| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
primus96
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 225
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 9:26 am Post subject: |
 |
|
There are,on ebay Industar lenses meant for the big Soviet FKD camera.
They are meant for 13x18cm format.
I have not physically handled one. Are they too fat for them to mount in a lens board for a Speed Graphic.
They are the basic Tessar type. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If they're the ones I think then they're too expensive once you add in shipping.
You can get high quality process lenses for lens. What lengths are you looking for? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2003-11-14 01:26, primus96 wrote:
There are,on ebay Industar lenses meant for the big Soviet FKD camera.
They are meant for 13x18cm format.
I have not physically handled one. Are they too fat for them to mount in a lens board for a Speed Graphic.
They are the basic Tessar type.
|
If you are looking at, e.g., http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2964026218&category=30077 "Russian Lens Industar51 4,5/210 Wooden camera", the seller says "Lens has screw mount M60 mm" so it should fit on a board for a 4x5 Speed. Won't fit on a board for a 2x3. Not a horrible deal at $US 35 delivered.
When in doubt, find out how big the board is and then ask the seller how big the lens is.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Does that one have a mounting flange? I don't see one in the pictures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gv-jones
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Chicago/SW suburbs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nick, if you zoom in on the middpe photo you can see the flange and the threaded mounting ring.
Gary |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gv-jones
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Chicago/SW suburbs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes spelled "middle"
Gary |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
primus96
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 225
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Um, a non-tele 300 might be a little long for a Speed. Check max extension available; without having the book handy I think that for the 4x5 Pacemaker Speed its < 13". If you can get the lens through, rather than in front of, the board it might work ... For $US 35 delivered it still won't be a horrible mistake.
By the way, you posted a URL that points to the 210, not the 300. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are a few cheap choices in the 210mm area.
1) Agfa process lenses. Come in different names but they all say made in west germany. Small light and should cover 8x10. I've only got a 4x5 camera so I can't check for 8x10. I bought mine and a 105mm for a total of not much more then $30. The 105mm covers 4x5.
2) JML 8.25"/209mm. Maybe the exact opposite of the Agfa. A big relatively heavy lens. Very impressive looking. Well at least to me. Also fairly cheap. Supposedly comes in two different vintages. One that just covers 8x10 the other will cover 8x10 with movements. Also fairly cheap.
None of these lenses easily go into shutters. That's why the lenses are so cheap. The longer porcess lenses are of interest to ULF camera owners. But these are of interest only to people looking for something cheap.
[ This Message was edited by: Nick on 2003-11-14 12:41 ] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
primus96
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 225
Location: Yorkshire, United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2003 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, if the bellows doesnt extend enough then you lose close focussing ability.
However what Speed I do acquire is going to need a back shutter in good order for these lenses.
I thought the 210mm might have enough area of good definition to allow some shift, which a bog standard 127mm Ektar won't.
A wide Field Ektar in shutter is going tobe as much as the camera and std lens would cost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2003-11-15 01:26, primus96 wrote:
Yes, if the bellows doesnt extend enough then you lose close focussing ability.
However what Speed I do acquire is going to need a back shutter in good order for these lenses.
I thought the 210mm might have enough area of good definition to allow some shift, which a bog standard 127mm Ektar won't.
A wide Field Ektar in shutter is going tobe as much as the camera and std lens would cost.
|
But you're in the UK. If you want a 5" barrel lens that will allow movements, why don't you look for a 5"/4 Wide Angle Xpres?
And there's enough confusion in this thread that I feel I have to clarify. That cheap Russian 210 will do fine, its the 300 that's iffy.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
j_bagnall
Joined: 22 May 2002
Posts: 4
Location: UK/Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My FKD 13X18 cm Russian tailboard camera came with the Industar 51 210mm f/4,5. It seems to be multi-coated and is giving quite good sharpness with decent movements. For contact-printing at 13X18 it is entirely adequate - and it was cheap. Is there anyone else with one of these strange Russian anachronisms made in the 1980s but looking at least 75 years older? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-04-05 09:00, j_bagnall wrote:
My FKD 13X18 cm Russian tailboard camera came with the Industar 51 210mm f/4,5. It seems to be multi-coated and is giving quite good sharpness with decent movements. For contact-printing at 13X18 it is entirely adequate - and it was cheap. Is there anyone else with one of these strange Russian anachronisms made in the 1980s but looking at least 75 years older?
|
I got an I-51 early this year. S/n 634904; I believe the first two digits of the s/n indicate the year of manufacture. Single coated. Unbeatable deal at $20, including an adapter to M-39, an M-39 extension tube, and a Zenit (?) M-39 to M-39 bellows that's a lot lighter than my Nikon PB-4.
I've finally got around to shooting my I-51 against a 210(?)/7.7 mystery Boyer (Dagor-like double anastigmat) and my beloved 210/9 Konica Hexanon GRII. In the I-51's favor, pretty artifact, gives much brighter screen than the other two. It passes light, forms an image. But at f/11 and f/16 the Boyer is sharper and the GRII a little sharper still. The I-51 would do for contact printing, perhaps not for big enlargements. This matters more for me than for you since I shoot 2x3.
My conclusion? My I-51 was cheap, not thrilling enough. Yours could well be better than mine, given the vagaries of quality control in Kazan and our two lenses' unknown histories. The Boyer, in M39, cost $5 plus shipping, is the best value of the lot, may replace the GRII in my travelling kit because it is so much smaller and not much worse at the apertures I use most.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lucabassi
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I need objectives for polish (Poland) foto cameras. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
