defconfunk
n00b
So here's the deal, I've got GAS for a Zorki-6.
Of all the FSU RFs it looks to be the best for me. Thumb film advance (a surprisngly big deal for me), wide RF base, and 'normal' film loading for those of us used to non-leicas.
There are three lenses that interst me:
50mm F3.5 Elmar style
Industar-61 55mm F2.8
Jupiter-8 50mm F2
The elmar is cool because, when not in use, the camera is smaller.
The 55mm is cool because it is a slightly different size from the 50mm on my SLR, and it is a bit faster than most the other lenses.
And the Jupiter-8 is cool because it is an F2, and I value every stop I can squeeze out of a lens.
But here's my problem, I think the only reason I'm actually interested in one of these is because I spend so much time on RFF and the kool-aid is infecting me.
I already have a Yashica Minister-700. It gives me a 45mm F1.7 lens which is faster than any of the FSU options, it has a standard screw filter mount (I like to use contrast filters) and it gives me a nice little light meter built in. Yes, it is a fixed lens camera, but I would only plan on using one lens for the Zorki too.
So why on earth would I want to spend more money on a second RF? The lenses are often described as sharp and contrasty, but are they really any sharper than a good fixed lens RF? And for the contrast, are they any better? How do they compare to a fixed lens with a 'low contrast' filter like a green or a green-yellow? In what conditions would shooting that camera be significantly different/valuable over my existing RF?
Of all the FSU RFs it looks to be the best for me. Thumb film advance (a surprisngly big deal for me), wide RF base, and 'normal' film loading for those of us used to non-leicas.
There are three lenses that interst me:
50mm F3.5 Elmar style
Industar-61 55mm F2.8
Jupiter-8 50mm F2
The elmar is cool because, when not in use, the camera is smaller.
The 55mm is cool because it is a slightly different size from the 50mm on my SLR, and it is a bit faster than most the other lenses.
And the Jupiter-8 is cool because it is an F2, and I value every stop I can squeeze out of a lens.
But here's my problem, I think the only reason I'm actually interested in one of these is because I spend so much time on RFF and the kool-aid is infecting me.
I already have a Yashica Minister-700. It gives me a 45mm F1.7 lens which is faster than any of the FSU options, it has a standard screw filter mount (I like to use contrast filters) and it gives me a nice little light meter built in. Yes, it is a fixed lens camera, but I would only plan on using one lens for the Zorki too.
So why on earth would I want to spend more money on a second RF? The lenses are often described as sharp and contrasty, but are they really any sharper than a good fixed lens RF? And for the contrast, are they any better? How do they compare to a fixed lens with a 'low contrast' filter like a green or a green-yellow? In what conditions would shooting that camera be significantly different/valuable over my existing RF?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
You're spot on about the Kool-Aid. 
And once they start appearing in your house you can't stop them.
That said, there are three reasons to use a FSU rangefinder:
(1) They are quirky.
(2) You can use lenses of different focal lengths and use them on different bodies.
(3) Some of the lenses are rather good.
If your choice is between three 50mm lenses and everything else doesn't interest you (a J-12 or J-9 maybe?) and you aren't one for quirky cameras, then I think it doesn't make sense, and I'm saying that as a dyed-in-the-wool FSU enthusiast.
And once they start appearing in your house you can't stop them.That said, there are three reasons to use a FSU rangefinder:
(1) They are quirky.
(2) You can use lenses of different focal lengths and use them on different bodies.
(3) Some of the lenses are rather good.
If your choice is between three 50mm lenses and everything else doesn't interest you (a J-12 or J-9 maybe?) and you aren't one for quirky cameras, then I think it doesn't make sense, and I'm saying that as a dyed-in-the-wool FSU enthusiast.
defconfunk
n00b
I could see myself using a wide lens for street, or an 85mm for portrait work. And I'll admit, I prefer RF to SLR for street (what little street I do). But I tend to use the SLR for any portrait work. And then theres the issue of cost. A big part of the appeal of the FSU is the price, and the 50mm lenses are inexpensive. The other lenses, not so much...
I like the idea of building up lenses that could one day be used on an M3, but then I wonder if I would ever bother having that much money invested in a film body ...
I like the idea of building up lenses that could one day be used on an M3, but then I wonder if I would ever bother having that much money invested in a film body ...
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
If you want cheap lenses, the best FSU road is a Kiev. No lever wind, but otherwise a great camera with a whisper-quiet shutter, and you can get things like a Jupiter-12 for under $50
wolves3012
Mentor
Zorki 6 is one of the most modern FSUs. It lacks speeds below 1/30th, presumably you've considered that. If that isn't a limitation, it's a good choice.
All good lenses, each with advantages. Don't be fooled by the 50mm/55mm, they are all pretty much the same and there's really no practical difference there. They are all actually about 53mm in truth and that is close enough to 50mm to be the same in the real world.
You plan on one lens for the Zorki but it does give the option of others, although you'll need some kind of accessory finder for non-50mm. The I-61 and J-8 both take 40.5mm filters which aren't hard to find. You'll struggle to find filters for the I-22/50/10 (f/3.5), although the clip-on types as for the Elmar are available. Just sometimes pricy. A good J-9 will not be cheap and can be a gamble. Not to put you off but there are many examples that have been reassembled wrongly after "service". If you really do plan to use only 50mm, I'm struggling to see what an FSU would offer over what you have - I also say that as a "fan", as "rxmd" did.
