Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Leica Screw Mount Copies (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=95)
-   -   Jupiter 3 or Jupiter 8? (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168384)

CharlesDAMorgan 05-16-2019 01:04

Jupiter 3 or Jupiter 8?
 
Looking to do a bit of experimenting with soviet glass. Of the two Jupiter 3s which do you prefer and why, just interested to see if there is a noticeable difference.

Cheers!

xayraa33 05-16-2019 03:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888173)
Looking to do a bit of experimenting with soviet glass. Of the two Jupiter 3s which do you prefer and why, just interested to see if there is a noticeable difference.

Cheers!

They all differ, even within the same type.

No two of my J-3s draw the same, each has its own bokeh signature.
The early 1960s ones seem sharper at full bore than the latest black J-3s but the colour saturation in photos is better on these late made black J-3s.
But all that could be just from my sample of lenses.

The J-8s also vary, some are duds and not sharp, many are just average and some are equal to the finest Zeiss Sonnar f2 lenses, year of manufacture makes no difference to these variances .

If you do not need the speed and there is less chance to need shimming and want lower cost the J-8s are fine, as both lenses draw very similarly at the medium aperture settings.

Ko.Fe. 05-16-2019 03:09

J8 is just neutral lens. With two choices. White, which could be from fifties and black, which are up to nineties. Blacks have more modern rendering and easy to shim.
J3 is character lens at f1.5 and also better lens at f5.6. After trying of all pre-asph Crons, 1.5 Norton, Planar ... I prefer J3. Black version also exist, but it is next to white elephant.
I'm fine with J3 from fifties. It is very good on bw films and OK on digital M.
But I know how to shim them. If it is not shim, then soft stories are made.

WJJ3 05-16-2019 03:31

I had a Jupiter-8 for a while, and was quite happy with the images from that lens. It was a 62xxxxx lens from the KMZ factory. I really don't care for the design of mount on these lenses though, and ended up moving it along. I don't like that the mount surface that screws onto the camera (or adapter) is thin, and has another ring there that doesn't contact the camera...

xayraa33 05-16-2019 03:37

As forum member Kim Coxon can attest, the very last made black J-3 lenses are difficult to fully correct with shimming and back lens element movement correction, as the back lens element block is glued in on these, versus being in threaded bezels of the earlier J-3s.

With these very pretty and late made black J-3 lenses one could be stuck with a more expensive to buy J-3 lens that can never be made sharp at full bore to use on Leica standard type cameras.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-16-2019 04:02

So earlier rather than late for J3s - any date onwards to avoid?

Shimming is to get the correct lens register for the L39 right I assume.

Thanks all, very helpful!

xayraa33 05-16-2019 06:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888197)
So earlier rather than late for J3s - any date onwards to avoid?

Shimming is to get the correct lens register for the L39 right I assume.

Thanks all, very helpful!

The very early J-3s are more for collectors, made in late 1940s early 1950s, expensive to buy now, and some might have Zeiss parts/glass to varying degrees combined with FSU made glass/parts. Lens hacker supreme Brian Sweeney did not think these were the best overall, a mixed bag.

Personally I found the early 1960s (JFK era) ones to be the best and fairly consistent in quality, although early 1970s aluminum finish J-3s are very good too. Avoid the final made early to mid 1980s black finish ones, can't really shim them properly, or to be more accurate.. cannot adjust the back lenses grouping like in the older J-3s, although sellers ask top dollar for them because they are not common and pretty and in good shape.

valdas 05-16-2019 08:21

I have a black J-3 from seventies and the focus is OK on my Bessa R2a via cheap adapter.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-16-2019 08:24

I found a 50s Jupiter 3 on Ebay with M adapter, so have ordered that. I'll check focus on my Sony and on my M3 (a few frames remaining) and hope it's fine.

Thanks to all for the advice, it is much appreciated!

rfaspen 05-16-2019 08:34

My 1957 J-3 gives me the results I expected from this lens. It was shimmed by a fellow RFF member at some point. Of course its a fast Sonnar, but I only need to remember to "lean in" about 5cm when shooting wide open and close.

