| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
 Posted - Nov 13 2015 : 1:58:46 PM
|
Hi!
Question can looks stupid, but it's been a while it's in my head, and can't find any answers.
I'm not talking about the Zenit-D Д lenses (Helios-44Д), and not about the D regime for shutter (bulb).
I'm talking about the Д that I found on an Industar-51Д and recently on a Industar-52Д 500mm/5 .
That's for now the only time I saw this "D".
|
|
xya
France
157 Posts |
Posted - Nov 14 2015 : 05:50:09 AM
|
| as far as I know D stands for M39 mount (and Z M42). |
 |
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Nov 14 2015 : 05:53:57 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by xya
as far as I know D stands for M39 mount (and Z M42).
Thanks for answer. But I have never seen a "d" in ZM39 lenses, and industar-51 doesn't have ZM39 mount. |
|
|
altix
Ukraine
152 Posts |
Posted - Nov 14 2015 : 08:39:32 AM
|
Dear Moxies,
as far as I remember I-51D is recalculated I-51 with higher resolution (27 lines/mm in center instead of 22 lines/mm in standard model). Probably this type was more preferable for aerial-photography or dia-projectors (hence the abbreviation).
best regards
altix |
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Nov 14 2015 : 2:24:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by altix
Dear Moxies,
as far as I remember I-51D is recalculated I-51 with higher resolution (27 lines/mm in center instead of 22 lines/mm in standard model). Probably this type was more preferable for aerial-photography or dia-projectors (hence the abbreviation).
best regards
altix
Interesting.I didn't think projector lens need better resolution. But the I-52 is a pretty heavy lens, and this version come with several color filter and fixation for large format apparature or AFA type camera. Diaprojector are usualy small compared to KinoProjectors lenses (like all those KP or KO lenses).
Still, Dyakuyu!  |
Edited by - Moxies on Nov 14 2015 2:27:21 PM |
|
|
altix
Ukraine
152 Posts |
Posted - Nov 15 2015 : 04:56:38 AM
|
Dear Moxies,
Будь ласка! Мені дуже приємно
It is hard to understand why I-51D is called "diaproektornyj". Probably it is just a code-word to distinguish it from the standard model.
There were several models of graphoprojectors in the USSR like "ЭДИ-454", "Лектор-2000", etc. These devices project the transparencies on the screen. "ЭДИ-454" has lens "Industar 51" (without D) in special mount and without the diaphragm. Could be that " D" has nothing to do with dia-projectors at all but I've heard such explanation for this letter.
Cordialement vôtre
altix
|
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Nov 21 2015 : 10:40:40 AM
|
| Thanks a lot altix! :) |
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 06 2016 : 09:48:46 AM
|
Looks like this Industar-51D was Cine 35mm lens.
Hard to believe, since it's initialy a large format lens.
But in a catalogue, I found this
Looks like my has adapted mount, but adapter looks identical.
 |
|
|
Alfa2
Poland
349 Posts |
Posted - Feb 06 2016 : 4:26:57 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by altix
It is hard to understand why I-51D is called "diaproektornyj". Probably it is just a code-word to distinguish it from the standard model.
Dear altix, interesting idea. But FED 5 series were sold with lens Industar 61 л/д. So there is "D" in name of lens but this is not "diaproektornyj" lens.
I wonder what this "D" means. |
|
|
Alexander K.
AlexanderK
Germany
590 Posts |
Posted - Feb 06 2016 : 5:10:35 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alfa2
But FED 5 series were sold with lens Industar 61 л/д. So there is "D" in name of lens but this is not "diaproektornyj" lens.
I wonder what this "D" means.
Industar-61 L/D (Л/Д) was produced on LZOS as standard lens for rangefinder cameras (in Russian "Дальномерная камера"). "D" means "Дальномерная" (rangefinder). The other lens from LZOS was Industar-61 L/Z (Л/З) - lens for SLR cameras (in Russian "Зеркальная камера").
"Л" means "Lytkarino" - Lytkarino Optical Glass Factory (LZOS)
Regards, Alexander |
Edited by - AlexanderK on Feb 06 2016 5:13:46 PM |
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 01:29:32 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AlexanderK
Industar-61 L/D (Л/Д) was produced on LZOS as standard lens for rangefinder cameras (in Russian "Дальномерная камера"). "D" means "Дальномерная" (rangefinder).
"Л" means "Lytkarino" - Lytkarino Optical Glass Factory (LZOS)
I thought I-61 L/D means the radioactive glas they used "Lanthan".
From Wikipedia:
Lanthanum(III) oxide (La2O3) improves the alkali resistance of glass and is used in making special optical glasses, such as infrared-absorbing glass, as well as camera and telescope lenses, because of the high refractive index and low dispersion of rare-earth glasses.
For Lytkarino they just used the factory logo.