You want an FSU or you don't. "rxmd" has given some good reasons but ultimately it's your choice. They are somewhat addictive, it has to be said.
No, they probably aren't sharper than more modern, muti-coated lenses. The difference is small and for the price they are good but in absolute terms don't expect them to blow away modern glass. They tend to give a more "old-time" look. The J-8 is a bit softer wide-open.
Elmar Lang
Well-known
I agree with rxmd, that a Kiev (let's say a Kiev-II or a 4A) would be the best choice for an ex-Soviet RF camera.
Except the lever-action advance/load (we won't miss it), it has all the pluses we would find in this type of camera: large rangefinder basis; shutter with metal curtains; low noise while shooting; bayonet-mount lenses; excellent design and project (the Contax-II).
Besides that, on a fine Kiev, any Carl Zeiss (Jena and Oberkochen) lens can be mounted.
Best wishes,
E.L.
Except the lever-action advance/load (we won't miss it), it has all the pluses we would find in this type of camera: large rangefinder basis; shutter with metal curtains; low noise while shooting; bayonet-mount lenses; excellent design and project (the Contax-II).
Besides that, on a fine Kiev, any Carl Zeiss (Jena and Oberkochen) lens can be mounted.
Best wishes,
E.L.
reagan
hey, they're only Zorkis
Since you're a filter fan, if I'm not mistaken, the J.12 and Orion also take the 40.5mm filters as well, in case you go wider later.
I don't own a Zorki.6, but my 5 is a keeper. The up side - it has the brightest VF/RF of all my FSUs. The down side - while it does have the lever advance and it does work ok now, it took some real adjusting/tweeking to get it there. It was a pretty rough winder when I got it. This is a common need for the 5 & 6. (Even after adjusting, it's still not as smooth as the knob winds.)
I was introduced to Zorkis, quite by accident. I purchased a Jupiter.8 that came with Zorki.4 attached to the back of it. The 4 was a poor example which I later sold, but I saw enough positive possibilities, that I bought a few more models, a Zorki.1, 3, 3m another 4 and the Zorki.5. No regrets here.
Ya wouldn't have to be in too deep to test drive a Zorki.6 and Industar.61 which I think would be a pretty good setup.
I don't own a Zorki.6, but my 5 is a keeper. The up side - it has the brightest VF/RF of all my FSUs. The down side - while it does have the lever advance and it does work ok now, it took some real adjusting/tweeking to get it there. It was a pretty rough winder when I got it. This is a common need for the 5 & 6. (Even after adjusting, it's still not as smooth as the knob winds.)
I was introduced to Zorkis, quite by accident. I purchased a Jupiter.8 that came with Zorki.4 attached to the back of it.
The 4 was a poor example which I later sold, but I saw enough positive possibilities, that I bought a few more models, a Zorki.1, 3, 3m another 4 and the Zorki.5. No regrets here.Ya wouldn't have to be in too deep to test drive a Zorki.6 and Industar.61 which I think would be a pretty good setup.
nthearle
NickT
Regarding a collapsible lens such as the Industar 10 - if you do fit a filter to it, then you will have to take it off the lens every time you want to change the aperture. I find my I-10 to be the softest of all the lenses I own. Compared to a modern(ish) lens such as a Canon FD or a Zuiko it's noticeably less sharp. The rigid Industar 61 is better in my opinion.
Just re-read your post, I have a Yashica Electro 35, similar to yours. It knocks the socks off the FED in terms of image quality, (Industar 61 included).
Just re-read your post, I have a Yashica Electro 35, similar to yours. It knocks the socks off the FED in terms of image quality, (Industar 61 included).
defconfunk
n00b
My main SLR lens is an old FD 50mm F1.8, and I'm finding it not as sharp as I'd like. So that is really important for me to hear. If I'm going to be getting softer images than I currently get with my Minister, there isn't an (rational) point to moving to a FSU with a single lens.
Thanks for all the input guys, it has been very educational (good to know those contax mount lenses are cheap!). I think I'll try to keep my GAS focused on growing the collection to things that my current gear cannot do.
Next GAS: Medium Format (just don't tell the wife)...
nthearle
NickT
Here's a comparison between the Industar 10 and the Yashica Electro 35. This crop is about one eighth of the frame in width. Both shot (on different days) on Tri-X.
Full frame is:
.
Full frame is:
.
defconfunk
n00b
Wow, that is quite the difference.
nthearle
NickT
It's not an awful lens, it's just not terribly sharp. It can be quite nice with colour for small prints. This is from the I-10
.
.
Last edited:
Thomas78
Well-known
Would a Canon RF with a Canon 50/1.8 or Canon 50/1.4 (LTM) be a interesting alternative or would it be to expensive?
My Canon 50/1.4 gives me a higher resolution with Velvia 50 (projected slides) than a scan with 2400 dpi can show.
Valkir1987
Well-known
I find them usually better than the Industar 22, the front element has a better coating and less scratches. When cleaned up most of them perform like a good Elmar.
I have two enlargements in my room, both made with the Collapsible Fed 3,5/50 Industar 10 lens. And they are both great in contrast and sharpness.