Great in-depth episode again
George
Does it matter. It's not a fashion statement
Thanks again Nigel
Interesting !
Have you tested the Foca lenses? Like the 50mm f1.9 it's french brand who make collapsible lenses for rangefinders
I haven't used one, but would very much like to!
@@zenography7923 Unfortunately the Foca lenses Oplar/Oplarex do not use the LTM 39 thread if threaded and a unique bayonet . So film only with Foca cameras , there are a few converted/adapted lenses around but too few and rare/expensive , only for the very commited.
Very interesting, thankyou
Happy birthday when ever it Is 😀
Thanks! I've stopped counting now though.
Do you have a favorite guide for doing work on the FED-10? I've got one of my own that's also got an extremely stiff aperture that will need attention soon. Fortunately, at least, the focus helicoid is behaving nicely.
Perhaps this might help? www.mu-43.com/threads/servicing-the-aperture-ring-of-an-industar-10-aka-fed-10.21070/
Good luck!
@@zenography7923 I'll give that a look, thanks!
Hello Nigel my Friend !!!!! I am a bit presumptuous ,,,, But I think that if we were closer in proximity we could enjoy a cup of tea and have an enjoyable chat about our love of cameras :) :) :) I hope that You will not take this as a criticism of You as many people,, use words (in my,, maybe ridiculous belief) not saying precisely what they mean....... One word that is like fingernails on a chalkboard is "cheap" I was taught by a favorite professor, that word co-notated that the object being described as something that is of quite bad construction....... I think that You mean that the object is inexpensive and that is more precisely what You are meaning to express !!!!!!! Please My Dear Friend use "inexpensive" if that is what You truly mean..... ThankYou for the great Videos You produce ........Just one old mans thought ,, John Y. ,,, Phx. Az. USA :) :) :)
Hey John, it would be fun to have a cup of tea and discuss cameras - drop me a line if you're ever in London!
@@zenography7923 Hello Nigel,, My wife is from Latvia (she is Russian ) when I met her 21yrs ago Her brother was a photographer and his eyes were going bad and he gave me a Salyut Camera and a Fed 3, which led me to collect a few Fed and Zorki cameras I have an interesting collection as I see You must also have :) ...... We plan (since Covid is not so bad) to go to Latvia this coming summer, so if we have a lay over in England I may just try to contact You :) We are not rich people so we may not be able to do so.... We have not traveled to London and it has always been on my wish list.... Hope You stay Happy n Healthy :) :) :)
By the way same goes for me if You get to USA,, Im sure You would want to go to California and maybe We could connect there :) :) :)
The Dawes bike is a single Super Galaxy full size frame touring bike.
Hello I have a question regarding some vintage equipment is it possible email you. Thank you Mike.
Thanks a lot for that video!!!
Glad it was helpful!
My issue with Soviet lens is that I find it difficult to focus. If I use F3.5 in infinite focus, it will come out of focus. I need to use above F8 for a sharp image but can’t get Bokeh.
Am I doing something wrong?
Take care of your throat, drink some Indian ginger tea 🫖
Are you shooting film or mirrorless? What camera/lens are you using?
@@zenography7923 I shoot with film. I have a Zorki 4K with a Jupiter 8, the shots do tend to come out of focus in one area but OK on the other. I’m kind of getting the trick of it a bit.
Then I have a Helios 44, if I shoot it at F2 with my subjects more than five meters away, they will come out of focus. Same picture at F5.6 came out fine.
I shot a film with a Yashica D TLR, together with the Zorki 4K. The Yashica pictures came all great. I was joking I was not surprised the URSS collapsed 😅
@@rpgbb My guess is that this has to be because of the different flange focal distance between the lens and the camera. The Zorki 4 uses the same flange focal distance as Leica M39 (28,8mm) . The threads are M39x1, not M39x26tpi, as in the Leica. ( Close, but not exactly the same.) As far as I know, the M39x1 mount on the old helios 44, mounted on the Zenit cameras, uses a flange focal distance of 45.2mm. (Pretty close to M42mount) This misalignment will prevent you to focus in infinity. Test out a lens with a Zorki M39x1, or a Leica LTM/L39 mount, and you will probably achieve focus at infinity.
Shiny inside is a con, not a positive thing. You do not want the light to have any shiny surface to bounce at.
True, shiny bits inside lenses don't help. I was surprised the elmar has a shiny bit inside - unnecessary machining and polishing in the Leica lens!
The Elmar 2.8 a better alternative