EDIT: We all know that I-61LD is a good lens. You have to wonder why Lanthanum glass wasn't used more if it improves the optical results so much. Why isn't it used in the new Jupiter-3plus? |
Edited by - Lenny on Feb 07 2016 01:51:34 AM |
|
|
Alexander K.
AlexanderK
Germany
590 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 01:57:30 AM
|
Lenny,
yes, you are right. I have read the both explanation about "Л" on Industar-61, but I didn't find any exact confirmation what the "Л" means. For me are the both explanations correct.
Regards, Alexander |
|
|
Alfa2
Poland
349 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 02:31:33 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AlexanderK
Industar-61 L/D (Л/Д) was produced on LZOS as standard lens for rangefinder cameras (in Russian "Дальномерная камера"). "D" means "Дальномерная" (rangefinder). The other lens from LZOS was Industar-61 L/Z (Л/З) - lens for SLR cameras (in Russian "Зеркальная камера").
"Л" means "Lytkarino" - Lytkarino Optical Glass Factory (LZOS)
Thank you, Alexander, geat explanation
All the time I was wondering why we have (Л/Д) and (Л/З) on Industar 61. Now I know.
Regarding letter "Л" I have heared about "Lanthan" too but "Lytkarino" is good explanation either.
|
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 03:22:22 AM
|
Yes, Lenny, I wonder too why lanthanum was not much used.
Leitz used it for the first series of their 2/50mm Summicron (1953/54)then abandoned it.
Same thing for the first Canon 1,2/50mm, in LTM, FL and FD. And for other lenses of this 1955/60 period. Nikon too.
Strange...
|
|
|
altix
Ukraine
152 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 06:27:25 AM
|
Dear all,
I consider that the real revolution in the optical glass industry was done by Otto Schott and Ernst Abbe. Long time it was believed that the increase of profit from the optical glass production is closely connected with the development of new sorts of glass. However in eighties Japan reduced the number of glasses excluding the glasses that contained toxic and radioactive elements. Their lenses they labeled with the green "nature-friendly" label. It was very clever marketing decision. Soon German and European glass and lens producers did the same trick. Now according to European standards not every sort of glass could be produced and used in the lenses. It is funny, but the modern Schott glass catalog almost completely coincides with the 120 years old Schott catalog.
altix
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/722016_getImage.jpg
|
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 07:50:15 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.
Yes, Lenny, I wonder too why lanthanum was not much used.
Leitz used it for the first series of their 2/50mm Summicron (1953/54)then abandoned it.
Same thing for the first Canon 1,2/50mm, in LTM, FL and FD. And for other lenses of this 1955/60 period. Nikon too.
Strange...
I'm reading about radioactive lenses now, Jacques.
This is interesting:
There is someone who said that the nuclear plant where he worked tried to confiscate his "newer" Leica 35mm f/2 summicron due to its "radioactive contamination".
From
http://www.bnphoto.org/bnphoto/LostSites_MonaghanRadioactive.htm
Thorium is derived commercially from certain monazite sands (e.g., from India). Thorium is radioactive itself, emitting alpha particles. The resulting "daughter" products of that radioactive decay series also produce both alpha and beta particles. Related rare earth such as lanthanum are often produced from the same sources, with monazite being up to 25% lanthanum. This decay process means these thoriated glass lenses can gradually become more radioactive over time, as the more highly radioactive decay products build up in the glass. This result is counterintuitive. You would expect the radioactivity to decrease over time. But after chemically purifying the thorium from its ore sources, the thorium is relatively free of these daughter products. Over time, the thorium decays, and the levels of radioactive daughter by-products builds up. Eventually a more highly radioactive equilibrium will be reached, as in the original radioactive ores. So over the years, your "hot" lenses are likely to get more radioactive rather than less. Surprise!
Lanthanum has two isotopes in its natural form, one of which is weakly radioactive. Another source of rare earths such as lanthanum is cerite, which contains the element cerium. Cheap glasses may have iron salts in them, often yielding the familiar green color of some iron salt contaminated glasses. Cerium is often added to glass to convert iron impurities into colorless compounds, yielding clear glass suitable for optical uses. Unfortunately, the rare earths include some chemically very similar elements as contaminants, many of which are mildly radioactive. The chemistry of lanthanum and its associated rare earths is so closely related that it is readily possible to have radioactive contaminants end up in the desired lanthanum salts used in making optical glasses. The amount of such contaminants could also easily vary from batch to batch, depending on the degree of contamination in the original monazite or other mineral sources being used.
