Review MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80

For the opportunity review of the MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens many thanks to Vladimir

Review MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80

Review MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80

TTX MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80
The weight: November 340, XNUMX
Front Filter Diameter: 62mm
Focal length: 80mm
Diaphragm: F / 2.8 to F / 22.0
Number of aperture blades: 6 pieces
MDF: 60 см
Optical design: 6 elements in 3 groups
Factory manufacturer: Arsenal
Bayonet mount: B (Pentacon SIX)

All Volna lenses are famous for their good performance. MC Volna-3 is no exception. Lens MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80 Designed for medium format cameras Kiev-6C, -90, -60. It would be correct to name the lens MS Volna-3B, so as not to be confused, since there is a modification of the lens for use on Salyut and Kiev-88 cameras MS Volna-3V. On an average format, 80mm focal lengths are considered standard, as they give a fairly wide viewing angle. In a narrow format (full-frame digital cameras, 35mm film cameras and crop), the lens can be used as a good portrait lens. If you are looking for a portrait of yourself, then you can look at the lens Vega-12B... Rumor has it that MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80 is a modified copy Carl Zeiss Jena Biometar 2.8 / 80, but in fact the Wave is a 6-lens planar.

MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80, rear view

MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80, rear view

How to use on modern cameras

Due to the fact that the Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens has a sufficiently large working distance, it can be easily installed on modern digital cameras with interchangeable lenses. For example, I used the MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens on the camera Nikon D800, D700 using the Pentacon \ Nikon adapter (KP-6 \ N), while maintaining the ability to focus on infinity. My MS Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens is equipped with a special chip that simplifies shooting when using the lens on Nikon amateur cameras, for more details on the chip, see the section Dandelion Lushnikova. Sale and sticker of dandelions in Ukraine produces official representative Andrey Kuryanov.

Sample photo on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80

An example of a photograph on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80. Bokeh, MDF.

How to use old similar lenses on modern Nikon central control centers can be found in the section Soviet optics... For Canon - old lenses at canon.

For other cameras, there are appropriate adapters. In general, there is absolutely nothing complicated when using old manual optics on modern technology.

MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80, side view, aperture view

MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80, side view, aperture view

Focusing

The lens has a metal focus ring that rotates about 300 degrees, thereby making focusing very smooth and accurate. It is worth noting that even at F / 2.8 the lens has a good depth of field. The depth of field scale is indicated for values ​​of F / 2.8, 5.6, 11, 16, 22. The minimum focusing distance is 0.6 m. This minimum focusing distance allows you to shoot small objects, for example, the modern Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f / 1.8D lens has an MDF of 85cm. When focusing, the front lens does not rotate, and the trunk protrudes by about 2-3 cm. It was not difficult for me to direct sharpness when working with Wave-3.

Sample photo on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80

An example of a photograph on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80. Bokeh

Diaphragm

The diaphragm has only 6 blades, and they do not have blackening. You can see the type of petals in the picture in this review. When closing the diaphragm, the petals form a 6-gon. The MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens cannot boast huge aperturebut f / 2.8 at 80mm focal length blurs the background and foreground a lot, which is very good for portraits. The lens has an aperture control mode switch. The lens has multi-layer coating, which is clearly visible in the pictures with the lens view. MS is one of the main advantages of the Volna-3 lens over Vega-12B.

Sample photo on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80

An example of a photograph on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80. Portrait.

Image quality

The lens is slightly soft on F / 2.8 due to spherical aberration, maybe I didn’t come across the most successful instance. The lens does not cope well with strong light sources in the frame. Contrast and color reproduction are good. No distortion or vignetting. The bokeh of the lens is pretty good. For portrait shooting, the lens showed good image quality.

Sample photo on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80

An example of a photograph on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80. Infinity.

Personal experience

I liked the Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens more than Vega-12B, it’s not surprising, because the MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80 lens replaced Vega-12B. My copy of 1986 release and still works wonderfully.

Sample photo on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80

An example of a photograph on MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80. Foreground and background. Sharpness.

Sample Photos

All examples of photos in the gallery without processing. Everything is filmed on Nikon D800, on-camera JPEG L, reduced size and imprinted data from EXIF.

