Iron Glass || Soviet Set || Cine Edition

[Bérenger Brillante]

I was wondering if anyone had one of these lens sets : https://ironglassadapters.com/rehoused-soviet-lenses/

I'm on the verge of ordering a full set (20-28-37-58-85-135), but I can't decide whether I want them Coated or Uncoated as there is no uncoated footage on their website.

If you have footage, even in non-Cine Edition, please share.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I have ordered a set but only have the rehoused 58 right now. I ordered it standard without mods which is essentially like a regular Helios.

 

[Phil Holland]

I have no personal experience with the Iron Glass versions, but they are doing decent work from what I can see.

There's been an interesting journey with Helios, Jupiter, MIR, Tair, Industar, and the Soviet Lenses in general. These optics were sold for very cheap, like not long ago you can snatch them up for $15 a lens. Which allowed for a lot of exploration with creative coatings, housings, and just general lens modification. We did a bunch of it in the 2000s and most of mine are in a case on a shelf, Richard Gale famously had his various iterations of mounts and housings, and there's been a few others in the mix.

It's amazing what Iron Glass is doing for the price IMO, so if the set interests you, it's worth doing. They certainly are passionate about it too. I've been following them as they've grown to the level to offer their full rehoused options.

Glass-wise, all of these are based on other things. Most notable is the Helios 58mm f/2, which is a copy of the Zeiss Biotar 58mm f/2 design, though they do have some unique differences to the image if you look closely. Some actually like the swirlier bokeh of the Helios. Interestingly lens companies as a whole worked very, very hard to get away from stuff like that occurring in the OOF image. But it does have an appeal for sure.

These lenses have character and they are a little all over the place, but that in this case is also what makes the set unique.

 

[Nick Gardner]

Like Phil I have used and modded, all of these. The tair-11 135mm is a spectacular lens. I really love the rest of the pack as well. I have a pile of helios 58s. They are so cheap, and so easy to put in PL mount, no reason not to. Polish the coatings off the front element, reverse the front element, unscrew lens and fill with glitter, etc. I have a 37, 58, and 85 that I rehoused my self, similarly to what they did here, but I kept mine smaller, and made them with 80mm fronts.

The only thing I am wary of with their rehousing is that they imply they are using the original helicoids. They are small and delicate, and I imagine they would have to have a little play supporting such a bigger housing, unless they came up with a clever way to support the lens body. I hope they did.

Nick

 

[Curtis boggs]

I’ve been eyeing their rehoused 58, love the swirly Bokeh.

Curious to see where this goes.

 

[Cameron Currier]

Like Bob, I ordered the 58mm without any special mods. I haven't had much of a chance to really put it to the test yet. I shot one music video with it, currently in post.

I love the lens and look forward to getting my hands on the full set in the future. I just really, really love shooting on old 35mm glass. It just gets really difficult when you need to add follow focus, mattebox, and whatever accessories you need to something so small.

I was stoked to see Ironglass do what I've been dreaming of for years, vintage glass in an affordable rehousing. I was sold. For me, I got their rehoused lens because it's more about form factor than the look for me. If I just wanted the glass, it's much cheaper to get the cinevised version.

 

[Bérenger Brillante]

Thanks for all these answers.

I totally need them in full cine edition for the housing mainly. I like the regular soviet look but mechanics are terrible.
As Bob, I'm eyeing the standard round version, no bokeh no fake flares.
I just really don't like how the colors are completely out of control with the amber and purple ovales.

I'll probably get 2 full cine sets, and some PL cinemodded as extras for uncoated.

I'm AC'ing a dual camera TV show next september/October and as I know the DP well, he wants vintage lenses for the MiniLF.
DNA lenses being rare and expensive, I offered him this choice and he likes it.

I really appreciate that Iron Glass can uncoat all of them to be a better color match, and that they are also changing/adding blades inside.

If they could do it at that price for Nikon AIS and HS Ekran, I would have kept my sets.

 

[Scot Yount]

I used to have the full set of the Dog Schidt lenses. Shot some ok stuff on them. I for one find the "swirly" bokeh a bit jagged for my tastes but these are an interesting take for sure.

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

Bérenger, honestly I think you would have gotten better and more consistent results keeping your Ekrans and buying an expander...

these still photo russian lenses can be relatively nice but bokeh, distortion and sharpness profile, optimal stop, flares, color balance and chromatic and spherical aberrations are all different from one FL to another...

