According provided by I-61 2,8 / 52 lens. Many thanks to Naval Vasily.
Overview of I-61 2,8 / 52
I-61 2,8 / 52 - almost a complete copy I-61L / D 2,8 / 55. There are very few differences:
- Coloring the body and lens marks, different focus distance marks (a triangle instead of a rhombus)
- Different number of aperture blades. I-61 2,8 / 52 has integer 10 petalsHave I-61L / D 2,8 / 55 there were only 6 petals.
- Different lens enlightenment. I-61L / D 2,8 / 55 has a lilac sheen, I-61 2,8 / 52 - yellowish.
- Different values of the focal length in the name of the lenses. But this is only the specific designation of old Soviet lenses. In fact, you can’t feel the difference.
In all other respects, the lenses are identical, therefore I will not describe in detail the functionality of I-61 2,8 / 52.
The copy from my review has a shabby enlightenment of the front lens and a very tight stroke of the focus ring. In the cold, the lens generally stopped focusing, most likely the lubricant froze. I used Industar-61 52mm F / 2.8 on the camera Olympus Pen E-P5 with adapter 'L39-M4 / 3' (adapter for rangefinder lenses with M39 thread for use on Micro 4/3 cameras) with the ability to focus at infinity. The quality of the images from the sample from my review turned out to be weak - the lens is very afraid of flare.
Lenses Industar-61 (I-61) F=50 mm 1:2.8
About the history of lens development: here.
- Industar-61L 2,8/50 (LZOS, mid-1960s) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, 10 petals.
- Industar-61-Z – for SLR cameras with M39*45.2 mm mount (mentioned in the lens reference book of GOI ONTI A.F. Yakovlev, 1970, v.1, p. 71);
- I-61 2,8 / 52 (FED) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, black and silver body, silver ring with depth of field scale. Ten-blade diaphragm. Early type of coating.
- I-61 2,8 / 52 (FED) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, black and silver body, black ring with depth of field scale. Ten-blade diaphragm. Late-type coating.
- Industar-61 L/Z 2,8/50 (LZOS, 1967-1971), M39 for Zenit SLR cameras. The name can also be indicated in Latin. The diaphragm is of a regular hexagonal shape.
- Industar 61-M 2,8/50 (KMZ, since 1971) – M42 for Zenit SLR cameras, limited series, 5-blade aperture;
- I-61-M 2,8/52 (FED, 1972) – M42 for Zenit SLR cameras, experimental;
- Industar 61-A 2,8/52 (KMZ) – M42 for SLR cameras, with A-shaped mount, experimental;
- INDUSTAR-61L / Z 2,8 / 50 (LZOS) – M42 for Zenit SLR cameras. The name can also be indicated in Cyrillic.
- I-61 2,8/52 (FED) - for cameras FED-Atlas/FED-11, non-removable, with a central lock.
- I-61 2,8/52 (FED) - for cameras FED-10, with a central lock.
- I-61L / D 2,8 / 53 (FED) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, black case.
- I-61L / D 2,8 / 55 (FED) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, black case.
- Industar-61L / D 2,8 / 55 (FED) - M39 for rangefinder cameras, black body. Adapted for use with SLR cameras.
- Industar-61L / D 2,8 / 55 (FED, 1992) – M39 for rangefinder cameras, experimental/small-scale production for FED-6TTL cameras.
- INDUSTAR-61L/Z MS 2,8/50 (LZOS) – M42 for Zenit SLR cameras, with multilayer coating. The name can also be specified in Latin. It was produced until the 2000s.
How to use with modern cameras?
Lenses with an M39 thread (for rangefinder cameras, M39 X 1/28.8), such as the lens from this review, are very easy to use on almost any modern digital camera (both SLR and mirrorless), for this you just need to choose the right adapter (adapter). There is no need to carry out any additional actions to remake the lens. The cheapest adapters can be found at Aliexpress.com.
For mirrorless cameras
- SONY: For cameras with 'E'/'FE' mount series SonyNEX и Sony Alpha need here is an adapter M39 -Sony E (aka L39 -Sony Nex).
- OLYMPUS / PANASONIC / KODAK / XIAOMI: For cameras with a bayonet mount Micro 4/3 (Micro 4:3) need here is an adapter M39-Micro 4/3.