I don't think that the original levels of thorium or lanthanum specified for use in these lenses [e.g., in patent filings] is the cause of their radioactivity. Later lenses of the same exact design and glass formulas, but from later batches with higher serial numbers, do not exhibit any similar degree of radioactivity. Nor do they suffer from yellow discoloration over decades of time. So it isn't the thorium or the lanthanum that causes the problem here. The radioactivity of these early lenses is caused by contaminants in the ingredients (e.g., thorium salts) used to make the early lenses. It is these radioactive contaminants which cause these lenses to be more radioactive than their later (more purified) batches of the same design. |
Edited by - Lenny on Feb 07 2016 08:55:05 AM |
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 09:32:03 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AlexanderK
Lenny,
yes, you are right. I have read the both explanation about "Л" on Industar-61, but I didn't find any exact confirmation what the "Л" means. For me are the both explanations correct.
Regards, Alexander
Alexander, do you have an I-61LD from Lytkarino?
According to fotoua.com there are only I-61LD versions made from FED. Could be fotoua is not complete about this lens.
Sovietcams.com is in progress about I-61 and might never be finished. |
|
|
Alexander K.
AlexanderK
Germany
590 Posts |
Posted - Feb 07 2016 : 1:58:27 PM
|
Lenny,
no, I don't have any Lytkarino I-61. This information I found some time ago on different Internet-sites.
So far as I know I-61 was produced in several modifications on three different factories: FED, LZOS and KMZ.
Regards, Alexander |
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 08 2016 : 04:32:42 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AlexanderK
Lenny,
no, I don't have any Lytkarino I-61. This information I found some time ago on different Internet-sites.
So far as I know I-61 was produced in several modifications on three different factories: FED, LZOS and KMZ.
Regards, Alexander
That's interesting Alexander. We all know that KMZ outsourced their lens production. But I thought FED never did that, but I'm not so deep into FED.
Still there are thousands of I-61LD made from FED, so this "L" definitely doesn't mean Lytkarino. |
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 08 2016 : 3:01:51 PM
|
Perhaps we could say "made for Fed"?
Nothing shows that these Industars were made by Fed. For example, some early I-26m wear a KMZ logo...
I wonder what was exactly the "status" of Industar in the FSU... An independant militaro-industrial complex, able to produce regular lenses for KMZ (Industar 22, etc) and Fed (Industar 10, 26, 61), as well as much more specialized other ones?
Probably the "L" only means lanthane. It's too what the JLP thinks. OK, it's not a proof!
Jacques.
|
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 06:02:03 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.
Perhaps we could say "made for Fed"?
Nothing shows that these Industars were made by Fed. For example, some early I-26m wear a KMZ logo...
I wonder what was exactly the "status" of Industar in the FSU... An independant militaro-industrial complex, able to produce regular lenses for KMZ (Industar 22, etc) and Fed (Industar 10, 26, 61), as well as much more specialized other ones?
Probably the "L" only means lanthane. It's too what the JLP thinks. OK, it's not a proof!
Jacques.
Were those KMZ I-26M delivered with Fed-2 cams?
KMZ started I-26M in 1955, a preseries was produced in 1957, resolution was 28/14mm. Later in passports 30/14mm is mentioned from FED. That's not better than I-22, I-50 and Jup-8. So I guess KMZ gave this inferior I-26M to FED, which was thought to produce for the domestic market with not so high quality as KMZ with their Zorkis.
To me, the factory logo shows where the lens was produced. If it was ok for KMZ to outsource their lens production and use lenses from other factories for their Zorkis it should not be a problem for FED either. Maybe we can find more information about this in 16 years when the FED archives open to the public, or earlier if Ukraine change their law. |
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 08:05:50 AM
|
I doubt that the Fed Industar were always produced by Fed.
For example, it was strictly impossible at the beginning of the Fed production. Some early Feds even were equipped with Elmar lenses... We know too that Fed could not calculate themselves their optics at this time. And I am always surprised to see that the s/n of the Fed 1 lenses are regular for some, irregular for others, as if there were several places of production.
So, could Industar have been a generic name for an "optical bureau"? Did they produce lenses, or not? Were they a sort of militaro industrial complex, specialized in optical questions? Or were the camera makers really independant in this question which is most strategical? I only put questions; I think we cannot simplify the answer...
Probably Zoom and Altix could give us information...
Jacques.
PS: I have never seen one of these very early "KMZ 26m" mounted on Fed 2.
|
|
|
Guido Studer
Guido
Switzerland
362 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 10:06:29 AM
|
Hello Jacques
All lenses in the USSR are designed or at least verified by State Institute for Optics (GOI, founded 1918, see Princelle, page 32). In 1932 the first three FED-1 prototypes are produced with 50mm/3.5 made by VOOMP and with the help of GOI FED began to produce there own lenses (see Princelle, page 88).
The family names of lenses like Helios, Industar, Jupiter or Mir to name only some of them are not associated with one company each but was used by divers optical companies. But it would be interesting to know why this family names were choosed. Could it be that Jupiter stands for Zeiss copies for rangefinder cameras?
