Review of the deeply modified Vega-22UTs F / 5.6 (2.5) 103 mm (MMZ) from a reader Radozhiva

View of the Vega-22UTs lens and sample photos from it, especially for Radozhiva, prepared Rodion Eshmakov.

Appearance of Vega-22

Appearance of Vega-22


For the gratuitous Vega-22TC I thank Vladimir Deyev.
Characteristics of Vega-22UTs
Optical design: 5 lenses in 4 groups (Biometar / Vega), no design drawing
Resolution (obviously for F / 5.6, center / edge): 65/20 lines / mm
Field of view angle (in native format): 52 deg.
Format: 6 * 9 cm (?)
Aperture Limits (Factory Option): F / 5.6-F / 16
Diaphragm design: six-petal, rounded, without presetting mechanisms, with ratchet on the feet
Diameter under filters: not provided
Mount: M42, working distance of about 80 mm (did not measure exactly)
Focuser: None
Features: built-in subtractive filters, the lens is artificially apertured to F / 5.6.

Vega-22UTs - an infrequent example of domestic optics for photo enlargers, as indicated by the letter "U" in the title. The letter "C" indicates that it was intended for color photographs.

The design and key features of the adaptation of Vega-22UTs

Like Vega-5U, Vega-22UTs was produced at the Minsk Mechanical Plant and existed in a single version of the frame - in the form of a sort of box with lenses.

Appearance of Vega-22UTs

Appearance of Vega-22UTs

The lens has an absurd appearance due to the presence of built-in filters, which are used for color correction in color printing.
And, although there are no complaints about the quality of the lens assembly, in this form it is simply impossible to use it normally.
In general, this is perhaps the most inconvenient photo-magnification lens for adaptation, because:

  1. The lens block is inseparable from the inconvenient body;
  2. The native diaphragm has a hole much smaller than the pupil of the lens;
  3. Built-in filters are not needed for photography.

For these reasons, it was decided from scratch to develop a housing for the lenses of this lens, which will allow using a diaphragm of such a size that it is the size of the pupil (or larger, which is not important). Naturally, the lens also needed a focusing mechanism (the G-44M case would do, but I had my own version).

The lenses of the lens are pressed into brass washers, which is very convenient. Therefore, the only lens distance to be found was the distance between the front and rear lens units.

I could not determine it with great accuracy, but, because Double-Gaussian lenses are quite insensitive to the distance between the lens blocks, I think there was enough accuracy. So, this distance between the seats of the lens blocks is 21 + -0.5 mm.
Also, at the beginning it was indicated that the lens is artificially diaphragmed to F / 5.6. Counting aperture Using comparisons of pupil diameters and aperture diameters, a value of ~ F / 2.5 was obtained.

It is very big aperture for a lens of a similar design; we can say that with such a relative aperture, the circuit operates “at the limit of possibilities” (it suffices to recall other Vega lenses that were not brighter than F / 2.8).

To fully use the lens aperture, the diaphragm from Industar-55U was chosen (I managed to find it separately), which has a diameter even larger than necessary.

Here link with lens lens adaptation description.

Appearance of the nine-petal diaphragm in Vega-22

Appearance of the nine-petal diaphragm in Vega-22

Ultimately, a completely different lens was obtained, having only the optical part from Vega-22.

Optical properties (modified sample)

Now the lens has become 103 / 2.5 instead of 103 / 5.6, its resolution at open aperture I estimated as ~ 30/15 lines / mm (center / edge) - the lens has very average sharpness at F / 2.5.
The main reason for the low sharpness is the soft effect, which increases closer to the edges of the picture, even on crop 1.6. Those. the lens suffers from spherical aberrations and coma, which was expected.

However, at F / 2.5, the picture of the lens looks very unusual - soft, with a very unusual blurring of the background, it is great for portrait shooting.

With aperture, the sharpness of the lens increases - at F / 2.8, excessive software disappears, although the picture remains generally the same; on F / 4, good sharpness appears while maintaining a recognizable pattern (9 aperture blades are responsible for this), and on F / 5.6 and beyond, the lens is technically sharp. Therefore, in the aperture enlarger up to F / 5.6 were not used.