All examples of photos in the gallery below without processing. Everything is filmed on Nikon D700, RAW -> JPEG with autolevels, downsized and data imprinted from EXIF. All photos were taken in heavy rain.

Also, you can see the modified photos from Wave-3 in the section 'Walking with a good lens 8'.
Catalog modern brand lenses 'Zenitar' и 'Helios' can look at this link.

In the comments, you can ask a question on the topic and they will answer you, as well as you can express your opinion or describe your experience. For the selection of photographic equipment, I recommend large catalogs, for example E-Catalog. Many little things for the photo can be found on AliExpress.


Conclusions:

MC Volna-3 2.8 / 80 is an excellent medium format lens. On modern full frame and crop cameras it can be a good portrait lens. Recommend.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval... Look for me on Youtube | Facebook | VK | Instagram | Twitter | 500px.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 202, on the topic: Overview of the Wave-3 2.8 / 80

  • Eugene

    I got the Volna-3MS in a “killed” state, with a torn back part, without a diaphragm ring and a broken diaphragm lever, in the mud. Surprisingly, all the lenses were intact, I made an M42 shank on it and sometimes I take off. Only the focus ring is tight and I haven't found a way to fix it yet.

    • Victor

      Replace the grease with a low-temperature grease -55 ° C.
      Lapping with an abrasive paste.
      Rinse the diaphragm with a block in a vibrating trough with a solvent.

  • Vladimir

    On a cloudy and sunny day, these are two different lenses. Bright light sources in the frame do not tolerate well. In the shade, the picture is faded, you need to add contrast and color in the settings. In the sun, the picture is a fairy tale voluminous, sharp. And the bokeh is very pleasant. It is brought very easily. A good lens.

  • Yang

    Hello! Tell me, through which adapter can I put the Wave-3 2.8 / 80 MC on the Canon 5d Mark 2 ?? Thanks in advance!

    • Anatoly

      I buy all piers in this online store. There are the most inexpensive different adapters http://www.18-300.ru/koltsa-i-perekhodniki/perekhodnoe-koltso-pentacon6-canon-eos.html

      • Vladimir

        Link does not work in Ukraine

        • B. R. P.

          There are stores in Ukraine.

          • Novel

            So what kind of Wave, there were two of them, it would seem. For B, you need a more common adapter from the Pentacon Six, for C - a very specific, purely Soviet one from Salyut. I had a homemade one, on a cone with two types of thread. Or you can look for KP-6N and change the shank.

  • Vadim

    I got the “Volna” in a perfectly new condition, unused. So lucky. In general, the adapter for Nikon cost only $ 15 for ALI. It was possible to buy a little more expensive with contacts, but the experience of shooting with handheld optics without electronics has already given its own. You can safely measure the light with your brains :). About impressions. It is quite heavy, and almost comfortable if you screw on the hood, the location of the focusing ring closer to the front lens gives a little discomfort to shooting. Solidly assembled, smooth focus. The result is higher than expected. :) Worked with an adapter on Nikon D90

  • Ruslan

    Hello.
    The brand-new Arsat C fell into the hands, and on the Internet I practically did not find anything about this lens. I’m looking at Wave 3 and I understand that my Arsat C is very similar to it. I understand that this is the same Wave 3 with a changed name?
    Thank you!
    https://ibb.co/m1yuN7

    • zengarden

      Yes, like he is; since 1991 renamed.

  • Rodion

    IMHO, but the lens did not impress - it was like that. On the crop - no sense at all. Sharpness is low (not far from the usual Jupiter-9 this Wave has left), chromatism is high, the contrast without light-cutters is low. The diaphragm shines - the contrast also drops with aperture. In terms of dimensions - with an adapter, it is too big, heavy and unbalanced. Typical Arsenal - the focus ring rotates in the opposite direction, not like most lenses. Should you buy it on purpose? No. Is it worth taking if they give? Yes - after all, these are portrait 80 / 2.8 in small format, after all, it's some kind of planar.

    • zengarden

      Maybe you got a bad copy? I have Vega-12B (which was replaced by Wave-3), so I like it; sharpness (if you get into focus) is sufficient + the picture is three-dimensional (even on a crop, but with a focus-extender).

