Jupiter 9 lens for portraits?

Seems that Spyderman has motivated me to service myself the J-9... No one would believe how MUCH grease I removed from it and how THICK it was!

Disassembly is easy, now the hard part comes!
//max
 
darkkavenger said:
Seems that Spyderman has motivated me to service myself the J-9... No one would believe how MUCH grease I removed from it and how THICK it was!

Disassembly is easy, now the hard part comes!
//max
Click to expand...

Don't worry unless you have parts left over.. 😱
 
No leftovers, took me a little to figure out that the red dot was to be aligned with infinity when reassembling, and the lens turns better now. Still i find it to be harder than the other lenses I have in external mount (J-12, J-11).

Now I've to test it!
 
damn I had to CLA my LTM J9 (thanks to someone's manual I found on RFF) it went well but wasn't easy at all. the lens was a grease ball but now it works like a charm. j9 rulezz 😀
 
Hej daniel,

that's a great example of what this lens is capable of.
(do you "dare" to use it wide open?😉 , mine is challenging, but I guess practice/patience is the answer, as usual...)

by the way, what sort of film did you use? (foma?)
 
My new Jupiter-9 was recently cleaned and degreased by Fedka. It was extremely hard to turn the focus ring before. Now it is way smoother, but now has a bit of play, probably due to the thinner replacement grease, and years of helical wear, and sloppy Russian parts tolerances.


I bought it to compliment my Canon 1.2😎
 
It's with 16 (!) aperture blades. You get nice circles even stoped down.

237656628_6f381d247b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Rather old thread... but still interesting!

I just love my J9!

As many have said before, it is soft wide open (which can be great for portraits) and gets really sharp from about f4 on.
It has a great blade construction and handles well and it is very robust, a fantastic "feel".

Well, I really like the results (wide open):

kentnes.jpg
 
Last edited:
And think of the viewfinder Question! I had the best results using an FSU-Finder for 85mm: It doesn't provide such a good view as the turret viewfinder but the results are a bit better in close range. Using the turret viewfinder (especially witha Kiev!) I would suggst you use a ground plate just to check if the markings on the turret viewfinder and the actual picture work for you.....I musta dmit the worst parallax errors on my photos were the results of me trying to compensate for parallax errors.

Anyone got some god advice on usinf viewfinders on FSU-Cameras?
 
Last edited:
Hi, Spider.

Have a look at my avatar. This is an Altix viewfinder on a FED-3b.
It offers a 35mm view (for my Jupiter 12) and a 50mm mask.
It is really bright and I like it a lot. (BTW it has a working parallax compensation.) 😉
 
Great portraits. I have the J9 in M42 mount. Absolutely love that lens. Best portrait lens I've ever owned in 35. An absolute steal at the usual price. My SLR is a fixed lens portrait camera because of the J9. That along with the Sigma 2.8/24 in Pentax K mount (4.4 MTF rating on Photodo) are the two tremendous bargain optics I own and can vouch for.
 
Hi Daniel,

I also remember to have seen somewhere J-9's offered with a Nikon and a K-Mount, but I read a warning (www.lausch.com only in German) about this N-Mount as it is amde for the Kiev 19 and won't fit so good on a Nikon.
I have used 2 M42 J-9's on my Nikon both time with an adapter with a rear lens some times they work but sometimes the results are phos right out of "The Ring" as the face was literally eaten away by light (no there wasn't any kind of light leakage)....And the Adapter without the rear lens? Well I couldn't try that one as it did not work on distances over 2 feet!
 
I have a black M39 version which the pre-owner shimmed, and it works quite well.
But there came up a question today.

Could it be that the collimation can differ between two different M39 to M adapters? I used it with a 50mm adapter and today with a 35mm adapter (silly, I know, but I did not buy a 90mm one yet) and I have the feeling that the calibration is different now.

Any thoughts on this?
 
If the thickness of the adapter is off, the J-9 will be out of focus. This does not happen to a 50mm lens as the translation is 1:1 for motion of the cam and the optics. Focus a 50mm lens with the RF, it will be in correct focus as the Cam and Optics are displaced equally. With a telephoto or wide-angle, the movement of the optics to the cam is not 1:1. So- the displacement is not self-correcting. My head always overloads thinking about this stuff. So I use ALL original Leitz Adapters. I lied. One Voigtlander adapter came with a $125 Canon 35/2 lens...

Brian

Florian1234 said:
I have a black M39 version which the pre-owner shimmed, and it works quite well.
But there came up a question today.

Could it be that the collimation can differ between two different M39 to M adapters? I used it with a 50mm adapter and today with a 35mm adapter (silly, I know, but I did not buy a 90mm one yet) and I have the feeling that the calibration is different now.

Any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom