The Jupiter-12's fits on the Bessa according to this site.

E

einszwei7

Member
Local time
2:24 PM
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
26
Hi,

I just saw @safelightberlin posting about the jupiter-12 and that it's rear Element supposedly doesnt hit the shutter curtain on the bessa R.
Could it be that some of the Jupiter-12's are shorter than others? Are there different versions? Can anyone confirm this?

I would love to use a J12 on my bessa as it's a less than halfof the price of the color skopar.

I added 2 screenshots of their post.


2ba8cdda3150d67d769ea0470dbf39de.jpg
94d72916a5e553a93f3099e78846140c.jpg


Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
The dilemma is, there doesn't exist *the* Jupiter-12. -- AFAIK, during the decades of manufacturing there quite certainly have been several more or less different models.
 
The most you can draw from that is that there is at least one Jupiter-12 that will fit safely on at least one Bessa-R. Hell, mine will fit on my Sony A7II but I wouldn't claim this to be safe as a general rule.
 
Black-bodied J-12s should work fine with Bessa-R, but there were problems reported with earlier, silver versions as these are slightly longer.
 
Judging from the pic you should be safe with a Black J12 from '72 manufactured in the lytkarino plant...
 
I have tried white from 1958 on L and R and it worked. But even if you will able to screw it in and focus ring will works in full range, the lightmeter is not going to work.
Color Skopar 35 2.5 in LTM isn't terribly expensive lens and it is superior to any J-12.
Or Canon 35 2.8 LTM.
 
I can report a black on from the 70s (PT0835 in the sovietcams.com terminology) that did not fit into a Bessa R. It just so clears the baffles in my Canon 7 after bending that baffle a fraction of a mm.

P.S. I don't think there's a problem clearing the shutter, just the baffles.
 
retinax said:
I can report a black on from the 70s (PT0835 in the sovietcams.com terminology) that did not fit into a Bessa R. It just so clears the baffles in my Canon 7 after bending that baffle a fraction of a mm.

P.S. I don't think there's a problem clearing the shutter, just the baffles.
Click to expand...

My PT0835 fits my Bessa R, Canon 7, Canon L2. The clearance on the Bessa is actually larger than it on Canon 7.
30661645044_d71c06a9d3_c.jpg



To OP:
I have seen more J-12s fitting Bessa R than not fitting. The only one that I have does not fit is an early Arsenal version that has the metal guard ring around rear elements. Buy one and try and get lucky.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I have tried white from 1958 on L and R and it worked. But even if you will able to screw it in and focus ring will works in full range, the lightmeter is not going to work.
Color Skopar 35 2.5 in LTM isn't terribly expensive lens and it is superior to any J-12.
Or Canon 35 2.8 LTM.
Click to expand...


Agree about light meter. I tried mine on my Bessa R2. It didn't hit/scratch anything and worked fine but light meter wasn't accurate. I think probably 1-2 stops, since back element partly blocks the light meter.

Meter said 1/100th on full day light, give the photo 1/500 and it turned out right. Measure wasn't the same on shadow, so wont trust the light meter much.

On the other hand, don't even try with a Leica M5 :)


Best regards

Marcelo.
 
None of the varied J-12s I have had over the years would fit my Bessa R cameras. I didn't try any of them on the R2A I had.
My J-12 lenses were mostly earlier than about the mid-70s if my recall is correct, were both silver and black, and from different manufacturers.
To those of you who have had J-12s that do fit your cameras, I am NOT questioning your experience, just relating mine.
The sample variation--or tolerance stacking, maybe?--of the J-12 seems to me to make it very risky to offer any broad statement about whether any given J-12 will fit a Bessa R or not.
I think that if you're careful, you could attempt to mount the specific lens you've got and see if it fits or not. And then you could state, this lens fits this camera.

And while I agree that the Color Skopar is a better lens in several ways, I just like the J-12. Enough so that I keep an FSU body (or two) around just so that I can use the Jupiter.

