易攝網

 找回密碼
 註冊
搜索
樓主: dobs

一些與M42有關的資料

[複製鏈接]
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:37:55 | 顯示全部樓層
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:39:12 | 顯示全部樓層
得閒才會整理一下d post。

俄小微距頭今不如昔
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:39:35 | 顯示全部樓層
俄製8/3.5 FISHEYE及兩枝35/2.8移軸鏡:
http://www.shutterbug.net/features/0801sb_thewide/index.html
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:40:06 | 顯示全部樓層
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:41:09 | 顯示全部樓層
What lens to buy? (譯 By fox_moudle) (Hot!)

原文見這裏:
http://anusf.anu.edu.au/~aab900/photography/cameras/whatlens.htm

中譯本譯得不太好,現在以例子說明之:
"......最近以一個很低的價錢得到一支前蘇聯的Jupiter 9......使用起來仍然是像以往一樣不方便,但是鍍膜和飾漆都不錯,沒有70年代版本那樣嚴重的眩光問題,對比度高而且易碎,色彩還原不錯,nice backgrounds,加上近攝接圈很適合微距使用......"

而原文是:
"....Recently picked up a post-soviet Jupiter 9......Well, it is as unconvenient as ever, but well coated and finished, no problems with backlighting like the '70s version, high contrast and really crisp, good color rendition, nice backgrounds, nice for macro with extension rings too..."

建議大家看的時候以中英版本互相對照。
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:41:36 | 顯示全部樓層
對Helios 鏡頭的補充
Helios-44 58/2:
Helios 58mm, surprising! (The quality control of Russian lenses is bad!)

Heliso-40-2 85/1.5
Soviet Helios-40-2 85mm f/1.5 lens for M42 Cameras
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:41:59 | 顯示全部樓層
 樓主| 發表於 2005-9-27 19:42:58 | 顯示全部樓層
發表於 2005-9-27 21:15:18 | 顯示全部樓層
嘩~~正啊,資料充足,謝謝
發表於 2005-9-27 22:37:36 | 顯示全部樓層
買m42之前一定要睇睇
 樓主| 發表於 2005-10-22 14:13:38 | 顯示全部樓層






 樓主| 發表於 2005-10-22 14:14:18 | 顯示全部樓層
又有新0野:
Fujica ST605N
Helios-44-2
 樓主| 發表於 2005-10-22 14:14:40 | 顯示全部樓層
發表於 2005-10-22 14:29:45 | 顯示全部樓層
Originally posted by dobs at 2005-10-22 02:14 PM:
俄仔16/2.8 ge simple已經增加到377了!
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/zenitar/16_28_mc_fisheye

以下是一些頗為毒的sample, 睇相之餘真係要佩服作者們的功力!
Landscapes:
[url]http://www.p ...



精彩,加點分支持下先
發表於 2005-10-26 16:32:35 | 顯示全部樓層
Originally posted by dobs at 2005-10-22 02:14 PM:
俄仔16/2.8 ge simple已經增加到377了!
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/zenitar/16_28_mc_fisheye

以下是一些頗為毒的sample, 睇相之餘真係要佩服作者們的功力!
Landscapes:
[url]http://www.p ...

真係好毒下
尤其係植物同黑白0個d
發表於 2005-10-27 12:51:51 | 顯示全部樓層
d sample 好正~~~
發表於 2005-11-27 20:59:59 | 顯示全部樓層
M42鏡頭 + 奧林E300

有點毒!
發表於 2005-11-28 14:47:44 | 顯示全部樓層
Originally posted by E300 at 2005-11-27 08:59 PM:
M42鏡頭 + 奧林E300

有點毒!



係幾毒
 樓主| 發表於 2005-12-5 20:00:09 | 顯示全部樓層
和平牌20/3.5、35/2及37/2.8簡介--郭鐵師
http://home.chyangwa.com/friends ... /view.asp?recno=138

部分蘇俄、日製鏡頭有幅射?
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/radioactive.html

Never underestimates the quality of russian lenses......the results may blow you away!

http://users.telenet.be/bobkeppens
 樓主| 發表於 2005-12-5 20:00:39 | 顯示全部樓層
轉貼Zenit Camera Group的資料:

No. 1
"Dear Comrades,

Does anyone know which optical formulas are used in various Soviet
lenses? AFAIK all Helios lenses are Planars and normal and tele Jupiters
are Sonnars. 35mm Jupiter must be Hologon. Industars are all versions of
Tessar (some look closer to Elmar design though). I never read which
optical designs were used in e.g. Zenitars.

--
Best regards,
Sergey A.Galin http://sageshome.net "

No. 2
"Hoy,

All industars for 35mm are of Tessar design (not Elmar).
All Industars for MF & LF of Tessar design
Jupiter 50,85,135,180 --> Zeiss Sonnar design
(some time ago Martin Lkens spotted a very rare Jupiter iirc 75mm)
Jupiter 35 --> Zeiss Biogon design
Orion 15 --> Zeiss Topogon design
Helios (44,103, .??) --> Zeiss Biotar design
Volna (3, ...?????) --> Zeiss Planar design

Some lenses could be exactly the same as the original design, but
probably some are recalculated for other glasses or have a slightly
different geometry (p.e. Jupiter 8M is not the same is a Jupiter 8)
Volna 3 also isn't 100% the same as the Planar for the Rolleiflex.
Helios 44-2 is imho a lot better than the original Zeiss Biotar.

