Industar-37

[Laskadog]

Hi all,

I just bought an Industar-37 for my DIY 5x7. Mine is brand new, but most that are for sale are seriously worn. I'm a Photojournalist and my gear goes through the ringer but isn't as worn as most of these lenses. Most modern LF gear is almost always in excellent shape so why are these lenses so beat up? What are they actually used for? They all say that they are used for aerial photography. Are these things pulled off of old spy planes or something? Just curious if anyone knows where most these lenses come from. They almost never come with a mounting ring either.

I guess while I'm at it, any other comments (sharpness, built quality etc) or advice about this lens?

[Dan Fromm]

Use Google first, then ask if necessary.

[Laskadog]

Use Google first, then ask if necessary.

What is this Google you speak of Dan? ...Of course I googled the topic. I was on page 5 before I gave up. Lots of chatter about sharpness and shutters and mounting and Tessar design etc, but nothing on their common use in Russia. Next time I'lll specify that I have already Googled, thanks for your input.

[goamules]

Try Bing then.

But seriously, if you can't find anything about it on the world wide web, with millions of users, I doubt you'll learn anything novel here. Other than what someone who is good at Google regurgitates.

Here, 8 seconds later, 3rd link: http://ussrphoto.com/wiki/default.as...ContentID=1527

"...used with 18 x 24cm FK and FKD [large format] cameras as the lens does not have a focusing mount."

And now my personal answer. They are probably so beat up because the USSR was a closed society for 72 years. No outside goods came into the country, and the Russians had to use what their Communist enterprises could make. Also, they had very little income. So if you could afford a LF camera and lens, you used it for the rest of your life. Then the next generation would start using it. If you owned one of these cameras, you were probably a professional, and used it daily. That's why they are worn.

[Dan Fromm]

What is this Google you speak of Dan? ...Of course I googled the topic. I was on page 5 before I gave up. Lots of chatter about sharpness and shutters and mounting and Tessar design etc, but nothing on their common use in Russia. Next time I'lll specify that I have already Googled, thanks for your input.

https://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...pe=&as_rights=

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...pe=&as_rights=

[Laskadog]

I've already read all the above links, thanks, but they do not answer my specific questions. Is there a reason why are they so worn? Are they used only on FKD cameras? Does anyone know of any other specific applications of this lens? Some of them are so worn and brassed that they seemed to have been used on a daily basis for many years. I don't know that many LF photographers that put that much mileage on a process lens.

I realize that no one may have these answers, but I've been surprised by the pool of knowledge on the LF forums, so I figured I'd ask.

[Dan Fromm]

They're plain vanilla f/4.5 tessar types, not process lenses. Why do you think they're process lenses?

What you haven't found probably isn't there.

Why did you buy one without knowing what you were buying?

[Laskadog]

@Dan Fromm. Sorry my bad. Wrong use of Process. I needed a 300mm fast lens for my 5x7 for Wet plate head shots in studio. I don't need a shutter but need it to be 4.5 or faster since I am using ALL my available flash power just to get an image (tested and proven with a borrowed lens. f5.6 doesn't do it). 300mm because I want to limit the bellows extension for the same reason. Not many lenses fit that description, keeping in mind I'm making my own camera to save money (and have fun). For 100$ I'll give it a try. The comments I've read all seem to say the optics are good enough for my needs. Am I wrong?

[goamules]

I've already read all the above links, thanks, but they do not answer my specific questions. Is there a reason why are they so worn? Are they used only on FKD cameras? Does anyone know of any other specific applications of this lens? Some of them are so worn and brassed that they seemed to have been used on a daily basis for many years. I don't know that many LF photographers that put that much mileage on a process lens.

I realize that no one may have these answers, but I've been surprised by the pool of knowledge on the LF forums, so I figured I'd ask.

What part of my link i posted, "...used with 18 x 24cm FK and FKD [large format] cameras as the lens does not have a focusing mount." doesn't answer your question "what were they used for?" Oh, now you know "what else were they used for?" Nothing.

What part of my reply on why they are worn don't you understand? I said why. You don't know many LF photographers that put that much mileage, because today LF is a special, niche market for amateurs. When the I-37 was made, LF was a common industrial and commercial format. What would a LF photographer have done in 1960 Russia? Lots, and probably moved his camera around a lot. What do YOU think causes wear on an item that shows a lot of wear? The lens didn't go to space on a Soyouz, it probably wasn't used in the battle of Stalingrad. But anything else, like factory or school portraits, yes.

[Laskadog]

@Goamules. Yes I know they were used for FKD cameras. What I was trying to ask was what OTHER uses did they have, which is why I tried to be more specific in my follow-up post. Many russian sellers mention "But is also used aerial photography". I was curious to know more about this usage or other applications. If my lens was on a Mig-25 that would be interesting

Thank you for your explanation on why they are worn. That makes lots of sense. The one I bought was sold as new, but I'm starting to regret not buying an older worn lens. I love to imagine all the things the lens has seen over the years, especially a cold war Russian lens.