My 1960's J-8 is a perfectly fine lens but not remarkable in any way. Consequently, I fine myself passing over the lens in favor of one of the many (too many?) other 50's in my lens closet. I think the J-8 makes a good lens for an economy setup, or for those times when you anticipate potential risk to your equipment -- in that case the J-8 is nearly ideal because its performance is rather good. Same comments apply to my 1970's J-8. I never had one of the more recent black ones. Some people say they're quite good (as opposed to the recent black J-3).

SteveM(PA) 05-16-2019 12:11

I thoroughly enjoyed my time with J8s and J3s ... I VASTLY preferred the J3 ... that big beautiful front element ... so much cheaper than a Summilux (was my reasoning).

This is a tiny file from my iiifrdst/J3 ...


CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 00:57

That's really lovely Steve - and very reminiscent of a Summilux!

retinax 05-17-2019 02:02

How is the J-3 distortion-wise? The J-8 has a bit of pincushion distortion which can be annoying for someone who, like me, likes architecture and placing horizons near the edge of the frame.

Ko.Fe. 05-17-2019 04:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by retinax (Post 2888390)
How is the J-3 distortion-wise? The J-8 has a bit of pincushion distortion which can be annoying for someone who, like me, likes architecture and placing horizons near the edge of the frame.

Check here:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/for...d.php?t=123588

retinax 05-17-2019 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2888409)

Thanks. Looks similar, some pincushion distortion. Great, less GAS.

raid 05-17-2019 06:11

Both lenses are good overall, but I prefer the J3. I like the rendering from J3’s from the 1950’s. My lenses were shimmed. My old 50mm lens comparisons had several J3 lenses in the pack. RFF members misled them to me for the comparisons. The three J3's used in my comparisons did not behave exactly the same way. This has been already discussed here by others. When shimmed appropriately, a J3 is not inferior to a Zeiss 5cm 1.5. Same goes for J8 and Zeiss 5cm/2. The Zeiss lenses are harder to find in ltm, and they cost a lot. I also have a "transition lens" (ZK) that supposedly has Zeiss glass but was put together in FSU. Sometimes it is best not to take such lenses apart to figure out if it is a genuine ZK or a false one. Just shim the lens and use it. I own a 5cm/2 ltm with Zeiss glass and a Leica lens barrel. I was informed that this lens is one out of 200 lenses that was sent to Sweden in return for iron ore. The history part is interesting to me. If you already have a Contax-LTM adapter, get Contax mount Zeiss lenses. They are cheaper. The J3 come in ltm without the need to use such an adapter. This is good.

J-3: from a very old lens comparison project






I used a 1938 Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5 with a M 4/3 camera here:



CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 08:03

Thanks Raid - very interesting to hear the Swedes used counter-trade to get the ore shipments paid for.

These are lovely lenses and I'm really looking forward to getting mine. It's a LTM screwmount with M adapter but I can easily test focus on the A7 etc.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 08:10

Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but is there the same need to shim if using the lens on say a Zorki or a Fed rather than a Leica? I suspect the answer is of the how long is a piece of string type, but who knows!

xayraa33 05-17-2019 08:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888455)
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but is there the same need to shim if using the lens on say a Zorki or a Fed rather than a Leica? I suspect the answer is of the how long is a piece of string type, but who knows!

Yes, it is like the" how long is a piece of string" type answer.

I go by the individual lens, some need shimming and a few that actually work fine the way you get them.

Some work great on FSU cameras and Leica the way they come.

Some need shimming to work well on Leica, or cameras with a Leica standard like Nicca/Tower or Canon LTM cameras.


Some need shimming to work well on any camera.

FSU gear can be unpredictable that way, you can never tell.

