Different M42 lenses, which to use?

Justin Roose · August 10, 2016

So i recently have been planning a new set of lenses to have and I came to the conclusion of investing primarily m42 35mm lenses and using them on various cameras via adapters. The three cameras and their mounts i'm using them on are a Nikon full frame F-mount camera, a Bealieu 4008 II super 8 that uses c-mount, and a Krasnogorsk-3 super-16 that uses m42 lenses.

So the first thing is that I'm sure the Nikon will handle the m42 lenses fairly well with the right adapter, however I've been told there may be issues about trying to adapt them to a super 8 camera such as the Bealieu. Anyone have any insight about that?

But the biggest issue I'm curious about revolves around the Krasnogorsk. While most 35mm M42 lenses are flat at the back end, the standard lenses meant for this camera (many under the brand/title names mir 11, vega 7 and meteor 5-1) protrudes into the opening of the camera to a degree.

Here is a standard 50mm m42 lens meant for a 35mm:

Here is a meteor 5-1 f/1.9 17-69mm lens that often comes standard with the krasnogorsk:

notice how the back end of the meteor lens extends beyond the mounting rings.

So basically my question is, would using standard 35mm m42 lenses cause problems when using it on a krasnogorsk?

Kraig Ewert · August 14, 2016

Not necessarily a problem, but because the ground glass is set farther back on the Krasnogorsk using any still 35mm M42 mount lens turns it into a telephoto one on the Kransnorsk. So a 50mm which can be great for say a wide shoot on a 35mm still camera basically just becomes a 50mm "zoom" for the Krasnogorsk. Which isn't a bad thing, the lenses work great with the camera you just need to take that into account when you're filming. If you can get your hands on a 28mm or even lower M42/Pentax lens it can work wonderfully as goto glass. I'm not an expert by any means on lens/camera/cinema optics by any means. I had a nice collection of M42 lens I use for still photography, and wanted to get myself my first tank of a 16mm camera so I got a nice Krasnogorsk-3. And I've been shooting some great film with all the M42s I've got. I'm sure there's a flange mount or wide-angle adapter/work around someone knows about but I haven't had any problems using the 35mm M42s, and love shooting with them. They're hardy, aren't difficult to find, and are very affordable glass. So no problem just the issue of telephotoing. It's great if you can get your hands on a cheap 28mm. I hope that helps and sorry for the long response but I wanted to give you an answer that made sense. Have fun and have fun shooting!

Stuart Brereton · August 14, 2016

Not necessarily a problem, but because the ground glass is set farther back on the Krasnogorsk using any still 35mm M42 mount lens turns it into a telephoto one on the Kransnorsk.

It has nothing to do with the ground glass. The change in field of view is because of the smaller size of the 16mm negative. The field of view of any lens is dependent on what format it is being used to photograph. A 50mm lens is considered a 'standard' lens on 35mm, but telephoto on 16mm, and wide angle on Medium format, but it's the same lens.

Kraig Ewert · August 18, 2016

It has nothing to do with the ground glass. The change in field of view is because of the smaller size of the 16mm negative.

I appreciate the clarification on the this part as I am still learning, every little bit of new knowledge helps! But I've notice in other posts and topics I've stumbled upon, a large air of condescension in your responses, though hopefully this attitude is just unintentional. I did mention in my post that a 50mm is a 50mm whether going from 16 to 35, with telephotoing however. From my experience it's a good starter to merely "think" of a 35mm lens as a different lens when switching to smaller formats, just to wrap one's head around it, I've run into this problem a lot with classmates, so it's not unfounded. In the advent and height of DSLR shooting a lot of beginners expect the field of view coverage to be the same as their DSLRs when stepping into 16mm filming when they can use their early 35mm lens sets. Just trying to clarify, I have a difficult time sometimes being as clear as I'd like on these forums, but do my best to be as helpful as I can, processing is more my speciality. But thanks again!

Stuart Brereton · August 18, 2016

I appreciate the clarification on the this part as I am still learning, every little bit of new knowledge helps! But I've notice in other posts and topics I've stumbled upon, a large air of condescension in your responses, though hopefully this attitude is just unintentional.

It's often difficult to discern tone from an internet post, and sometimes a brief response can be interpreted as dismissive. So I'm sorry if you felt that my correction was condescending, but it's important to be accurate in the information that you are sharing with others.