Hole shape on F / 5.6

Hole shape on F / 5.6

Hence the conclusion - the picture of the lens is very plastic, which is a big plus. The blend of aberrations creates a very unusual, almost psychedelic bokeh. For the picture, my peers called the lens "alien" - in my arsenal there was nothing like it yet.

With regards to bokeh - it is peculiar both in the prefocal and the out of focus, but not ugly. Rather - for an amateur. The lens is not very fond of a colorful background - there is a risk of turning it into a mess.

Zofocal blur at F / 2.5

Zofocal blur at F / 2.5

Vega-22 suffers from chromatism on open diaphragms, but most often it is masked by software.

The contrast of the lens is low - all the photos have been revised by contrast. This is due to the insufficiently thought-out design (until the rear light cutters are installed - they are required for medium format optics in a small format) and the fact that the lens has single-layer enlightenment. Still, Vega doesn’t hurt and a good lens hood.
But the color rendition of the lens is very correct, neutral - because lens and was designed for color printing. I could not find such familiar shades of yellow and green in the lenses to the lumen.
However, enough words. Just look at the photos (most of it was shot at 2.5-2.8)!

Conclusion

Vega-22 is a very unusual and infrequent lens. In its factory form, it is practically useless, but, having acquired a completely new mechanics, the lens has changed - from a boring box it has become an unusual portrait lens with an original picture. My summary - the lens was worth the effort.

Thank you for your attention, Eshmakov Rodion.

Save

Save

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 161, on the topic: Overview of the deeply modified Vega-22UTs F / 5.6 (2.5) 103 mm (MMZ) from the reader Radozhiva

  • anonym

    Thank you for the review. The work is done, it is visible. But the picture did not like. Very mediocre drawing, IMHO. Successes.

  • Ilyas

    Another article for everyone's favorite site with a bunch of homemade products
    We look from the swarthy plague and get it right! From the shaitan box, another lens! Bravo.

  • Sergei

    Sometimes you dig around like this with such lenses, do something - interesting, fascinating. And so the first, second, fifth, tenth. Time goes by, but there is practically zero sense, and I also spent an n-th amount of money. As a result, such lenses turn out to be the brainchild of Frankenstein - unsightly, uncomfortable, large and heavy, looking accordingly - like some kind of hellish designer. You make such lenses, you think there will be a special case, I will shoot them and it will be cool. But this case came, and you did not take it because it is heavy and uncomfortable and you are afraid to knock modern plastic camera-lenses on it in your bag. Or here it is, the moment, and you did not get into focus, but the moment is gone. And looking back, you realize that all this time it would be better if you took pictures, and this money could all be put aside and then spent on a normal system lens.
    My most successful alterations that have the right to life are the alteration of Helios 44M-7 under Nikon (300r for a brass adapter + manual dexterity), alteration of PO3-3M for micro 4/3 (350r - adapter + turning work) and Zuiko 40mm 2.8 from Olympus Trip 35 (350r - adapter + turning work). These lenses were worth the investment, even though I got them myself for free.
    And so you think whether to finish Vega 22UTs to mind or not, whether to finish projection aplanat 130 f2 to portraiture or not. The only consolation is that this hobby is harmless enough and better so than ditch in the gateways or lower everything in the slot machines. + now a lot of material on monocles! : D

    • Rodion

      I've been sitting on manuals for 1,5 years - in principle, I'm so used to it that I don't even pull on AF. I don't regret the shutter of the camera - I do focus bracketing in difficult cases.
      I use my homemade products according to my mood, so, of course, the main optics park is less showy: Mir-20, Mir-1, G-44, Yu-11, Vivitar 70-210 / 3.5. But I often take a "regular" lens + homemade products for special effects, which justifies itself. Or just home-made - it's more difficult, but more interesting.

  • Alexander

    taking pictures of people is categorically contraindicated. Is that the "dandelion seals". “The lens is not very fond of a colorful background” - the lens is not very much at all ... But the idea is wildly deep, for example.

    • Rodion

      There is no lens that cannot be removed. You just need to come up with a plot. I think I can handle this lens too)
      In any case, the inappropriateness of a picture always only attracts me, and does not repel me. I would like to experiment further and achieve unusual and unexpected results)

      • B.R.P.

        Golden words, Rodion.