- CANON M: For cameras with Canon EF-M mount need here is such an adapter M39-Canon M.
- CANON R and RF-S: For cameras with Canon RF mount need here is such an adapter M39-Canon R.
- Nikon 1: For cameras Nikon 1 Series need here is such an adapter M39-Nikon 1.
- Nikon Z: For cameras Nikon Z series (FX/DX) needed here is such an adapter M39-Nikon Z.
- FUJIFILM X: For cameras with mount X need here is such an adapter M39-Fuji X.
- FUJIFILM GFX: For medium format cameras G-mount need here is such an adapter M39-Fuji GFX.
- SAMSUNG: NX mount cameras require here is an adapter M39-Samsung NX. There are no adapters for the NX mini camera yet.
- SIGMA / PANASONIC / LEICA: For cameras with L mount need here is such an adapter M39-Leica L.
- LEICA: For cameras with a bayonet mount Leica M need here is an adapter M39-L / M.
It's important: for SLR cameras, only macro mode is possible (can only shoot at very close focusing distances).
For SLR cameras (macro mode only)
- Canon: For cameras Canon EOS with bayonet mount EF / EF-S need here is an adapter M39 -Canon EOS.
- NIKON: For cameras Nikon DX / FXas well as for cameras Fujifilm и Kodak with Nikon F mount needed here is such an adapter M39 -Nikon F (some cameras will only work in M-mode).
- PENTAX: For Pentax K-mount cameras, you need here is such an adapter M39 -Pentax K.
- SONY/MINOLTA: For cameras with a Sony/Minolta A mount, you need here is an adapter M39 -Sony A.
- OLYMPUS/PANASONIC/LEICA: For cameras with 4/3 mount (not to be confused with Micro 4/3!) here is an adapter M39 -4/3.
More useful information can be found in review of his clone I-61 2,8 / 52.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval.
Little simpot reviewer, thanks
Thanks for the review. A lens at a flea market costs a penny.
I think one hundred micro 4/3 is a dead system, it has no future with the pricing policy of Olympus and Panasonic.
Yes on true yes drive prices the only advantage is compactness
2017 in the yard. And MFT doesn't look dead ...))) Great new cameras!
2019 in the yard and 4/3 one of the most advanced systems
Funny. Never progressive. It’s surprising that even in 2014 they spoke poorly of this system) And the commentator was right.
2020: Olympus E-PL1 costs $ 40 carcass on the secondary. The short working distance allows you to install almost any manual. I have this camera with me every day, plus an Olympus 17 2.8 fixed pancake (it costs $ 100). Total $ 140. Still always with you Jupiter-8 for a portrait ($ 25 with an adapter). The weight of the whole set is 500 grams.
Here is a link of how it looks: https://camerasize.com/compact/#354.94,ha,t
Aim at the lens and hold the cursor - it will display the dimensions and weight.
In terms of FF, 17mm 2.8 turns into 35mm 5.6, what the hell
Let's distract from the topic already to the full. I have a sidekick, so apart from Panas 4/3, he doesn’t recognize anything, he often gets out on trips for a long time (Chukotka, Kamchatka, Altai) and it is the size and weight of the equipment that play a decisive role. And he is not alone in his preferences.
There will be a review of P5 soon, I think it will be possible to arrange debate there.
and what kind of camera is it and where can I look at the pictures?
otherwise I have GF3 with a fix of 14 / 2.5, and everything is terrible with the color. they say that this is the case for all Panas (even new ones), for Olympus type better, but not fundamentally. I want to understand, so I'm interested in personal experience.
I don’t know exactly, no matter how not the GF3, but not a fix - the zoom is for sure. There are no photos in the free view, only for home use.
Clarified camera - G5
is it a soapy lens or something? Is it because of enlightenment ???
real slag.
I have the same pictures, with a gray veil
I would not be so categorical. “Real slag” of a particular specimen - yes, but there are a la “I-61” in excellent condition and giving a beautiful picture.
And about the freezing grease. For half an hour or an hour, I was not sorry to spend on changing the grease and washing the diaphragm blades, but then the song.
Good afternoon, can you please tell me how to lubricate? Will Ciatim go silicone?
whatever they say about the old Soviet optics, good or bad, you first need to consider why you need it.