I think a decent Zorki, a J-12, and a 35mm vf all together could be had for less that an LTM Color Skopar. If you choose a Z3 or Z3M as I did, that math may not work out. But other models don't seem to carry the premium that the Zork 3 and 3M carry.

Rob
 
I have J-12s in both LTM and Kiev mounts (both 1959 models, what are the odds). Fine performers; I have no complaints. Too bad I can't use them on more cameras. My CL? The metering arm is in the way. My Nicca/Tower? Baffles or something gets in the way. My Zorki? Fits perfect but last roll I shot in it ripped the film so its in the time-out corner for now.

A pity I can't use it on my Sony mirrorless...
 
By the way, most likely only my case, but I had better luck with Jupiter 12 on Kiev mounts. Better craftsmanship.

Keep a Kiev 4 just to use that lens.

Regards

Marcelo
 
rbiemer said:
And while I agree that the Color Skopar is a better lens in several ways, I just like the J-12. Enough so that I keep an FSU body (or two) around just so that I can use the Jupiter.

I think a decent Zorki, a J-12, and a 35mm vf all together could be had for less that an LTM Color Skopar. If you choose a Z3 or Z3M as I did, that math may not work out. But other models don't seem to carry the premium that the Zork 3 and 3M carry.

Rob
Click to expand...

J-12 is as functional on meterless Leicas as on Canon LTMs.
This is what I have. Z, J-12 (1950) and ex XA VF.
The main problem with J-12 is flare. It might flare, might not and here is no way to predict or fix it with any J-12 copy. White, black, doesn't matter.


If you use FSU RF cameras at one film per month ratio, they are good.
And this is what for they were built for. Occasional use by soviet masses.
One roll per annual vacation (it was one month long in USSR) and/or one roll per year.
Back in FSU, we abandoned them once imported P&S cameras became available.
And professionals in FSU time were ditching FSU cameras at very first chance.
 
santino said:
Only problem is the kiev... other than my zorkis , none of my kievs work due to poor craftmanship.
Click to expand...

Lack of service to be exact.

I had working fresh 4AM (I have to fix its light leaks). I had 4 working fine (including meter) until I was not able to fix its tiny ribbons and I had modified 2 (Rob took it over :) ).
It was serviced first by Oleg for previous owner (RFF member) and then I send it for CLA to Kiev. Worked and it is camera which was in use a lot.

Kiev RF cameras were more durable than FSU LTM (those were for hobby use) and they were designated for use in regional media. But, they required periodical service, just like Contax.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
...and I had modified 2 (Rob took it over :) ).
Click to expand...

It was in very good working order, I thought.
I did pass it on but not because there was anything wrong with it. Mostly because I don't appreciate the Kiev/Contax "ergonomics" as much as I once did.

Rob
 
I don't know. I think the Contax ii/iia are prone to error because of it's complexity. The classical Leica shutter without slow speeds is relatively tolerant when it comes to Lack of Service. There were a lot of kievs which left the factory in non working condition in the 80s.
 
santino said:
I don't know. I think the Contax ii/iia are prone to error because of it's complexity. The classical Leica shutter without slow speeds is relatively tolerant when it comes to Lack of Service. There were a lot of kievs which left the factory in non working condition in the 80s.
Click to expand...

Here in the US, the hot rod guys had a thing called "blueprinting" an engine. That meant that they would work on an engine not to just get it working but to get to how it was designed. The contention was that the designers, mostly, knew what they were doing and that engine once it had gone through this would be as good as the design was capable of.
In the camera world, those putative 80s Kievs would surely benefit from such a thing.
Still comes down to service more than design, I think.

Rob
 
rbiemer said:
It was in very good working order, I thought.
I did pass it on but not because there was anything wrong with it. Mostly because I don't appreciate the Kiev/Contax "ergonomics" as much as I once did.

Rob
Click to expand...

Is that the 2a that I ended up with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top