My 2c...

 

[Nick Gardner]

As a side note, I have a few of these original lenses that I polished the coatings off of, They look nice, but definately more bloomy and lower contrast than the lenses with coating. And they are already bloomy and low contrast.

Nick

 

[Bérenger Brillante]

As a side note, I have a few of these original lenses that I polished the coatings off of, They look nice, but definately more bloomy and lower contrast than the lenses with coating. And they are already bloomy and low contrast.

Nick

Thanks Nick, that's exactly what I wanted to know. So I guess I'll get the coated version.

Bérenger, honestly I think you would have gotten better and more consistent results keeping your Ekrans and buying an expander...

these still photo russian lenses can be relatively nice but bokeh, distortion and sharpness profile, optimal stop, flares, color balance and chromatic and spherical aberrations are all different from one FL to another...

My 2c...

Well, I was tired of their look at the time, and I find the Ekrans were too expensive for mechanically approximative lenses, and because of the non uniform housing, I litterally couldn't sub-rent them to any rental houses.

I like the Mir-Helios-Jupiter-Tair look, they are so much cheaper than Ekrans, and the Iron Glass mechanics look pretty decent. Icing on the cake, they have a unified body, which means ACs and DPs won't be afraid to use them.

 

[Ilya O.]

Double read what Nick Gardener said about the poor decision to use whacky original heliciods!!!

It will not withstand your pro work shooting style. Wil not!

Or double ask IronGlass if they migrated already to their own built multi threaded heliciods in the new housing version.

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Iron Glass is a company based in Ukraine, which is where I am. I've talked to them on a phone yesterday, wanna give a try on their PL mount. The price is a crush, especially on full cine-housings. They are based on the south of our country in a pretty distant town, and seem not to have much exposure yet. Will talk to them to do some tests (dunno how it'll go due to the coronavirus shut down).

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Update - I've decided to pick up a PL-mount for my Scarlet from them, and they were pleasant to give me a 58mm rehoused in PL-mount in Feet scale for a test.

I've just recieved the stuff, so yet no through tests - just unboxed and took a couple shots at home. First off - the quality of the rehouse is stunning. The boxing is pleasant (for those who has seen Cooke, or Arri, or other cinema lens boxes - will understand). The lens did come in a rather small box with padding, as if it was fitted into peli-case. Also it did come with a soft bag. The caps are fitted well, if you've used Sony Cinealta lenses in PL, you know they always come loose and messing with them is just annoying. The front lens cap has a soft cushion built inside, which is what i've always expected for someone to do at one day! There are plenty of focus marks, so it's an easy to use on a daily-basis world. The focus ring and the iris ring do come in an unusual placing - focus is closer to the lens mount, iris is closer to lens front. It's due to the original lens design. The grease is a tad stiffer than I'm used to, compared to other lenses, but overall it's smooth and silent. Dunno, never tried a totally new lens from a pack though, maybe it'll act a tad different after some time of use. The focus ring rotation is a full-cinema grade one, I don't actually know is it the same angle on every lens, or differs from lens to lens - will have to ask tomorrow. The lens does retract it's front element while focusing, but the movement is robust and i've barely managed to see this. Will test with clip-on mattebox and some ND's in a couple days. Thefocus gear of the lens stays on the exact same position all the time, so no need for a thick pitch wheel. The IRIS wheel does move, but I'm guessing you'll almost never need to throw a motor on that. The focus wheel is located really close to the camera body, so it's better to check your rig before going on set. Some studio FF systems will be tough to put-on (guess).

Okay, now about the image. The bokeh and the "3D" characteristics of this lens are well-known in photography, but I have to say - it's nothing but stunning! It's a FF lens, and it really shines on VV or LF sensors, while 4K on my Scarlet MX gets right to the edge of it's legendary "swirly" bokeh. On Gemini, Alexa mini OG it'll take much more of the fun aspects pf this lens. Otherwise it's sharp wide-open, and at T/8 it seems clinical.

Post what you'd like to test in this lens, and I'll try to make it!

