50mm 1.1 Lenses: CV and 7Artisans with Leica M10

I'm looking at pictures from the 1956 ZOMZ Jupiter-3, wide-open against a fence post: Center Sharp, like the very late KMZ with new formula. The edges were soft- due to field curvature. Personal Observation- small changes in spacing the rear triplet changes the focal length, and amount of field curvature. I'm guessing this is what ZOMZ and KMZ had to deal with then starting production of the new lenses. I've changed spacing before on an early 1950 KMZ lens to make it usable.
 
This thread started out with the two 50mm 1.1 lenses that I own, but it is spreading now to other 50mm lenses, which is a good thing.
This morning there was some fog, and I was ready with a 50mm lens that can handle high contrast scenes better than the modern lenses manage to do (I think). I got out the CZJ 5cm 1.5.

link: https://raid.smugmug.com/Leica-M10-Z...1938-SEPT2021/

50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--2-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--3-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--4-X3.jpg



50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--5-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--6-X2.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--7-X2.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--9-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--12-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--13-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--14-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--15-X3.jpg


50mm-CZJ-1.5%281938%29--16-X2.jpg
 
If there will be a foggy morning in the coming days, I will try out the CV 50 1.1 and the 7Art 50 1.1. I wonder how the modern optics with multicoating will do in such light.
 
Including the F1.5 Sonnar formula lenses to compare with the 7artisans and Nokton- I believe it shows that most designers stopped at F1.5 with the Sonnar type lens. The 7artisans can give some very interesting images, but pushed the Sonnar design past practical limits. The Double-Gauss is a better approach for super-speed lenses, Nikon recognized that over 60 years ago with the 5cm F1.1 Nikkor-N.
 
I used a Nikon 50 1.1 as a loaner from Kiu many years ago. I wish I could find images from then.
 
I currently own the 7Artisans 50/1.1, and this thread confirmed two things I've thought: (1) It's happiest on a film camera, and (2) at any aperture wider than f/2, it's very much a "choose your own adventure" lens -- you might like where it takes you, and then again you might not!

The bokeh comments on the CV 50/1.1 bring back interesting memories for me. I remember a lot of discussion of this topic when the lens first appeared, with several people noting that out-of-focus objects behind the main subject looked "busier" than they had expected. On the other hand, various users (including me) felt that out-of-focus objects in front of the subject looked pleasingly smooth.

Of course if you're shooting portrait-type photos, smooth out-of-focus backgrounds are what you want. But if you're shooting documentary photos, as I was then, it's all too common to have an unwanted object pop up between your camera position and your subject... and the less obtrusive you can make that interloper appear, the better.

I had learned from this article on the "1001 Nights of Nikkor Lens" website that "defocusing cannot be attained simultaneously for both foreground and background" (which is why Nikon designed the "defocus-control" lens that was the subject of the article) and I realized that this was one of the choices that a lens designer had to make.

I tried to popularize the terms "portrait bokeh" (smooth out-of-focus background objects) and "documentary bokeh" (smooth out-of-focus foreground objects) but never got any traction for it... still worth thinking about, though, I think!
 
Thank you for your input here. I am still trying to figure out what this lens does well and what it does not do as well (with a digital camera).
 
Sonnar Brian said:
Including the F1.5 Sonnar formula lenses to compare with the 7artisans and Nokton- I believe it shows that most designers stopped at F1.5 with the Sonnar type lens. The 7artisans can give some very interesting images, but pushed the Sonnar design past practical limits. The Double-Gauss is a better approach for super-speed lenses, Nikon recognized that over 60 years ago with the 5cm F1.1 Nikkor-N.
Click to expand...

Interesting .

I`ve been using my Zeiss 1.5 Sonnar for years and must admit it`s my go to at that FL both on film M ,digital CL and Sl2s .
 
Sonnar Brian said:
...
ZOMZ: 1958 through to 1962, best consistent performance. Some 1957 are good, but I've seen more variation. I have one from 1956, 56002xx. "They were still getting the kinks out of their design and implementation".

ZOMZ- I have a very sharp 1975 that is as good as the KMZ: it required a change to the shim, looked like it had never been used. It is noticeably better than others I've shot with. Porbably upper 5% or so?
....
Click to expand...

Before Brian posted the above, I purchased from a Ukraine vendor what was described, and looked like in the photos, as a mint condition J 3. So after reading Brian's descriptions, I had my doubts about what I had done. However, when it arrived, the marking and SN identified it as a 1963 ZOMZ. it had some scratches on the body but everything else was pristine. Focus accurate etc... You never know... Wonderful rendering.


***

As to the 7A 1.1/50, it shines with the subject at 2-5m. In subdued or diffuse light, subject separation is aesthetically meaningful, at least to my taste...


***

48455294127_597a88ceb7_b.jpg

***


***

(Focus was on mom...)


***
 
There are a lot of very good J-3's made outside of the years I cited! I went with "statistical" of what I've seen. Around 1963 ZOMZ changed the mechanical fixture of the barrel to one piece rather than the separate fixture for the rear triplet. Having the separate fixture allows some fine tuning of the adjustment. The aperture ring also changed from one with threads to one that slips on and is held in place with set screws only. This makes it harder to re-index if you need to shim it.

One of my very best J-3's is a 1975 ZOMZ. The 1970s focus mounts are very smooth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom