Filzkoeter
stray animal
Jupiter-3! Correctly shimmed and adjusted it is just awesome; dreamy glowy yet sharp wide open und tack sharp stopped down + gorgeous bokeh.
z.bruce.li
Established
I really like the collapsible FED 50/3.5, cute as a button, small as a lens cap, yet producing really good photos. Moderate resolution, fairly high contrast and quite flare resistant.
My second vote will go to a J3, but I seem to like it more on APS-C mirrorless than on film bodies. Probably it is a little low in contrast when wide open.
My second vote will go to a J3, but I seem to like it more on APS-C mirrorless than on film bodies. Probably it is a little low in contrast when wide open.
Spyderman
Well-known
I voted Jupiter-3 for its Sonnar character and smooth bokeh. People who prefer sharpness will probably vote for any of the Industar "Tessar"-type or even more modern double-Gauss design (Helios, Menopta) lenses, but I prefer the Sonnar-type J-3 and use it as a designated portrait lens on M6.
Kent
Finally at home...
A close run between the J8 and the J3 with the J3 as the winner. It just has that special something.
palmerfralick
Established
J-12
J-12
Not sure why this lens was not included. I am so pleasd with the one I got. A best buy in the 35mm class.
J-12
Not sure why this lens was not included. I am so pleasd with the one I got. A best buy in the 35mm class.
j-dogg
Member
Why so few votes for the Industar 26? I have one and it produces remarkable images and thats with a bit of fungus.
Ewoud
Perceptol Addict
Think because its not 50-52mm but 35?
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
I tend to consider the I26 and I61 as different versions of the same lens, with probably better coating in the 61. Is this an incorrect assumption on my part? What is the actual difference between these two lenses?
Cheers,
Dez
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Jupiter 8. I do have some I-22 and I-50 (or is it I-10?) as well; they're sharp enough, but too slow. The J-8 is sharp and not bad wide open (adequate).
Oh, but its still hard to beat a sharp 50/3.5 collapsible on a Zorki C. That was one of my main shooters for a long time. It actually was pocketable (a jacket pocket).
I'd like to try a J-3 someday. Or its inspiration, the CZJ Sonnar. I think I'd use that extra speed.
I will get either an I-26 or I-61 eventually. I could ask here: which one is better? I kind of like the looks of the one with the really knurled focus ring (can't remember if that's the 26 or 61).
Oh, but its still hard to beat a sharp 50/3.5 collapsible on a Zorki C. That was one of my main shooters for a long time. It actually was pocketable (a jacket pocket).
I'd like to try a J-3 someday. Or its inspiration, the CZJ Sonnar. I think I'd use that extra speed.
I will get either an I-26 or I-61 eventually. I could ask here: which one is better? I kind of like the looks of the one with the really knurled focus ring (can't remember if that's the 26 or 61).
wolves3012
Mentor
Not counting the early tabbed I-26s, they are almost identical in mechanical construction from I-26 through to I-61L/D. The 61L/D uses Lanthanum low-dispersion glass but it's alleged that so does the "plain" I-61. Of the ones I own, I'd give the edge in sharpness and contrast to the L/D version and both are a bit better than the I-26. Best-made ones, however, are the "zebra" versions with alternate black/silver rings - these also retain the higher number of aperture-blades. Avoid the late I-61L/D ones too (usually to be found with a FED 5B or 5C as a lens-cap), they are poorly made and have printed markings rather than filled-engraved.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Well, someone wanted to vote for the J-12. Maybe because its a "normal" lens on their APS-C digital? In which case, hmmm, maybe we should let it in?
I'm becoming even more intrigued with the I-61 LD "radioactive" lens now. The "zebra" version wolves is talking about. So many people claim its sharp beyond belief, and so inexpensive. I think I'd like the versions I've seen because they don't have an infinity lock. I used to like the infinity lock, now I hate it. I still kind of like the focus tab on certain lenses, but the lock....errrr. In fact, I really like my I-10/Fed-50 because of the tab. I like it more than my I-22's (I have 2 or 3 of those) because it's shorter and doesn't stick out some much when extended. And, for same reason, it doesn't stick into the camera as far when collapsed. This is why it can be collapsed on a Bessa R (check that carefully with your own setup instead of taking my word for it, please).
So, in order now: (1) J-8, (2) J-3, (3) I-61LD, (4) I-10/Fed50, (5) I-22 or I-26. Are there any others? Oh yeah, the pre-war Fed 50 "macro". I think its a Summar or Summitar copy. Not common though. Are there any Helios 103 in LTM? I've heard rumors that they exist, but are probably custom mods of recent.
I'm becoming even more intrigued with the I-61 LD "radioactive" lens now. The "zebra" version wolves is talking about. So many people claim its sharp beyond belief, and so inexpensive. I think I'd like the versions I've seen because they don't have an infinity lock. I used to like the infinity lock, now I hate it. I still kind of like the focus tab on certain lenses, but the lock....errrr. In fact, I really like my I-10/Fed-50 because of the tab. I like it more than my I-22's (I have 2 or 3 of those) because it's shorter and doesn't stick out some much when extended. And, for same reason, it doesn't stick into the camera as far when collapsed. This is why it can be collapsed on a Bessa R (check that carefully with your own setup instead of taking my word for it, please).
