Industar-69 28/2.8

[Ricohfanboy]

As for the question of half-frame lens vs. APS-C size sensor: Note that the APS-C crop factor applies on *both* sides of the sensor, i.e. an APS-C sensor is not "1.5 times smaller" than full frame, but (1.5x1.5) times smaller. In other words, APS-C *is* almost exactly half-frame:

24x18mm = half frame vs.
25x17mm = APS-C (approximately)

In other words: half frame lenses *should* be good on APS-C sensors! If I recall correctly, somebody on this forum mounted Olympus Pen (the film half-frame SLR) lenses on the M mount, too, with good results...?

[Tom Caldwell]

Yes they work fine, mine does, the mount is M39 ltm and it screws in properly. The only problem is that the flange back distance is not standard ltm and the adjustment stops short of infinity.

A fix promoted on the web says file the internal shoulders down to correct and it works 100℅. A vendor says remove the internal focus stop pin. The jury is still considering the verdict.

Tom

[33dollars]

.
If you can find a nice Jupiter-12 35mm f2.8 then those images you took will be even better. The J-12 is a very nice lens indeed and of course made for LTM. The aperture setting in front of the lens is common to the Orion-15, the Russar-MR2 and the Jupiter-12 as well and probably others. Many Russian lenses also have stepless apertures as well including the J-3, J-8 and J11 which are more conventionally external ring based. Best grab a J-12 quick before the word gets around.
Tom

Tom, Have you tried the Russar-MR2 & Orion-15 yet ?

[Tom Caldwell]

Yes I have.

I even bought the Orion-15 bfore the M mount was released. Is that crazy? Would mount but not focus to infinity on the NX10. No problems with fit on the GXR-M on which it is very neat. It is very much like a "super" industar-69 and of course it is built for ltm and needs no modification. In practice it is another Russian silver aluminium "special" not that there is anything wrong with this but they need proper resoect and care. Sometimes they can be knocked about. Mine is cosmetically fine but the focus ring is tight, despite pulling it apart and relubricating it the tightness is still there. Might try it again with less lubricant. Optically it is fine but it is a very slow lens (f6.3). It is wide enough and so-oh slow that focusing is not much of a problem anyway. By examples the Orion-15 has litle distortion which shows its ancestry as an aerial photography lens.

They are a bit more expensive probably because they are relatively rare but grace the M mount very nicely.

The Russar MP2 (in Roman characters) is really MR2 in Cyrillic, but this matters not except to cause some confusion. There is only one lens. It was made in very small numbers - mine is #00363 and possibly a "prototype" batch as it is not date coded. Mine has had a fairly "useful" life - I can't say that it was abused but merely used a lot. It was almost affordable, good ones fetch Leica-like prices. I think this represents more a rarity/collectible value rather than reflecting its worth as a lens. Mine works fine and I will get some worth-showing images with it shortly. It is f5.6 and 20mm and so is wider and faster than the Orion-15 as well as being much more expensive. Again in many ways it resembles the I-69 design stable with aperture worked around the lens. It is better built, even if hardly "exquisite" being well up to a usable commercial standard. It has that soviet era, and pre WWII generally, basic look about it. Lenses were instruments like knives and forks and none of this "nonsense" pretty refined look about them for dilettante photographers, they were workman's tools just like pliers and screwdrivers.

The Russar (sometimes shown as "Roussarie" which may be from the French) has a huge rear protrusion, even more than the Jupiter-12 and has its own special rear container tube which carries a separate cap. However it does fit the A12 m mount module.

Although obviously well used the lens carries a certain aura and graces my camera well. I have not had opportunity to put it to serious use since I bought it but hope to rectify this shortly. Everything on my example seems to work well.

Some time ago and before the A12 mount was released I photographed my Russian LTM lens collection on a Zorki 4K body to give an impression of how they looked on-camera. This series is in my gallery on dpreview. Should be easy enough to find.

As soon as I get the chance I will repeat this with the A12 mount.