Best wishes - Guido
|
|
|
Lenny
496 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 10:21:31 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.
I doubt that the Fed Industar were always produced by Fed.
For example, it was strictly impossible at the beginning of the Fed production. Some early Feds even were equipped with Elmar lenses... We know too that Fed could not calculate themselves their optics at this time. And I am always surprised to see that the s/n of the Fed 1 lenses are regular for some, irregular for others, as if there were several places of production.
So, could Industar have been a generic name for an "optical bureau"? Did they produce lenses, or not? Were they a sort of militaro industrial complex, specialized in optical questions? Or were the camera makers really independant in this question which is most strategical? I only put questions; I think we cannot simplify the answer...
Probably Zoom and Altix could give us information...
Jacques.
PS: I have never seen one of these very early "KMZ 26m" mounted on Fed 2.
Sure prewar I can imagine that lenses were made somewhere else where they had more knowledge than the Dzerzhinsky kids. Maybe FED made the lens body and the glass were made somewhere else. But I-26M started 1957 and I-61 and I-61LD are much later.
To me, these names "Industar, Jupiter, Helios" are names for kind of quality. Strange seems to me that Jup-11 got this name because it has 4 lenses in 3 groups, same as Industars, but maybe it got the superior name "Jupiter" because there were not many tele lenses.
We also know that GOI calculated lenses. Maybe they always did that for all lenses, to concentrate the knowlegde at one place, while production were at different places.
Might be that KMZ I-26M is so rare and hard to find. |
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 10:54:58 AM
|
Thanks Guido.
About the first Feds, I have seen several ones with an Elmar-Leica, with a one turn distance ring. The same ring we find on the "labelled" lenses made for the 1a-s.
And for the Jupiters, you are of course right about the consanguinity (!) with the Zeiss Sonnar and Biogon. It would be interesting to check with the other ones: do they have Zeiss ancestors too? Not time enough to look for that now.
My general idea was: in a planned production, sensible to what is strategical, the drawing of lenses and their production should be strictly controlled. You answered about GOI (I had forgotten them!). Nothing about the places of production? Yes, I'm a bit far from the original subject, I fear!
Amitiés. Jacques. |
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 10:59:25 AM
|
| Lenny: in the 1930/50 years, there was nothing best than the 4/13,5cm Sonnar in its category... |
Edited by - Jacques M. on Feb 09 2016 11:00:06 AM |
|
|
Guido Studer
Guido
Switzerland
362 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 1:19:17 PM
|
Hello Jacques
GOI was not the factory but there was an associated factory or better said research laboratory there too. As I understand they were located in Leningrad (Saint Petersburg) and had much names over the time: GOZ (1921), VTOMP as part of TOMP concern (1928), VOOMP (?), GOMZ (1932), LOOMP (1962) and LOMO (1965). All that according to Princelle, page 32ff.
Best wishes - Guido
|
|
|
Jacques M.
France
2599 Posts |
Posted - Feb 09 2016 : 2:20:34 PM
|
We have the same readings, Guido.
I was just reading that same page!
Jacques. |
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 12 2016 : 04:44:28 AM
|
Some months ago, Zoom told me in private that GOI was not the only institut, not only they calculated lenses. If I remember right, KMZ also had their ingéniers who calculated lenses. Also there is LITMO institut.
Maybe he can confirm.
About the name, they are related to optical formula.
Some exceptions exists, but all Jupiter are Sonnar (tele 4/3 and normal). Biogon is Sonnar regarding to diagram also, so it is still Jupiter...
Biotar is Helios..
Biometar is Vega...
Mir is rétrofocus wide angle...
Talking about exception, Helios-95AT is not Biotar.. Like Helios-123...
But general rule works almost every lens.
Later name Zenitar became name for all Zenit lenses, like Arsat for Arsenal, so this système was lost. |
|
|
xalmaz
Russia
37 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 12 2016 : 11:51:19 AM
|
I always suppose: Zeus(greek)/Zeiss => Jupiter(roman).
http://xalmaz.narod.ru |
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 12 2016 : 3:47:30 PM
|
Double post, sorry. |
Edited by - Moxies on Feb 12 2016 4:41:19 PM |
|
|
Pierre Tizien
Moxies
France
183 Posts
My Collection
|
Posted - Feb 12 2016 : 4:40:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by xalmaz
I always suppose: Zeus(greek)/Zeiss => Jupiter(roman).
I think you're right.
But also many soviet lenses are usualy named of stellar object (even Mir is a name of star named Mira). But many exceptions also (Russar, mto, Industar...).
BTW, you can find explanation/supposition of all soviet lenses names here : http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/marks.html
|
Edited by - Moxies on Feb 12 2016 4:42:30 PM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
What does "D" mean?