      • zengarden

        um ... I mean, with the "speed booster", well, you understand; such a thing, reducing the focus area by a smaller size and theoretically preserving the viewing angle of a full-frame lens on the crop.

        • Rodion

          Do you have a BZK or ZK? I haven’t seen speed boosters for DSLRs;
          In general, I have complaints about the Wave precisely in terms of the discrepancy between the dimensions and ergonomics and the optical properties, and not to the optical properties themselves. If it was two times smaller, it would be great)
          Regarding Vega-12 vs Volna-3, I definitely can not say something. I came across both a very nice Vega that killed the Wave, and an extremely filthy one that went near the monocle) But all the Volna-3 lenses that I held in my hands (pieces 3) were very noticeable with chromaticity and considerable software.
          I just once took with me the MC Jupiter-9 and Wave-3 with an adapter from Vega-23 (with bokeh control). The wave was very, very disappointing: with equal apertures with Jupiter, it loses very, very literally in everything. But this Jupiter-9 is not even KMZ and not Arsenalovsky, but LZOS, although it is MS!

          In general, the topic of speed boosters is not disclosed, especially here, IMHO. It would be interesting to look at the picture of different manuals with them in comparison with the picture without them.

          • Vladislav

            I strongly support you!
            I have my own (already) Vega-12V and someone else's Zeiss biometar 80, well, this is the very thing from the Pentacon medium format. Both came to me from one person and I had the opportunity to work with them for two years. As a result, he bought Vega. Gorazd is more convenient thanks to MDF, and does not lose anything in the picture, well, at least this particular Vega to this particular Zeiss. Since both lenses are always at my home, I often use them outdoors and in the studio, and for all the time I have not hesitated in my choice.
            Dear Arkady, I would like to propose to have some kind of target for testing lenses, a teddy bear, or a vase - whatever, but one for everyone. And then it turns out we are not comparing lenses, but a luxurious autumn wild grapes and ... a white cat on white snow. )))

            • Victor

              Wave 3 is better. Vega-12 is much worse. Biometar 80 - GDR is worse than Wave-3.

          • ba3lur

            Jupiter-9 with f / 2 aperture and Wave f / 2.8 is somehow not correct to compare

            • Rodion

              Correct at equal apertures.

      • Victor

        Take pictures only with a tripod with an aperture of 5,6 - 8,0.
        All lenses have a shallow depth of field.
        Lens hood required. I make from a can from a canned pot with a M62 ring sticker - short. On Aliexpress - 134 rubles. Internal diaphragms (washers) - 3 pcs to be made of aluminum from beer cans. Who will be interested I will send a description.
        Good cans from Tomato paste, Peas, Olives.

    • Victor

      The advantage of 6x6 cm lenses is that when working on a 24x36 mm format, we have a uniform field in terms of resolution, aberrations, and geometric distortions. Well, someone uses a 15x25mm CMOS matrix.
      Pentax-K1, Canon EOS 5DSR. We will wait for an enlargement of the 6x6 cm format.

      • Rodion

        Now, right now, the Vega-12 field or the same wave should be called uniform) At equal apertures with small-format optics, this very mediocre medium-format has no gain. Oh, and I'll still remember Industar-29 or 24 ...
        On the contrary, there are such good small-format lenses that they are adapted to the SF - as was the case with the Zonnar 180 / 2.8. Tair-33 itself is not bad, they say. Only something needs to be done with it, so that there is a contrast. Here, you know, "what you sow" - what will be the scheme and the quality of execution of the scheme, such will be the result.

    • Alex

      Rodion, good day! Do not tell me, you had quite a few lenses, you have experience in using them, they offer lenses Jupiter 37a, Helios 44-3 ms, Industar 63 lz ms and Granite 11 ms for 5000 rubles, is it worth taking Sony A7 for shooting portraits, objects , landscape?

      • Rodion

        Enjoyed everything except granite. The price is good if for everything. Enough for some fun, and for a long time.