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Now separately on PL-Mount. During last decade I've used a lot of various PL-Mounts from different manufacturers. Was it RED TI PL, MG PL, DSMC 2 PL, Wooden Camera PL, noname PL - I've always preferred the original MG PL due to its simplicity and robustness, then the DSMC 2 Pl came out and has become my fav. one, while Wooden Camera one was my most-hated. It's just too soft, I've bended them twice on sets, one was using Arri UP 40mm !!!

I never needed to buy one though, throwing in one with the rented lenses on a gig. I've bought an old 18-85 RPZ for car-chase stuff recently, so decided to buy one. My choise was between Tilta (never seen one) and the Iron Glass. I've liked the Iron Glass a tad more due to its matte black finish. Was worried for the ring size though, but it did come just right.

The mount itself is dumb (no pins), with a pin-safety bar inside to prevent short-circuit. Does come with a lens cap, and is a tad front-heavy. Made from anodized aluminium, it's pretty thick in base, and quet large. Those with big hands will feel comfortable with the fixing ring. In terms shims - it does not come with ones, will check the flange distance later this week or in the beginning of the next one.

It has different screws than the original RED mount. They are different in length and type, but the tool to unscrew them is right on your Red Sidewinder. Just have to keep in mind that the screws are not interchangable in between mounts.

Also, by far this one is the cheapest one on the market right now - only 220$

 

[krzysztof jankowski]

It's sad that they just copied the design of the locking ring...

 

[Alex Lubensky]

It's sad that they just copied the design of the locking ring...

It does seem so, never seen this one before. The base is totally different though, the one you've mentioned has a flat one, like Wooden Camera, this one is a slicky fatty, had a semi ball-like shape - thicker in between the screws. It's way more robust than the WC one.

 

[Bob Gundu]

It does seem so, never seen this one before. The base is totally different though, the one you've mentioned has a flat one, like Wooden Camera, this one is a slicky fatty, had a semi ball-like shape - thicker in between the screws. It's way more robust than the WC one.

BTW, krzysztof makes those C7 adapters

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Oh, I'm sorry, I did sound errogant!

*update: have visited the page - wow, it's a ton of mounts and stuff!

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Had a chance to do some tests recently.

Things you should know before looking into - the lens tech is from stills photography, so it does cover FF (LF or VV - pick any), and it's best to use it on a bigger sensor camera to open it's potential. Anything from LF or Monstro up to Gemini or Alexa mini is going to saturate the look much more, than I could do with my Scarlet MX @4K UHD - grabbing only the center portion of a lens.

The one I've tested is a natively-coated, 8-blade iris lens in full cine housing. The front ring diameter on each of their cine-rehoused lenses is 95mm, which is handy. You're going to love the lens cap. Size-wise all lenses match in their set. The focus gear is located closer to the mount, while the Iris is at the front. The housing is a retrackting one (does not rotate while moving), so while you're pulling focus the lens front is going to move back and forward (not much compared to a lens size, also depends on how deep the refocus is). While the focus gear itself will stay at same place, the aperture ring is going to move with the lens. Also, aperture ring adjustment is non-linear, which means the throw from 2 to 2,8 is the same, as from 5,6 to 16. The focusing itself is made a tad stiffer, than you used to. I've tried throwing an LMB-15 with a couple thick clear filters - and it feels just fine. But it could be a possible problem if you're going to use it on a gimbal with clip-on and a bunch of filters.

While pointing on every single aspect, I have to say that the build quality is good. Don't know how to expect the lens to survive a rental life, but for the owner it'll work a ton.

As expected, the lens flares easily, catching various glares from windows and other big bright sources. The glare itself in 99% doesn't cover the whole image, while staying rather big, but beautiful to my taste.

No glare:


Glare:


Glare:





Straight sun at F/2.0:


Straight sun at F/4.0:


Compared to a Red Pro Zoom 18-85 T/2.9:



Going to a straight comparison - I've had an RPZ 18-85 T2.9 by hand:

Iron Glass Helios 44-2 58mm @F2.0


RPZ 18-85 58mm @T2.9 (exposure matched by shutter)


As you can see the colors vary rather vastly in between two. Helios renders shadow areas much cooler.

Nex examples I've taken using 2.1 IRND by Tiffen (dye based one), and some basic color matching in Resolve. Matching was done lens by lens to a non-nd shot.

Out of focus rendition:

Iron Glass Helios 44-2 58mm @F2.0




RPZ 18-85 58mm @T2.9 (exposure matched by -0.3ND)




Close focus: