Considering the 50mm...

[flavio81]

When it's about soviet lenses, a lot depends on specific sample of lens. More so with Helios-44 than any other. I have three (44-2, 44M and 44M-4), of which only one delivers adequate results. So you never know.

Which one? Because the 44-2, 44M, and 44M-4 are not identical lenses. Same optical scheme but not exactly the same diagram. It was improved through the eras up to the 44M-7. Also, it was produced in different factories (i.e. Valdai vs KMZ vs Lomo), so it's not only down to good sample vs bad sample.

I'm more surprised by russian lenses lately, after being almost a decade on Canon and Nikon glass. Almost all seem to have been designed for beautiful image rendering: 37/2.8 Mir-1, 58 helios, 50/2 Jupiter-8, 85/2 jupiter, 85/1.5 Helios, 135/2.8 Tair-11, etc.

Russians could also produce good cameras when they wanted, take a look at the Kiev-15 SLR, Kiev rangefinders, or the Leningrad rangefinder.

 

[M-88]

Which one? Because the 44-2, 44M, and 44M-4 are not identical lenses. Same optical scheme but not exactly the same diagram. It was improved through the eras up to the 44M-7. Also, it was produced in different factories (i.e. Valdai vs KMZ vs Lomo), so it's not only down to good sample vs bad sample.

M-4 is the one with best results, but I have seen M-7 which was a disaster and regular 44-2 which was excellent (although early silver one with m39 thread). As for manufacturers, there was also 'Belomo', Belorussian factory. Its product is disastrous.

I'm more surprised by russian lenses lately, after being almost a decade on Canon and Nikon glass. Almost all seem to have been designed for beautiful image rendering: 37/2.8 Mir-1, 58 helios, 50/2 Jupiter-8, 85/2 jupiter, 85/1.5 Helios, 135/2.8 Tair-11, etc.

I have Mir-1V (37/2.8), it's the only widely available Soviet wide angle lens for M42 thread. Everything beyond f/5.6 is adequate, but I really like how it softens the image at f/2.8. Never had others listed by you, cause even in FSU country they are quite expensive. I'd like to point out at Industar 50-2 (50 mm f/3.5), it's a diminutive, a tad whimsical piece, but it's super sharp and contrasty. No wonder, since "Industars" are Tessar clones (Industar means Industtry+Tessar), I extensively used it on 4/3 cameras as portrait lens and still use on APS-C. There's another Industar, "61". It's for rangefinders, with 2.8 aperture. Wonderful lens!

Russians could also produce good cameras when they wanted, take a look at the Kiev-15 SLR, Kiev rangefinders, or the Leningrad rangefinder.

I used to own Kiev-10. It's a non-TTL version of Kiev-15. It is heavy, clunky machine, but it was always highly regarded here, much higher than Zenits. While Z was considered amateur, K was a 'pro', due to more reliability, bayonet mount, automatic (Aperture priority) mode and wide selection of speeds (11+B on Kiev vs 5+B on Zenit). Unfortunately it had a weird metal shutter which was its greatest weakness.

P.S. Check out "Start" camera too, it's a real marvel back from the fifties. Unfortunately also unreliable.

 

[faberryman]

A 50mm lens on a 35mm camera is more aligned to Zen photography.

Care to elaborate on what Zen photography is and why a 50mm lens is aligned to it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A 50mm lens on a 35mm camera is more aligned to Zen photography.

It sounds like you have a parallax problem with your keyboard.

 

[John Koehrer]

Not sure why optical engineers wouldn't be able to design a 50mm lens and label it as such.

Has to do with manufacturing tolerances. Leitz used to engrave actual fl on the lens itself.

 

[faberryman]

Has to do with manufacturing tolerances. Leitz used to engrave actual fl on the lens itself.

I didn't realize manufacturing tolerances were so sloppy. One lens is a 48mm and the next one off the line is a 52mm.

 

[slackercrurster]

50mm is more of a short telephoto to me. My normal is about 21mm to 25mm.

I like to shoot up close. Both of these photos are candid and were done with a 21mm. Could never do it with a 50mm.

A 50 is good if you need to shoot from a distance. I work very, very close and candid...my specialty.

...but whatever the distance, the lens has to be able to be zone focused easily and have a manual aperture.

This one was with a 15mm, a couple feet away...

 

[cliveh]

Care to elaborate on what Zen photography is and why a 50mm lens is aligned to it.

A 50mm lens is close to normal angle of vision and allows the photographer to react with a camera as you see with your eyes. Zen - right here, right now, click and no thought required.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A 50mm lens is close to normal angle of vision and allows the photographer to react with a camera as you see with your eyes. Zen - right here, right now, click and no thought required.

As I noted before any focal length can appear that way with the compensation done in the prism optics. Nothing Zen in optics design.

 

[MattKing]

As I noted before any focal length can appear that way with the compensation done in the prism optics. Nothing Zen in optics design.

I don't think you understand what is being said.
Clive is talking about how the field of view with a 50mm lens is such that one can use it without even looking through the viewfinder, and still be able to easily see what it sees.
The most important parts of photography happen when the viewfinder is not up to the eye.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I don't think you understand what is being said.
Clive is talking about how the field of view with a 50mm lens is such that one can use it without even looking through the viewfinder, and still be able to easily see what it sees.
The most important parts of photography happen when the viewfinder is not up to the eye.

The optics is prism view finders can make it so that, if designed that way, a 45mm lens will appear to be the same as directly visually on one camera and a 58mm lens will appear to be the same visually on a different camera. It is handled by the final magnification in the view finder. Nothing Zen or special here, just basic optical design.