        • Alex

          Thank you, take it ... I read about optics, good reviews, Helios and Jupiter for a portrait, Industar for macro, objects, and Granite for a landscape ... Let's try ... Thanks again for your response! All the best) Arkady special thanks for the wonderful blog :)

          • Rodion Eshmakov

            The funny thing is that Helios in macro would rather be better. And Industar is quite good in portrait and landscape.

            • Alex

              Good day! I have already tried it, I can say that the manual optics pleases, the picture is pleasant, it draws a little differently, it is quite interesting to shoot. Well, it probably also depends on the instance, the successful ones were caught, otherwise I saw a video review before buying that the modern whale optics in the Sony 16-50 review in terms of resolution is better than the Soviet fix Helios 44-2, plus the Soviet one washed around the edges, low contrast ... At the same time, the review was in doubt, because the Helios had a spread in quality, maybe because of this, although Karl Zeiss 50 ka was also on the review, the contrast is slightly better and everything else is like Helios. So far, of course, when I took a chance and bought Soviet lenses, which I am glad and grateful for, I checked, in practice it turned out not as in the review, everything is not so bad to put an end to the optics of the previous generation. The drawing is different, I don't know how to choose the right word, the picture is nicer to the eye ... Here we can conclude that it still depends on the specimen, someone may have assembled crookedly or disassembled without experience, then negative reviews. I could be wrong. Thank you.

            • Alex

              Thank you, I have already tried it, I unsubscribed in the comments ... Optics pleases, whale optics 28-70 is still on the sidelines, I can only use it for video, but Soviet optics is now used. You correctly noticed Rodion about Granite, not the worst lens, only slightly soapy the edges, later I will throw off the photo of nature, for evaluation, without processing, as it is

          • B. R. P.

            Telezoom for a landscape?) Take something other than Granite.

            • Trueash

              Specifically, I won't say for Granite, but you can shoot very expressive landscapes on a TV set. For example, James Popsys does this successfully:
              https://youtu.be/1uco5Xq27gg

              • Victor

                This is if the terrain is suitable, like a comrade in exile from a pipe.

            • Rodion

              Come on. Granite isn't the worst zoom. A person will figure out how to use it.

              • Trueash

                Here I am the same. “The photographer is shooting, not the camera,” but wherever you go, everyone measures the vignette with micrometers ...

  • Alex

    Now we need to think about what kind of shirik to take from Soviet optics, maybe a super shirik fisheye, but I'm not sure, the fisheye will probably play more and postpone it, well, maybe take an additional 85 ku, although it's still questionable, because there are 58 Helios and 135 ka Jupiter ... ... Enough for now

    • Rodion

      Shirik only new) Forget about old stuff. Better whale.

      • Alex

        Rodion, do you still shoot with manual Soviet lenses?

        • Rodion

          I'm filming) Most, however, are converted from technical ones. But there are also quite ordinary Jupiter-3 and Helios-44.

          • Alex

            Rodion, which projection projections have you redesigned (diaphragm, adapter)? What can you say about Jupiter 37a, Helios 44-3 and Industar 61 lz, your opinion, because you have previously used

            • Rodion

              I respect Jupiter - One of the best one hundred and thirty-five heats in general. I prefer Industar 26m. Helios - well, helios and helios)

              • Alex

                Good day! I accidentally caught Industar 50-2 and 26m p (about the 2nd cm review your Rodion and I remember you voiced it here) to replace 61 lz, in contrast and color 26m p is good, average sharpness, in the center on the open, oddly sharp edges slightly smears, and 50-2 is better in sharpness, but weak in contrast, the effect also gives a slight fog, most likely it is that the weak contrast took both, but it makes no sense to keep 2, 50-2 may go for sale, although under. ? Now in the arsenal are Mir 1 black Brussels USSR, Industar 50-2 black USSR, 26m P, Helios 44-2 Minsky, with a rear lens from 44-3 (better color and contrast), Jupiter 37a USSR.
                I wanted to ask, Rodion, you are engaged in assembling - disassembling Soviet optics, you have not encountered it, if at infinity Mir 1 smears when shooting through Sony A7, what needs to be done? And then when I took it, smeared it with Tsiatim so that the ring would work smoothly, then I assembled it, and when I already started shooting, I noticed that it was soaping in the distant shots, regardless of the aperture value, but what is interesting, when you press the focusing ring on yourself, the distant shot is a little better on the picture…

              • Alex

                May have faced

              • Rodion

                It's hard to say about the World, apparently, something with the lens unit mount. Dangles, perhaps.
                26m at the edges with 8-11 is quite normal.