I had a very late made LTM J-9 lens in black and in new condition that was so out shimming wise from the factory, that you could never get it to focus on any FSU LTM camera or on a Leica or a Canon LTM camera the way it came.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 08:45

Thanks xayraa - that at least saves me from going down the FSU camera wormhole, if just for now!

Toreno 05-17-2019 09:30

Currently, I really love my J-3 (1960), just arrived 2 days ago. Very light, small, soft wide open but have a pleasing effect and character.

http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1123596578


tbhv55 05-17-2019 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888467)
that at least saves me from going down the FSU camera wormhole, if just for now!


Oh, go on, Charles - you know it'd be fun! :D

CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 12:18

That's what I'm worried about. With their prices you can go from 0-60 in well under Lada times...

I must test out the four cameras I have not so far used, I must use all my cameras more often, HELP, they're breeding!

tbhv55 05-17-2019 12:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888514)
That's what I'm worried about. With their prices you can go from 0-60 in well under Lada times...

I must test out the four cameras I have not so far used, I must use all my cameras more often, HELP, they're breeding!


Tell me about it! I recently told a photographer friend that I wouldn't be buying any more camera equipment this year. Well, since I said that, I've added two film cameras. :o (one FSU ;))

Ko.Fe. 05-17-2019 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888455)
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but is there the same need to shim if using the lens on say a Zorki or a Fed rather than a Leica? I suspect the answer is of the how long is a piece of string type, but who knows!

You would have to, if it will be necessary. I don't know anything about string type, but FSU collimation and following standards is not something written on the rock.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 22:38

Received and understood Ko.Fe!

Now to do my research on shimming.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-17-2019 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbhv55 (Post 2888518)
Tell me about it! I recently told a photographer friend that I wouldn't be buying any more camera equipment this year. Well, since I said that, I've added two film cameras. :o (one FSU ;))

Oh dear, I have been weak.

Ko.Fe. 05-18-2019 05:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888601)
Received and understood Ko.Fe!

Now to do my research on shimming.


I used one manual from Brian Sweeny, but could find it anymore.
Basically with J3 you need to remove entire lens block from focus assembly and on lens block you will see shimming ring. I'm using it as template and cutting additional from paper. Most of the times I need to add one.
Only tricky part is to shift focus scale ring after it. It requires drilling three new locations to where three holding screws will screw in.
Those three screws are extremely small...

goamules 05-18-2019 05:56

It's hard to believe I bought my J3 eight years ago. I was lucky, I had a camera friend who lived in Moscow. I asked him to find me a good one. He let me "audition" 3 or 4 different J3 lenses he had on hand. He sent me high quality photos taken at different stops, and I chose a 1956 one. The prices at that time were $100, which we thought were getting up there from their $25 days a few years before. I still have the J3, and it did not need shimming on my Canon P.

CharlesDAMorgan 05-18-2019 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2888642)
I used one manual from Brian Sweeny, but could find it anymore.
Basically with J3 you need to remove entire lens block from focus assembly and on lens block you will see shimming ring. I'm using it as template and cutting additional from paper. Most of the times I need to add one.
Only tricky part is to shift focus scale ring after it. It requires drilling three new locations to where three holding screws will screw in.
Those three screws are extremely small...

I've found Brian's guide https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/...4&postcount=15.

My cunning plan is to have a very skilled friend who is insanely capable of dealing with tiny screws to do the job. He doesn't know this yet, but he owes me...

Ko.Fe. 05-18-2019 09:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan (Post 2888655)
I've found Brian's guide https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/...4&postcount=15.

My cunning plan is to have a very skilled friend who is insanely capable of dealing with tiny screws to do the job. He doesn't know this yet, but he owes me...

First link is hijacked now. Here is direct one to the manual I used:
http://pentax-manuals.com/repairs/j3service.pdf

IIIg 05-18-2019 11:47

Your chances of finding a useable J8 are quite a bit better than a useable J3.

Quality control on the J3's was evidently poor. Many of them require shimming to focus properly on a Barnack Leica.

