Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Russians are back
The design of the E-mount lenses is quite neat

Zenitar 35mm f/2 (E-mount)

Zenitar 50mm f/1.5 (E-mount)

Zenitar 60mm f/2.8 macro (EF-/F-mount)

Zenit Selana 58mm f/1.9 (EF-/F-mount)

They'll also release some new mirrors:
Chief Editor -

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Yeah, like 58/1.9 lens ("Selena") with four elements approaches the price of Voigtlaender SL 58/1.4 or Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 Classic, both made with crystal glass, both with CPU contacts, both with jumping diaphragm blades that work with film SLRs...

Helios Jupiter 85/1.5 is a nice lens, although a bit overpriced. But the Selena specs looks ridiculous... That was the first from the list I opened. Won't bother checking the rest.
You just can't have too many lenses...
Cristal glass?
(05-15-2021, 06:08 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Cristal glass?

Lead crystal, unless it's just a legend Smile
You just can't have too many lenses...
Dese prices be steep Big Grin
(05-15-2021, 06:08 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Cristal glass?

Don't mind if I do old boy !! ......... easy on the ice and soda ......... !!
Dave's clichés
No (lead?) crystal was used for lens elements, but rather lead glass (glass lacks a crystalline structure). The only crystal I know of that gets used in lenses is fluorite. Of course, lenses that have lead glass elements usually also have other types of glass in other elements, it depends on the refractive properties wanted for the element.
The use of lead glass (glass containing lead oxide) for its refractive properties was pretty common anyway, but because the production od lead oxide glass is a source of pollution, lead oxides in optical glass has been replaced with other metal oxides.
Hey, please don't kill the messenger. I suppose the term "lead crystal" is born is someone's marketing department, but hey - is this the first time they do that to us?

Anyway, Wikipedia gives more details about this issue -
You just can't have too many lenses...
It indeed looks like a translation error.
Anyway, the cheapest of those lenses (the 60/2.8 macro) is almost $500 and it's really a bit too much for what they seem to be. I'd be glad to be mistaken but for me MF is a no-go anyway...

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)