              • Alex

                We will try. From Industar 26m positive emotions, color and contrast are directly pleasing to the eye, which I noticed, each of the lenses has its own characteristics in its own way, Industar 26m has bright and saturated color and contrast, Helios 44-2 twisted bokeh and contrast, World 1 contrast and picture under watercolor, Industar 50-2 slight haze and sharpness across the entire field.
                Today they offered to change, my World 1 to Zeis 50 ddr Jena 2.8, black, I think it makes no sense, all the glasses are Soviet, analogues of German ones, all the necessary focal points are there, each is good in its own way, despite the fact that the resolution is worse than modern ones, HA , etc., but the drawing is more pleasant, its own charisma…. I'm still thinking about Zeiss. In general, I thought to take one OKS or Lomo, see your reviews, good glasses, at one time they were popular for quality, the price is really something….

              • Rodion

                Tessar 50 / 2.8 GDR is not the most interesting glass, I-26m is better in some aspects. There is no point in chasing OKS. Only those from 75 mm will stand on the mirror (with a couple of rare and senseless exceptions). And the telephoto there are almost identical to the projection ones in properties. If you are interested, you can take a look at me for something.

              • Alex

                I'm from Kazakhstan, I'm afraid I won't succeed, but I looked with joy, we don't have enough manual optics here, we can say they sell leftovers, there's really no choice, I wanted to take everything, I have it in Russia, I found it, but we have, apart from Zenitar, Samyang over shirikov not…. It's purely for myself, to take pictures, a hobby, I never thought that manual optics would drag out so much, my friend, a professional photographer, see the photos, showed them shot on the A7 through Helios, Mir, Industar, he says they are lively, voluminous ... Now I'm thinking of switching to A7s from A7, I'm afraid only from the photo I may lose some advantages somewhere, I did not have time to buy something cheap, I hung on the secondary for a week, when I decided, it was too late…. I took the 1st 7 ku, it just happens that there is a desire to shoot a video, and the first 7 ka video is more modest than that of the S ki, plus a silent shutter mode, a nice little thing….

              • Alex

                Dealt with Mir 1 + Industar 26m cleaned the lenses, now both on the diaphragm 5,6 show a sharp picture on the whole field, it remains only to turn the adapter m39 to the photo, find a suitable hexagon, otherwise the lens is upside down .... I tried through the M39 ring to the M42 fotja adapter, and it becomes like a macro lens, because of the distance, as I understand it, from the matrix to the lens through an adapter with a ring….

              • Alex

                Rodion, good day! As a specialist in manual lenses, can you tell me which of the Soviet analogues of Zeiss can take 85 ku, Jupiter 9, Helios 40-2 or Wave 3? I just collected for myself a collection of focal points from Mir 37mm, Industar 52mm, Helios 58mm, Jupiter 135mm, and Granite 80-200mm and Industar 50mm for sale, I'm thinking 85 ku, earlier Industar 26m was voiced, recommended, took, liked it, for this special thanks!

              • Rodion

                If you are from Kazakhstan, this is not a big problem, the mail works fine.
                From Soviet ~ 85 mm I keep KMZ Yu9 and a set of projection lenses of different classes.

              • Alex

                Rodion, do you have a mail, vats app or vk to contact you ...

              • Alex

                If this is Jupiter, which you have from the review, KMZ seems to be coming, white, like the lens…. I took Helios 40-2, but our price is very high, for rubles from 20 thousand and more goes .... Maybe in a boutique in our city, there is where you come across lenses with cameras from the USSR, I will turn up, I'll take it, especially since the prices there are reasonable, for example, in rubles Mir 1 - 1 rubles, Industar 000m p - 26 rubles, Helios 400-44 - 7 rubles, Granite 800 - 11 rubles. But on the secondary market, prices are just like modern lenses for buyers are sold ...