  • Dim

    Liked: "Felix 30.05.2016/19/40 at XNUMX:XNUMX ... I mean, it's just incredible to spend so much money for the sake of interest, then getting mediocre characteristics to praise him ...." (c) I wonder what dear Felix proposes to do with MONEY? Pray for them, sell everyone and everything for them, lie in a coffin filled with DE-NL-HA-MI? :) I foolishly always thought that money is just what is needed to make life interesting. A person (Rodion) is interested in living, why should he save up pieces of paper? Mediocre characteristics again what? Can't you turn off ads and turn on what nature has so hard crammed into your skull? Do you have something or Rodion that he personally likes, and not the marketing department of Nikon or Canon or Zeiss, why he actually SHOULD be nailed to a herd of hypnotized gibbons who do not know what they need from life and therefore look into their mouths cunning uncle and reassure themselves that their characteristics are the best at least and they are not suckers :-))))
    And what is the funniest thing these people teach, teach and do not teach ...

  • Linkoff

    Bokeh is just magical ... the effect of magic in its purest form! Tell me if there are analogs on optics that do not require alteration?
    For the rest, as for me, Jupiter-8 gives more artistic portraits, and the volume and plastic and colors are more pleasant and pretty.

  • Oleg

    Who is for, who is against, but the lens did not leave indifferent. 123 comments all the same, whether the case is SMC Pentax-DA L 1: 4-5.6 18-50mm DC WR RE everything is dark and predictable. Neither needing to be cut, nor a psychedelic bokeshki

  • Vyshgorod City

    Gentlemen SAMODELKINS and RUKOZHOPENKI - do not argue !!!
    The lens is “unique”! Gives a VERY interesting picture!
    I really liked the background in the bubbles. Very original !
    For "blind critics" advice - start criticizing the paintings of Salvador Dali and Picasso !!!
    Start comparing them with the paintings of Shishkin and Aivazovsky - you will have SEA and OCEAN reasons to be “dissatisfied” with THESE or SOME artists - for every subjective taste!

    And the lens is VERY interesting ...! ;)))

  • anonym

    I wanted to ask Rodion: Have you tried to blacken the ends of the lenses and distance rings?

    • Rodion

      You can read more carefully: "The lenses are pressed into brass washers." To the ends, i.e. don't get there.
      And there are simply no lens spaces here. There is nothing to blacken.

  • anonym

    I read the comments, and it became curious: the author was able to do an entry-level work in the locksmith and design direction. Well done. Where does such conceit come from? Who did he imagine himself to be? Someone, delicately so, hints: "and to remove from another point" - insults immediately. Someone gave an example with their glass from Minolta - again offense. When they say that it did not work out, again offense. And this is “they don't like me here, I'll go to another site.” A strange approach to photography. I, like many others, would like to see the author's photographs that reveal the possibilities of glass, but there is not a single worthy shot. It's reworked to be filmed or to be admired by everyone. And in the comments I did not find a single review of a good picture, except for the cat, which the Lynx took from the network.

    • Lynx

      Because the author of the review - in essence of development - is still a schoolboy.
      With the resentment characteristic of many teenagers and the desire to be “praised for drawing from kindergarten,” simply because he tried and succeeded.
      The fact that I here evaluate my work according to more objective and strict criteria was an unpleasant surprise for him. Well, plus “friends, to whom I boasted about the publication” came running and nabizhi to support.
      On the whole - nothing unexpected or new, everything is quite typical.

      • zengarden

        Lynx, do you talk to yourself? ;)

        I did not see any resentment anywhere. Just the author shows restraint, calmly and benevolently responds to the comments of not quite adequate "adult uncles."
        But, of course, it’s easier to discuss personal qualities of a person and fantasize on this topic :)
        But in fact, many people are engaged in obscure, but interesting hobbies. So let's blame them!

        • Lynx

          no

    • Rodion

      And then “they don't like me here”? I said there is a different audience. Here it is not necessary to spread it, why litter the site with something that does not fit the idea at all.

    • Rodion

      And in general it would be very surprising if, 1 day after production, I immediately gave birth to a pack of first-class photos on the lens. Despite the fact that I have never filmed them, I do not know him at all - he is new, completely new. There is no information about him ... This is not helios - he put it on and went to shoot ...
      I sent more photos to Arkady, but for some reason they aren’t here yet.
      PS Well, in general - not all photos I can send here, many of them cannot be sent to me at the request of the people who are present in the pictures. I cannot but respect them. Therefore, many of the photos that I like and which I consider to be successful, I could not include.
      And many more photos just serve as illustrative examples of the features of the lens - there are deliberately bad photos here. After all, this is not a site with a selection of art photos, but a site with reviews. And the review should give a characteristic of the lens “weighty, rough, visible”. For vanilla pictures - for flickr.