Mir-1, is based on Zeiss Jena 35mm Flektogon
http://zenit.istra.ru/archive/lenses/mir-1.html (at least I think
this is in the text)

Other lenses.
http://zenit.istra.ru/catalog/lenseslist.html

The zenitars seem to have an own design. Zoom was so kind to send a
link to the Zenitar k-2, but I lost it and can't find it back.
However I saved the image. A lens that comes close geometricaly is
the old Taylor Hobson 2/50.



Of course comparing these is ridiculous, different kinds of glass are
used ; only in common is that both (it seems)KMZ and Taylor-Hobson
were able to calculate a number of flat surfaces (easier to control
and to produce) on a number of lens-elements (4 for the Zenitar ;
5 !! for the Taylor Hobson).
(Furthermore for the TH only 2 different kinds of glass were used !! -
- I have no idea of the quality of this lens, but maybe all this is
a little bit too much simplification).

Regards Rob"

No. 3
"Hi,

On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 17:53 +0000, ragnarosk wrote:
> All industars for 35mm are of Tessar design (not Elmar).

According to http://zenit.istra.ru/archive/lenses/industar-22.html
Industar-22 is a direct copy of Leitz Elmar. Actually, is there any
difference from optical point of view if Elmar is one of Tessar
breed? :-)

Thank you very much for the information!

--
Best regards,
Sergey A.Galin http://sageshome.net "

No. 4
"Hi,

That's a little strange, because the optical center of both lenses is
different.
The triplet related lenses from Leitz, always have the optical center
between the first and second lens(group). I didn't find a drawing of
an Elmar, but one of the Hektor, in principle the same lens only the
Hektor has the first (I) and second (II) group doubled to give extra
correction for the faster design.


The optical center is marked with a red "X". Consequently the Elmar
(and Hektor) have the iris-blades behind the first lens(group), while
the Tessar has the blades between 2nd and 3rd group. Industars uses
the same location as the Tessar. The I-22 also has a longer barrel
than the Elmar, I'm not sure but I think the I-22 even can not be
fully lowered on the Cosina "Voigtl鄚ders".

Interesting to note on the drawings is, that the Voigtl鄚der lens is
a kind of reversed Tessar (but both are of same age). It is known
that some other designers did the same because the Tessar was
patented till after WWI. On the other hand the Elmar was developed
from the Elmax lens which was designed as a 5-element lens.

I have no idea which one is the best judging from pictures. Maybe
for uncoated lenses theoretically the Elmar with its more foreward
iris could have a lower amount of bouncing light inside the lens
(less inner reflections).

There is a story going around that the German WWII marshal Erwin
Rommel used a Tessar on his Leica ; but maybe this could have been
for sentimental reasons ; he was born in Heidesheim which is the
place where the Carl Zeiss Stiftung was founded.

Anyway the place of the iris-blades is a good method to distinguish a
fake from a real Elmar.

Regards Rob"

No. 5
"Comrade Rob,

Thanks again for the very interesting information!

If you join(ed) sovietcameragroup, here's a link to some Elmar, Tessar
and Industar schemes:

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/g ... ir=/Tessar+Elmar+In\
dustar&.src=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/


--
Best regards,
Sergey A.Galin http://sageshome.net "

No. 6
"Finally I found a drawing of the Leitz Elmar (in a book -- not on the
web)



However this is the f2.8/50 ; as you can see 3 different kinds of
glass, and I don't know if it is the same with the f3.5.
The "classic" Tessar used only flint and crown glass.

For the drawings of the Jupiter lenses :

http://users.telenet.be/bobkeppens/jupiter.html

Orion
http://users.telenet.be/bobkeppens/orion.html

Helios
http://users.telenet.be/bobkeppens/helios.html

Rob"

No. 7
"From the same factory literature:
Zenitar 16mm: 10 elements, 8 groups
MIR 20M 20mm: 9 elements, 8 groups
VarioZenitar 25-45mm: 10 elements, 10 groups
Zenitar 50mm: 6 elements, 4 groups, but different layout from Helios
TeleZenitar 135mm: 5 elements, 4 groups
TeleZenitar 300mm: 7 elements, 6 groups

Older lenses:
Helios 44-6 58mm: 6 elements, 4 groups
TAIR 3FS 300mm: 3 elements, 3 groups

Jeff Ziesmann"
您需要登錄後才可以回帖 登錄 | 註冊

本版積分規則

小黑屋|Archiver|手機版|易攝網  

GMT+8, 2020-10-31 12:58 PM , Processed in 0.172716 second(s), 27 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回復 返回頂部 返回列表