              • Zheka Profi

                They're not worth it, it's old

              • Rodion

                My mail: rudzil@yandex.ru
                I don’t sell Jupiter-9 in principle - it is valuable to me in a different way, the Cyclops from the review has already been sold. In general, write - we'll figure out what I have in general.

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                Hello Rodion! You have Soviet lenses for sale, not film projection lenses, but of the type Y8 p, Y9 p, I26m p, I50 p, Helios 44 p white, Jupiter 11 p, Peleng and others. You can consider without P, ​​I'm more interested in rangefinder, well, and mirror ones, if they are interesting in themselves, I have a Sony A7 Siii

              • Zheka Profi

                Yupi 37a is an average lens, the first Gelik white 44 is poor, and 44-2 and from 44-4 to 44-7 are even worse, due to the spread of quality, Indus 26 with that Yupi 3,8, and other similar mediocre and similar lenses , nothing special. Both Soviet and German ANCIENT lenses, a waste of money !!!

              • Rodion

                I still do not do sales, I do optics. Therefore, I almost never have anything like the usual ordinary Soviet extras. Mostly rare specimens of technical optics in a competent design for cameras.
                Although now there is Jupiter-3 ZOMZ 1970, chosen from many. Like Arkady's review. Near Kiev. With adapter. $ 115 in case you're wondering. It turned out to be better than all his old options.
                If you need a specific list, write to the mail.

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                Money is not a question, as I understand it, you have rare optics that I have listed, but you do not sell them, tk. they searched for themselves, collected, the same G44 white with 13 y., U8,9, 11 with p, I26, 50 with p, and others? Oddly enough, rare USSR optics often show better results in the picture as a whole, there are, of course, not very rare examples. I watched the reviews somehow Mir 1, there are so many negative reviews, except for white and black Brussels ones, on 1c, mostly bad reviews, and all because the quality is not the same, and not rare V ki in and of themselves.

              • Rodion

                White helios is not rare. And I have not had it for a long time. The same goes for everything else that you have listed. These are not rare lenses. Of these, I only have Jupiter-3 and the usual I-26m.
                In comparison with the technical specimens that I am engaged in, all these "rare" optics sometimes did not stand nearby)

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                Why is cinema projection optics better? Indeed, in terms of convenience, it is definitely worse, I will not say from the picture, I had no experience with them.

              • Rodion

                It has no compromises between the picture and the dimensions, it uses the most interesting optical designs that were not found in photo optics. You can chase the Era-6M while I'm doing 35KP-1.8 / 65 with a similar scheme, and even in the version with blurring control and short MDF for macro photography. In technical optics, there was often no economy, because it cost a lot of money by Soviet standards. Cinema projection lens units were 1.5-4 times more expensive than similar photo lenses in terms of parameters, although KP optics did not have complex mechanics. Have you seen Schneider Cinelux 70/2 here on Radozhiv? Yes, not a single Soviet lens, especially an ordinary schematic lens, stood nearby. Think about it.

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                I can't say anything, I didn't own more than one, it's just that when I bought a camera, they gave it Tamron 28-75, because the whale picture is boring, well, I will say, 28-75 when I tried it on, I left not far, left it under the video. A friend who shoots for a manual, said try vintage optics, he has A7 ii, gave Mir 1 white, tried it, at first somehow, unusually, after modern optics, clicked, looked at the photos, liked it, but was about to take Sony Zeiss 35,50, 85 , considered that the emission of money, yes, by modern standards, the old optics are lagging behind, well, the pictures are pleasant, while the priority is Soviet optics. I put Zeiss, Canon and Nikon from optics of the past years, try it, they did not go far in quality, they were even worse, maybe such copies were caught, disassembled, anything could be, only Biotar 58 left it for now, there was Zeiss Sonnar, well, then the Yu37a MC took myself, it seemed more interesting. Now I also want to try kodak Minolta optics, maybe we can take something there.

              • Rodion

                Well, you understand me. I have already left this.

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                You Rodion also use manual optics, which means that at least you have a fleet of optics, experience with it, but I only have 3 lenses so far. I was interested in direct cinema optics, I need to get a better look at what kind of animal is. I saw in the reviews here, you, as the author of articles, the owner, you basically have a Lomo cinema optics, reworked to the same.