  • Igor

    The review is not a lens, but a homemade product, there are homemade products, not improvements. If I understand correctly, the distance between the groups of lenses is broken, which is no longer Vega-22. My purely personal opinion is that on the site about photographic equipment I would like to see reviews of factory photographic equipment that can be purchased in the form in which it is produced and viewed. Finalization (deep or not very) is, it seems to me, pinning a helicode or even adding a diaphragm (if a projector), but not a violation of the optical scheme.
    Everything is very IMHO, the thought of an ordinary reader;)
    P.S. When I make monocles, I sometimes dabble, for the sake of curiosity I add different lenses. The effects are different, funny and not so much. But I never thought to call it “finished” or “redesigned” and even “new unique” lens.

    • Rodion

      The inter-lens space, if broken, is not critical. So the influence of the error is minimal.
      It's like moving the rear lens unit of Helios-44 a little - it's not critical and doesn't affect the overall picture.
      Re-read it carefully - there is no violation of the optical scheme.

  • Rodion

    So fotochki covered up to 2.8-4 arrived)
    Well, and a little open - to demonstrate once again the effect of aberrations.

  • Ivan

    But still no. It’s painful to look at the pictures.

    • Oleg

      and eyes did not try to close

  • Sergei

    This is a lens for use in the enlarger and for printing color photographs. Why redo it for use on the camera ???

    • Rodion

      Simple)))

      • Alexander Hedgehog

        do not pay attention, lately I see people often have their asses flaring up from the fact that someone is “scratching against the grain”

  • ppseva

    I liked the lens precisely because of my side. Well done Rodion, keep it up. Maybe your hands will reach Vega 12 and you will remake it. I want to put it on Pentax or Nex and the adapters are too expensive.

  • Masha

    I use it for panoramas, very convenient.
    There is a nuance, I removed the transparent filter, I thought why it was too glass and the sharpness was greatly lost. I returned it back.
    The lens is underestimated by many.

  • Igor

    You are all crazy - you are so interesting to read! Thanks!!!

  • Rodion

    Recently, it suddenly suddenly dawned on why, despite observing the lens distances, the sharpness of the image fell (judging by the photo of other colleagues).
    The fact is that it is necessary to take into account that the filter is not air, its refractive index is different. Therefore, you cannot just take and get the filter without adjusting the distance between the lens blocks.
    Everything, the lens - I will redo it.

    • Vasily Alexeevich

      Hello Rodion! Interested in the lens, if there are any - please report the results of the alteration ...

      • Rodion

        Hello! I have not yet begun to remake it. Put aside in a long box fuss with biometars.

        • Vasily Alexeevich

          I dropped a letter to your mail - if it doesn't make it difficult, answer

  • Kirill Yankovsky

    I found such a new one with a passport in a box! In the factory form, it is quite suitable for macro. With three M42 sleeves, it focuses from about 40cm. Very sharp with F8. And low contrast. A stunningly rare toy - it looks like a Polish Janpol Color

  • Paul

    Good review thanks! But I would like to see a photo, for example, streets on f8 which flu and what detail the volume is the same

  • Nicholas

    I tried to photograph with this lens, after removing the light filters. The lens has a M42x1 connecting thread. If you install it on a camera with a small extension ring (I don’t remember, medium or short), then you can aim at infinity using the lens thread or extension ring (you just need to be careful not to swing the lens out). The picture is good, clear.

  • Denis Korzun

    Rodion, thanks - good review!

    I wish I could see shots on closed apertures at 100% scale, I would like to know what happens to the chromatics there - it seems that XA should be rather low on enlarging lenses !?
    Will there be a link to the source code?

    I myself think about such alterations of Vega-22UTs or 5U (by the way - which one is more interesting), or try to cut the Angle Vegas ... you can certainly do without Schneider Componon-S 135mm or 150mm - but that will be another story (more technical than creative).

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2016/05/vega-22u-c/

Version en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2016/05/vega-22u-c/