Soviet lenses were made for film with a lower sensitivity than modern “digital” and in addition for “full frame” without vignetting. When used on the crop, the modern digital matrix is flooded with too much light, as well as the cavity of the camera itself. The light transmission of Soviet optics is large (or good), as evidenced by the tests at least by Evtifeev, under equal conditions Soviet lenses give a lighter picture.
If you want contrast, use an ND filter. If your Soviet lens “soapy” gives a “gray veil”, select a normal ND filter for it, put on a hood, reduce the area of the front lens with the help of lowering rings ... Experiment ...
look at the photo in the article ... Low contrast - yes, but the lens is sharp throughout the entire field of the frame, the absence of CA, distortion is also not visible, and this is a $ 10 lens
A little experience and dexterity, more correct exposure, some kind of filter (adapter, ring, hood ...) and for only $ 50 we get an excellent lens for creativity or for every day. There are no bad (well, very bad) lenses, there are the wrong tasks and subjects for the lens or the wrong photographer.
In this particular specimen from the review, the image is full of slag, due to the completely ragged front lens. Enlightenment is peeled, the entire front lens is in the mass of rough scratches. This review can be a tutorial on what lenses you should not take and you need to avoid buying glasses with the presented defects. In good condition, Industar-61L / D gives a TOTALLY different picture. Be careful when purchasing lenses.
Arkady, I want to note that this version of the lens (I-61 2,8 / 52) was also produced with 6 aperture blades. In particular, I have such a copy (serial no. 87… ..).
PS
And the number is not an indicator of the year of release. I know for sure that my father acquired it back in the late 70s along with the FED camera.
I have a similar version of the “Industar - 61” (I-61 2,8 / 52) lens with 6 blades, like yours. The serial number of the copy is No. 8620017. Judging by the photo of the copy from the review, these serial numbers (No. 85… ..) were the last ones with 10 blades in the diaphragm. And the subsequent numbers have already been "modernized" and began to make 6 petals.
zdrastvuite. izvinite chto pishu latinsimi bukvami bespokoiu s solnechnoi gruzii. u menia est canon 1100d i obiektiv I-61 2,8 / 52 fed. nujen perekhodnik a kakoi ne znaiu pojalusta podskajite zaraneie sps
This lens is pretty good for macro photography.
Here is an example (with three macro rings) - a fastening of a Christmas tree decoration.
I’ll insert my 5 kopecks, I have an industrial 61 2,8 / 52 but his enlightenment is lilac. It turns out l / d and he also has 10 petals? How to clean them?
good lens for shooting small flowers
My I61 2,8 / 52 just has a lilac sheen, I would even say - bright purple, but my I61L 2,8 / 55 is yellowish.
compared with pentax super takumar 1.4 50 and with sony 1/4 50 at aperture 6.3 on a sony nex5n with an m42 adapter \ inferior in sharpness only to sleepyheads \ dreary to sharpen — twist for a long time, the colors are excellent \ really for a subject macro is quite suitable \\ on Panasonic gx7 - shots sucks - pale and soapy, while with Industar 50-2 (3.5 50) soapy but decent, you can shoot portraits if money is tight. So on APSC and for a full frame you can leave on the farm with such a price. The lens from fed3 is rangefinder.
Well, I don’t even know, I have a perfect Jupiter-8, and a well-washed I-61 52 / 2.8 case. As a result of a 1: 1 comparison, there is no difference, from the word at all. So I could not find almost 2 times greater resolution of I-61
Great kid! I will say that I personally have not met the Greater permission anywhere! Even this copy, from the review, is not bad, in my opinion ... I will attach it to the critics (the photo is slightly tightened, without fanaticism; it is clearly visible what it is capable of):
Another one:
Lens I - 61 L / D 2,8 / 55 Tell me what adapter you need to try on Nikon 5200.
Will only work in macro mode, if not cut.
Adapter М39-М42 and М42-AI (without lens).
When tidied up, it's a great lens and costs an average of $ 5. My front lens was rubbed to a matte state, I polished it with GOI paste and the lens came to life.
Eh, I’ll take this baby from a friend in a couple of days, let’s see what he can do on the Nikon D500)
Sorry, typo. Nikon d5100