Tom

[Tom Caldwell]

.
If you can find a nice Jupiter-12 35mm f2.8 then those images you took will be even better. The J-12 is a very nice lens indeed and of course made for LTM. The aperture setting in front of the lens is common to the Orion-15, the Russar-MR2 and the Jupiter-12 as well and probably others. Many Russian lenses also have stepless apertures as well including the J-3, J-8 and J11 which are more conventionally external ring based. Best grab a J-12 quick before the word gets around.
Tom

Tom, Have you tried the Russar-MR2 & Orion-15 yet ?

To answer the question directly. Yes I have tried them and am satisfied, but not seriously with subjects that would grace the image caught.

I suggest that we all chip some money into Pavel's Paypal tin so that he can buy one and test it for us

[33dollars]

I think an Orion-15 would work just that little bit bettera than a Industar-69

[Tom Caldwell]

I think an Orion-15 would work just that little bit bettera than a Industar-69

Yes the Orion-15 is a useful lens, have not got it with me atm but I was using the Russar yesterday and it works well. My Rissar has a little bit of variable feel to the focus motion and it might repay disassembly cleaning and relubrication. Only have an iPad to hand and have to figure out how to upload images from it when I get the chance to do so.

I have two Industar-69's - one a cery cheap but battered one that I have been experimenting with off and on, and the other in better condition that I will use as my good one once and if I destroy the rough one in my experiments. So far I have only removed the limit pin which then allows the lens to focus closer to infinity until it ultimately jams just short of the mark. But of course the indicator scale then is useless. But from playing around with it it seem to produce acceptable images. The only real recourse is to remove some some surface area on one side or the other of the inner mating areas. Apparently only about 1.5mm is necessary according to the flange back specifciations.

Comparing the I-69, O-15 and R-MR2 in hand the construction material quality is similar but i would agree that the latter two seem better built. The lenses are almost certainly better in the latter two. However they are all that small that really close inspection is hard, nor am I that interested - it is a bit like checking labels on bottles of wine, if it tastes ok then I regard it as a good drop. I don't really need to read the label to feel good about anything that has just brought a rosy glow of contentment. I guess it is basically on how big a premium you might be willing to pay to remove all risk.

I also suppose that I am of the character type where both experimentation and addressing then overcoming a challenge is more fun than assurances from others that by buying the right brand you know it has to be good (so don't y'all worry).

Meanwhile with my first extended session using a Jupiter-9 85mm f2.0 in ltm has proved it to be a very good lens indeed. This one is in great condition but the focus ring was a litle loose. A short session with a 1mm flat blade screwdriver and the two offending screws are tight enough - beware over-tightening such screws if ever doing this yourself - the screws are timy and the aluminium is often soft.

Tom

[Athena]

WOW!! A fantastic lot of pictures indeed!! I didn't read all the stuff about the lenses, so can't comment on that aspect of this post, but I had to comment on your pics...amazing job .

[riccadonna]

Pavel. About forgetting about the fact that this Industar is for half frame camera ( Chajka to be exact).I have one and originally it didn`t focus at infinity which id easy fixed. Quality like it`s wide open holgalike, some people would like the effect.Really sharp ruski one is Orion 28/6 and no distortion at edges (architecture!). Half- frame is in fact slightly bigger then APS-C. It´s half of 24x36 thus 24x18. So should anybody dream of super small high quality lenses for m-mount, then just have a look at many film Olympus Pen or Ricoh half frame, get one ,take the lens cell out, put in some sliding tube and prasto! .

[riccadonna]

Pavel. About forgetting about the fact that this Industar is for half frame camera ( Chajka to be exact).I have one and originally it didn`t focus at infinity which id easy fixed. Quality like it`s wide open holgalike, some people would like the effect.Really sharp ruski one is Orion 28/6 and no distortion at edges (architecture!). Half- frame is in fact slightly bigger then APS-C. It´s half of 24x36 thus 24x18. So should anybody dream of super small high quality lenses for m-mount, then just have a look at many film Olympus Pen or Ricoh Auto Half Frame EF ( four element HQ 25/2.8), get one ,take the lens cell out, put in precision helicoid and prasto! .