Summitar vs Jupiter-8

[ktran]

Ok folks, which is which? 🙂


img163 by khoa.sus2, on Flickr

vs


img164 by khoa.sus2, on Flickr


These are both straight "autoexposure" scans from a roll of Fuji Sensia 200, shot my Leica IIIc. I hadn't really had a chance to actually test my two 50 f/2 lenses in a "controlled" setting, so this was an interesting thing to try. Both are shot wide-open at f/2, indoors.

 

[Krosya]

1-jupiter, 2-Summitar?

 

[Disaster_Area]

Number 1 is the Jupiter, 2 is Summitar

 

[hipsterdufus]

I'm with the other guys. 1=jupiter, 2=summitar. #1 has a little more contrast, it seems.

 

[elmer3.5]

2nd one is summitar, very interesting test!

 

[Massimiliano]

I agree: 1 - Jupiter, 2 - Summitar

 

[ktran]

Wow! There's no fooling you guys 🙂

Now, which one do you prefer?

 

[Brian Legge]

So for everyone saying 1 is the Jupiter, why?

The only thing I'll note - it looks like 1 may be slightly backfocusing and 2 slightly front focusing if anything. Or the subject was moving enough to make focusing consistently tricky.

 

[jpfisher]

So for everyone saying 1 is the Jupiter, why?

The bokeh in the second image was a dead giveaway as to it being the Summitar. It's got that swirly quality that the lens produces quite often --

 

[Disaster_Area]

For me it was the bokeh in #1, not quite as smooth as #2, also, #1 is sharper (notice the collar). The Jupiter (at least my copy) is sharper than my Summitar with better contrast.

 

[ktran]

So for everyone saying 1 is the Jupiter, why?

The only thing I'll note - it looks like 1 may be slightly backfocusing and 2 slightly front focusing if anything. Or the subject was moving enough to make focusing consistently tricky.

As jpfisher points out, the summitar's bokeh wide open is swirly/wonky/rather-quite-one-of-a-kind. I mean, what other lens does this??


The Bog by khoa.sus2, on Flickr

And yes, focusing wide open at around the near focusing limit of the lens is pretty tough with the razor-thin DOF. Even focusing and recomposing, which is a necessity with a screwmount Leica, can throw things off. I fully admit to probably having "missed" on the Jupiter shot. In my experience, at least stopped down, the Jupiter is quite a bit sharper than the Summitar, but I absolutely love the Summitar because nothing else looks like it.

Thanks for the feedback, folks 🙂

 

[dexdog]

I see that many folks already beat me to it, but this was an easy one 🙂. I much prefer the OOF of the J-8 to the summitar

 

[Luddite Frank]

The background of the bog photo in #11 reminds me of VanGogh and his brush strokes...

 

[hipsterdufus]

The background of the bog photo in #11 reminds me of VanGogh and his brush strokes...

Great way of describing it! I dropped my Sonnar (Nikkor H-C) in favor of the Summitar for the OOF and it's slightly gentler rendering of portraits.

Not that the Sonnar is a bad lens by any stretch of the imagination. If I ever want to go back to Sonnar, I'll just get a J-8.

 

[alexnotalex]

to my mind I see classic sonnar bokeh with the Jupiter, classic planar bokeh with the Summitar.
Interesting test. The Summitar looks a bit more 3D poppy somehow.

Both look pretty good at f2!

best,

 

[Voe]

1. Summitar.
Bokeh and OOF highlights seems more blurred like in a f/1.5 lens


2. Jupiter-8.
Bokeh and OOF highlights seems more pronounced and harsher as per a f/2 lens.

 

[John Shriver]

Voe -- it's a Summitar, not a Summarit. f/2.0. (Yes, Leica lens names are ridiculously confusing.)

The give-away is the football-shaped out-of-focus highlights on the sides and corners.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I'll have to put up a Summarit vs a J-3.

Another easy one. Summarit Swirlies are more pronounced than Summitar Swirlies.

 

[alexnotalex]

is that round european footballs, or oval american footballs?

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Oval Footballs!