My own experience with ten J8's (then used to be inexpensive) was that they were all useable when they reached me (silver and black bodies both). Only one of four J3's was anywhere near good focus. All of the bad J3's were quite sharp lenses after having been shimmed properly.

raid 05-18-2019 12:03

Brian Sweeney shimmed J-3 lenses for me. Thank you Brian.

Ko.Fe. 05-18-2019 15:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIIg (Post 2888702)
Your chances of finding a useable J8 are quite a bit better than a useable J3.

Quality control on the J3's was evidently poor. Many of them require shimming to focus properly on a Barnack Leica.

My own experience with ten J8's (then used to be inexpensive) was that they were all useable when they reached me (silver and black bodies both). Only one of four J3's was anywhere near good focus. All of the bad J3's were quite sharp lenses after having been shimmed properly.

You have odd description of bad and quality control. Sounds like total newbie in RF. :D

David Hughes 05-19-2019 00:34

The strange thing is that none of the old USSR made lenses were intended for the Leicas in any shape or form. And the J-3 and J-8 design was from CZ in the first place then modified to use with Zorki cameras. And Zoris were based on FEDs and FEDs were based on Leica II's. By "based on" I mean starting out like them but being modified along the way, sometimes for the better. (I'm thinking of take up spools, RF colouring and cable release arrangements and so on.)

A lot of people selling them on ebay etc say they are for Leica, FED and Zorki and when they don't work or the original design works the way it always did the makers get blamed.

Then there's the other factor, which is the age and condition of the camera bodies. I doubt if there's any normal (non-billionaire) user who has had the RF and the registration of all his FED, Zorki and Leica bodies adjusted and standardised and the same goes for the lenses.

Add in focus shift and you get a real dog's dinner...

Regards, David

CharlesDAMorgan 05-19-2019 00:41

Very sage David. It's also the case that many of the FSU cameras and lenses, being so inexpensive, will not have had the same care, attention and expense lavished upon them as more valuable things.

I'll await my lens with interest. I have, in my normal fashion, succumbed and bought a Zorki 3 from 1954. I am entirely certain that both lens and camera will have issues that need sorting. Neither set of issues will be in as serious need of sorting as my expenditure on things I don't need!

valdas 05-19-2019 01:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hughes (Post 2888807)
The strange thing is that none of the old USSR made lenses were intended for the Leicas in any shape or form. And the J-3 and J-8 design was from CZ in the first place then modified to use with Zorki cameras. And Zoris were based on FEDs and FEDs were based on Leica II's. By "based on" I mean starting out like them but being modified along the way, sometimes for the better. (I'm thinking of take up spools, RF colouring and cable release arrangements and so on.)

A lot of people selling them on ebay etc say they are for Leica, FED and Zorki and when they don't work or the original design works the way it always did the makers get blamed.

Then there's the other factor, which is the age and condition of the camera bodies. I doubt if there's any normal (non-billionaire) user who has had the RF and the registration of all his FED, Zorki and Leica bodies adjusted and standardised and the same goes for the lenses.

Add in focus shift and you get a real dog's dinner...

Regards, David

The fact is that QC has never been a thing in FSU and many things did not properly work right of the box. Been there, seen it many times, including cameras...

CharlesDAMorgan 05-19-2019 02:04

That is certainly true too!

NickTrop 05-19-2019 02:22

Never had a Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 3. Did have a Jupiter 9 for a spell. Smashing portrait lens. Didn't mind that delimiter ring -- thought it an interesting work-around. Sonnar design too! (Though I never thought Sonnars were "all that", really... Could never really see a difference from a plain ole planar...) But my favorite Jupiter was the Jupiter 2. It, along with that robot, got the Robinson family out of many a jam on distant planets!

David Hughes 05-19-2019 03:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by valdas (Post 2888810)
The fact is that QC has never been a thing in FSU and many things did not properly work right of the box. Been there, seen it many times, including cameras...


Interesting but I'd like to know how many brand new cameras you have bought in the old USSR, make, models etc...

Regards, David


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:38.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.