Portraits taken with Russian Zenit 3m SLR Helios 44 (2)

[Kamepa]

Photographs taken with a two quid car boot sale Russian Zenit 3m SLR and Helios 44 Lens at Badley Church Suffolk. Photo edited in Gimp using Ubuntu Linux. Then uploaded to flickr. Downloaded into Browser Puppy Linux and edited in Photoscape and uploaded again!

[BigWill]

Lighting is a little uneven in the first one and the background similarily so in both images. Nice catchlights in the eyes though and the focus is also commendably sharp. Not sure that the helios 44 is perhaps the kindest lens for portraiture, but as a demonstration of what can be done with a cheap camera and lens I think it works very well. The sepia toning i can live without personally but others may like it.

BigWill

[RovingMike]

Yes, got to notice things like the light on the nose in the top one. Second is really nice.

[Kamepa]

Lighting is a little uneven in the first one and the background similarily so in both images. Nice catchlights in the eyes though and the focus is also commendably sharp. Not sure that the helios 44 is perhaps the kindest lens for portraiture, but as a demonstration of what can be done with a cheap camera and lens I think it works very well. The sepia toning i can live without personally but others may like it.

BigWill

Not so sure this is a demonstration of the abilities of a cheap camera. I have a feeling the early Zenits and Lenses, meaning those produces before they ditched the 39mm Leica type mount are of very high quality. The Zenit 3m has more the look of a Zeiss product than later cameras. It is also often forgotten that the Zenit Shutter is in fact an improved version of the 1930's Leica II shutter - setting with the shutter uncocked is possible. Maybe not quite as revolutionary as later FED shutters with there none linear curtain transitions but still an improvement. OK the Reflex housing is rather crude but reliable detail design - early Zenit/Start SLR's had string operated mirrors - crude but very effective. The Zenit lenses are mostly developments of Zeiss designs and again the early bright blue coated ones tend to be of higher quality. I think from the Zenit B onwards it became a matter of quanity before quality and these current cheap prices reflect that

[BigWill]

Lighting is a little uneven in the first one and the background similarily so in both images. Nice catchlights in the eyes though and the focus is also commendably sharp. Not sure that the helios 44 is perhaps the kindest lens for portraiture, but as a demonstration of what can be done with a cheap camera and lens I think it works very well. The sepia toning i can live without personally but others may like it.

BigWill

Not so sure this is a demonstration of the abilities of a cheap camera. I have a feeling the early Zenits and Lenses, meaning those produces before they ditched the 39mm Leica type mount are of very high quality. The Zenit 3m has more the look of a Zeiss product than later cameras. It is also often forgotten that the Zenit Shutter is in fact an improved version of the 1930's Leica II shutter - setting with the shutter uncocked is possible. Maybe not quite as revolutionary as later FED shutters with there none linear curtain transitions but still an improvement. OK the Reflex housing is rather crude but reliable detail design - early Zenit/Start SLR's had string operated mirrors - crude but very effective. The Zenit lenses are mostly developments of Zeiss designs and again the early bright blue coated ones tend to be of higher quality. I think from the Zenit B onwards it became a matter of quanity before quality and these current cheap prices reflect that

Quite so, and I meant the term "cheap camera" in the sense that such a camera can indeed be purchased quite cheaply rather than referring to the quality of the optics being in any way "cheap" which they certainly are not. Apologies for any confusion over my terminology.

BigWill