So, in order now: (1) J-8, (2) J-3, (3) I-61LD, (4) I-10/Fed50, (5) I-22 or I-26. Are there any others? Oh yeah, the pre-war Fed 50 "macro". I think its a Summar or Summitar copy. Not common though. Are there any Helios 103 in LTM? I've heard rumors that they exist, but are probably custom mods of recent.
wolves3012
Mentor
Sharp beyond belief is hype, whoever said that. Sharp, yes and for the money it's hard to beat but not "beyond belief". They are only radioactive to a minor degree, not hazardously so.
They exist only as mods, if at all, since they were only ever to be found in Kiev-mount.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Darn. I was hoping for "beyond belief". I'll still try one. I've been disappointed with sharpness of a lot of lenses. At least, they don't live up to my fantasized expectations after reading the praise they receive. My Canon 50/1.4 is so far closest to those expectations, but I'm still left wanting more.
Ah, the obvious question now: would an I-61LD compare with the Canon 50/1.4 in terms of sharpness? Would it? I would not be surprised, but no expectations now...
Some day I'll find out.
Ah, the obvious question now: would an I-61LD compare with the Canon 50/1.4 in terms of sharpness? Would it? I would not be surprised, but no expectations now...
Some day I'll find out.KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I can't vote just yet on the positive merits of FSU 50mm - 52mm lenses (only tested about a third) but who knows, I may yet find a gem.
Here's a photo taken with a 50mm Jupiter 8m (Kiev type} - sorry about the footprint centre screen and the scratch.
[/QUOTE]
The woman crossing the trolley tracks -- when was this taken?? And with what?
Wulfthari
Well-known
Until a week ago I would have said Jupiter 8, but now I've to say Industar 61LD.
I don't why but I still have to learn how to shoot white flowers.
I don't why but I still have to learn how to shoot white flowers.
tbhv55
Well-known
I have had both of these lenses for several years, and I too used to prefer the J8. However, I've used the 61 L/D a great deal more over recent months, and I have to say that I'm starting to reach the same conclusion as you. I'm not even entirely sure why I've changed my mind. I do still like the J8 though - slightly more gentle for portraits, in my experience.
It's not just me, then...I don't why but I still have to learn how to shoot white flowers.
Wulfthari
Well-known
the picture you see were taken by a £15 I-61LD in pretty bad shape, it looked like it wasn't cleaned since 1986, but however I find it "gentle" enough also for portrait as you can see here:
On the other side the Jupiter lenses can also be pretty sharp:
Forgive the low quality of the pics, they were printed by Boots and scanned by a £30 scanner.
I still have to try the lens with color anyway, I wonder how the I-61 behaves because my sensation is that the difference between the two lenses is more in terms of contrast than sharpness.
It's not just me, then...
Anybody can explain to me how to do it correctly? I loved that picture and its 3D effect, the bokeh, the composition etc...but the white flower spoiled it! On the other side this rose came out better:
But I couldn't obtain the results of the other pictures in terms of bokeh and composition...
rjbuzzclick
Well-known
You could try a reflective reading off of the white of the flower and then open up two stops. It's what I did for this snow photo (also relevant because it's from a Kiev 6C and Vega 12b):
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
To add, after some time and few dozens of film.
For b/w.
J-8 is OK, comparing with more expensive LTM, Summitar and Summar at same 50/2, I have and like as well.
J-8 is sharp, not crazy in character, easy to find in pristine condition lens, comparing to Leitz old glass.
Some guys are pushing it here, what FSU glass is the gamble. It isn't true statement, to me, if you not buying junked ones FSU.
Where are lot more, more expensive Leitz LTM glass, which is nothing but "dreamy looks, Leica glow" junk suffering from fungus, front element heavy scratches and internal separation.
Again, only for b/w. Color (not a fan of it on film) might be different story. Like the colors from my coated Summitar.
Also (b/w).
Tried I-10, 22 and 50 collapsible ones.
I-22 is the best collapsible FSU lens. Just have to see first good scan from it.
Not an Elmar, but the lens at its own.
I-10 is interesting because it fits on some FSU bodies and Bessa R, where it doesn't locks at infinity lock.
I-50 is surprisingly good in ugly, cumbersome, non-collapsible version.
IMOE.
For b/w.
J-8 is OK, comparing with more expensive LTM, Summitar and Summar at same 50/2, I have and like as well.
J-8 is sharp, not crazy in character, easy to find in pristine condition lens, comparing to Leitz old glass.
Some guys are pushing it here, what FSU glass is the gamble. It isn't true statement, to me, if you not buying junked ones FSU.
Where are lot more, more expensive Leitz LTM glass, which is nothing but "dreamy looks, Leica glow" junk suffering from fungus, front element heavy scratches and internal separation.
Again, only for b/w. Color (not a fan of it on film) might be different story. Like the colors from my coated Summitar.
Also (b/w).
Tried I-10, 22 and 50 collapsible ones.
I-22 is the best collapsible FSU lens. Just have to see first good scan from it.
Not an Elmar, but the lens at its own.
I-10 is interesting because it fits on some FSU bodies and Bessa R, where it doesn't locks at infinity lock.
I-50 is surprisingly good in ugly, cumbersome, non-collapsible version.
IMOE.
MikeDimit
Established
My favorite portrait Industar 26m
