For the provided lens 35KP-1,8 / 85 many thanks Konstantin Puchkov.
35KP-1,8 / 85. Photo take here (the lens from the review is heavily modified and the marking is no longer visible on it). The adapted version looks like like this.
In short
35KP-1,8 / 85 - Soviet film projection lens. Nowadays it can be used as a creative lens after appropriate adaptation, it is primarily interesting as a portrait lens.
Cinema projection lenses are prized for their exclusive image character. 35KP-1,8 / 850 turned out to be sharp and create a pleasant picture with the character inherent in planars. Like 35KP-1,8 / 70, in my opinion, 35KP-1,8 / 85 is also one of the best projection and cinematographic lenses in the family of their kind. One of the obvious shortcomings is noticeable glare in the backlight.
The lens consists of only one massive lens unit and requires adaptation for use on modern digital cameras. A sufficiently long flange distance allows the 35KP-1,8 / 85 to be adapted for both mirrorless and SLR cameras. 5KP-1,8 / 85 easily covers the full frame.
Sample Photos
Sample photos with original RAW files were helped by the photographer Natalya romanenko (instagram). Convert RAW source files with Nikon D700 original utility Nikon Capture NX-D v 1.4.6. The lens does not have an aperture, and therefore you can always shoot exclusively at F / 1.8.
You can download the original photos in RAW format at this link... Some more photos here.
All reviews of film projection and filming lenses:
- RO3-3M 2/50
- RO2-2M 75/2
- LOMO RO501-1 F = 100 1: 2
- PO 500-1 F9 CM. 1: 2 P
- LOMO RO500-1 F = 90 1: 2 + Review, analysis and comparative test of the adapted projection lens LOMO RO500-1 F=90 1:2
- LENKINAP RO500-1 F = 9cm 1: 2 P
- LOMO RO506-1 F = 80 1: 2
- ЛЭТИ-60/60М F=92 1:2
- 2/92
- F = 92 1: 2
- 16KP-1,4 / 65
- 35KP-1,8 / 65
- 35KP-1,8 / 70
- 35KP-1,8 / 75
- 35KP-1,8 / 85
- 35KP-1.8 / 100
- 35KP-1.8 / 120
- 35KP-1,8 / 120 (with aperture)
- LOMO P-5 F = 90 1: 2
- LOMO P-5 F = 100 1: 2
- LOMO P-6M F=12cm 1:1.6
- LENKINAP OKS1A-75-1 F=75 1:2 P
- LOMO OKS1-22-1 F = 22 1: 2.8
- ЛОМО ОКС1-40-1 40/2.5
- LOMO OKS1-300-1 F = 300 1: 3.5
- LOMO OKS11-35-1 F = 35 1: 2
- LOMO W-53 F = 75 1: 2
- LOMO W-54 F = 85 1: 2
- LOMO OKP4-80-1 F=80 1:1,8
- LOMO OKP8-90-1 F=90 1:2
- ОКП-6-70-1 F=70 1:1,8
- Tair-41 50/2
- KO-120 1: 2,1 120mm
- KO-90 1: 1,9 F = 9cm
- KO-120M 1: 1.8 F = 120mm
- KO-120M 120 / 1.8 with a diaphragm and helicoid
- KO-120 1: 2.1 F = 12cm
- GOZ “KO-140” 1:2,2 F–14cm
- Vega-9 2,1 / 50
- MP RSFSR GLAVOCHTEKHPROM PLANT №6 ★ F=7.7cm ★
- MSO USSR SSD UPP-1 ★ KHARKIV ★ F-7 CM ★
- Schneider Super Cinelux 70/2
- Meopta Meostigmat 90/2
- Meopta Meostigmat 100/1.7
- RO2-2M 75/2 VS LOMO Zh-53 75/2 VS LOMO RO506-1 80/2
- Belar-2 2,5/90 (MMZ). Review of a rare slide projection lens adapted for modern cameras
- Projection aplanates: "Petzvali" and "Richter"
The names of the lenses correspond to their exact spelling on the body.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval.
This is the younger brother of the 100 / 1.8 Minsky. Six-lens planar.
Reply
Sharpness at full aperture is too good for portrait use.
If you shoot a portrait of a lady of Balzac's age, you are used to having high sharpness just before your eyes.
And here it is noticeably wider. We'll have to soften the skin on the face and neck additionally.
A good portrait lens allows you to control this process by closing the aperture.
Reply
As if the modern 85 / 1.8 would draw something differently ...
Reply
"Nowadays it can be used as a creative lens after appropriate adaptation, primarily interesting as a portrait lens."
Hmmm, 20 photos - 2 portraits and 15 photos of grass. Is he really interesting as a portraitist?
Reply
Now is not the season, but you can understand its suitability and from these photos you can, if you look and think, and not dig.
Reply
I'm not digging. It is also not the season for grass, but there are many times more portraits of it.
How do you rate this “primarily interesting portrait lens” from these two photos? Well, that's it. You think that it is enough to add some kind of opinion about him - ok, hi so i bude.
Reply
Natasha, who prepared an example, will improve
Reply
We are waiting for the update.
Reply
For a portrait, it must be covered so as not to get situations in the style of "the left eye is sharp, the right eye is not very", and in the modern world it is already inconvenient to do this with pens. Otherwise, it will only be full face portraits. And if there is also no diaphragm, then it turns out completely sad.
Reply
Why, by the way, is this considered bad manners?
Reply
There is nothing worse than monotony in portrait photography. On high-aperture optics in the open, we will get either Esquire-style photos, or with a sharp and unsharp eye, if we turn the model even slightly. And that's all. Not only do two such types of portraits quickly get bored, but there are very few models and situations for which this is suitable. More often, a blurry eye is perceived as some kind of defect, and a defect in the model. Or as a lack of photography skills.
By the way, you have an interesting lens to note - https://mysku.ru/blog/diy/84095.html
Reply
There is a group dedicated to projection lenses in the MordBook. I got the impression that some of them twist the background so that “Helios-40” is quietly crying on the sidelines.
In this regard, there is a question for connoisseurs: why does this effect not manifest itself when the projection device works for its intended purpose?
Reply
“When the projector works for its intended purpose” - obviously, because when the projection from the film to the screen, everything is in focus (the entire frame of the film), there is no out-of-focus area, and there is no defocused image either.
Reply
>> there is no blur zone - Oh, really. Thanks!
Reply
And if it’s affectionate, it’s not important for us to do it.
Reply
Axis here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2161767920526039
Reply
Dyakuyu. Even cool!
Reply
I am not even more surprised, ale the hostility is formed, but the projection lens is “the head in the middle of the frame, and the background is not cool, or polyethylen”. I will not say that it is nasty, an ale such defect can be quickly become a stamp. Yak bi there is no bulo, I want to try it: D
Reply
Zhakhlivy technical marriage, ale duzhe tsіkaviy, I really want to try it too)))
Reply
How did you adapt it to the camera? I bought a pair today. They didn't give me much. I can't find any examples of how to attach it to the camera body yet. The only thing is, I wouldn't want to put it in a can of condensed milk
Reply
Look, here is a lens with a similar design shown in the adaptation: https://radojuva.com/2020/12/35kp-1-8-100-mmz-vavilova/
Reply