              • Rodion

                I didn't have much cinema optics - not a fan, I have never been inclined towards LOMO specifically. On the contrary, I like the IPZ and the oil refinery more.

              • Photographer-enthusiast

                Thank you Rodion for the information. Rodion, had the experience of owning Ju8 p and I26m p? They offer to buy both, it will not work to check, in different cities, as of almost zero they go. Do they have a difference in the picture? I read the reviews, I26m are partially negative reviews, and the J8 is mostly praised, almost an analogue of the J3 th, even a little better.

              • Rodion

                There are several reviews of the I-26, J8 and J3 here. Read, see. Regarding J3 versus J8, I wrote in my article about J3 in 1963.

  • B. R. P.

    2 Alex
    … “Now I’m still thinking of switching to A7s from A7, I’m afraid I’ll lose some advantage just by the photo”…

    You will not lose anything with the bold pixel A7s, on the contrary, you will gain, especially with old lenses.

    • Alex

      For a photo, the color depth, DD, iso, etc., in contrast to the first 7 ki, is more sharpened for the video, although in practice it may not be very striking

    • Rodion

      YES, for the sake of a fat pixel, I took the A7s. She doesn't colorshift yet.

      • B. R. P.

        Eh, a review would be on the A7s ...

        • Rodion

          And what should be original there besides the fact that it does not colorshift with optics with small WFD?

  • Alex

    I think I'll stay at 1 st 7 ke, a normal balanced camera for a photo, then maybe 7 Ska will turn up, I'll take it additionally, especially since I took it inexpensively six months ago, 23 thousand rubles with a whale come out, and then I recently sold a whale, now completely on manual optics ...

    • Victor

      23k with a whale even for the first seven is not that inexpensive, it's almost free :)

      • Alex

        Of course I was glad to purchase, to replace Fuji x-t10, although I did not have time to take Sku, a little cheaper, but with a defect, the memory card slot did not work, and when I decided to buy it, I took a gopher, ahead of it, it was sold for 21 thousand, so then I put it up almost 2 times more expensive on the secondary market…. Well, nothing, I'm happy with the 1st seven, I was also aiming at C because of the video, plus the silent shutter, I liked the latter on Fuji, that's why I wanted a silent mode ....

        • Victor

          I would immediately change the bayonet ring to a metal one on it)) On the esque, they immediately put metal, and on this and the first erk there is plastic. From the second episode they changed their minds.

          • Alex

            I have no backlash, maybe it will be when the lenses are heavy to put on, to use often, and so I had a heavy Granite 11, I held it, you never know, but for fixes behind the eyes ... tfu tfu tfu, live bayonet ....

  • Zheka pro

    Throw out this old stuff, have thought of plastic, volume, etc. Whales are much better than your ancient fixes. Mirrorless cameras there, especially Aunt Sonya, Fuji, Olympus, Panosa (((

    • Victor

      Who offended you, tell us in more detail, share your problems with people, it may become easier.

      • Alex

        Troll is likely ... ..

      • Zheka Profi

        Problems for those who do not understand, this is already antiques, they take and then amuse themselves that the picture is special, and mirrorless cameras are unreliable and useless cameras due to their ergonomics, limited capabilities and unreliability (for example, a weak battery, focus, fail more often and etc.)

        • Victor

          You, excuse me, have some kind of set of delusions based on nothing.

          • Zheka Profi

            So, or rather? Any arguments against?

            • Victor

              There are many examples among friends, reviews on forums and cameras on hand.

              And you only have a statement that "mirrorless cameras are inconvenient, with an incomprehensible focus, they often fail", so you need to provide arguments (or rather, facts) :)

              • Zheka Profi

                Where are these examples of acquaintances?

            • Novel

              There is no food here. Vodka too, go home.

              • Zheka Profi

                Have you eaten everything already ???

  • executor

    WAVE AND VEGA AT F 2.8 WORKING IN DIFFERENCE FROM SOAP JUPITER-9. I HAVE THESE DEVICES.

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2012/10/obzor-ms-volna-3-2-880/