50/1.5 Jupiter J-3 LTM back in production at Lomo

Hi,

Click stops wouldn't be too hard to put on a lens, surely? Most I've seen were a hole, a spring and a ball bearing opposite a series of 'v' stops...

Regards, David
 
It is easy to move the aperture ring. However, since the aperture ring only has a thin rim of knurling at the very front of the lens, it is unlikely that you would do this by accident, especially if you have a lens hood on it. The focusing ring milled area is physically separated from the aperture ring by at least 1cm (1cm at infinity focus, and the distance increases as you focus closer).

As far as the aperture itself goes, it is a marvel. Tons of blades (I didn't count them, but Jan says 13) - more than present on my Nikkor, which may have 12 or so. Anyway, both lenses give you a perfect circular opening at all aperture settings.
 
jonmanjiro said:
A question for owners of the new lens - is the aperture ring dampened enough to prevent it being moved easily by accident?
Click to expand...


Here's a direct quote from Brian Sweeney;

"Some fine points to add: the J-3+ uses the same aperture mechanism as the original design, no click stops and geometric progression between stops- small stops are closer together. The aperture mechanism itself is well damped, and like the original- probably uses a dab of grease under the ring."
 
Contrast is also what i am most curious about. Coating looks very nice so i would be surpriced if the contrast is not higher than at least the early versions of the original J3.
Resolution, i don't think is much improved from the original but need to spend more serious time for that comparison.
 
I still don't get where the J3+ falls. It is a new and expensive lens without the awesomeness of modern expensive lenses and it is not a vintage lens with some collectors value (at least not yet) and without a character of its own.
Personally, I'd rather spend my money on a 50mm 1.4 FDn on a Canon F-1 for a lot less and for a far better IQ, or the original J3 that has a piece of history on it and a character (yes, those lovely flaws).
 
I also think the contrast will be higher due to modern coatings, and I hope it will not be anything like the ZM. Without being an expect, I would dare to affirm coatings don't play as much of a role as the design. The 40mm Nokton SC of mine has still much higher contrast than my Summicron 50mm DR with modern coatings.
 
Nikos, you should understand it is a new lens and some people just don't like to buy used goods (for example, like most Chinese people I know). What awesome new lenses are you talking about? The Nokton 50mm f1.5 M, since all others seem to cost more? It is too contrasty and ugly to my taste. I don't see lens character therefore don't believe it, but I do see difference in contrast on my negatives. Nikon has also reissued some of their rangefinder cameras and lenses with success. If you still don't understand it, perhaps you can learn to tolerate it.
 
Nikos72 said:
I still don't get where the J3+ falls. ...
Personally, I'd rather spend my money on a 50mm 1.4 FDn on a Canon F-1 ...
Click to expand...

It is easy, if you are able to use this SLR you are not belonging to this thread. Why?
Some of us here can't stand any SLR, not just Canon, but even Nikon true F series. 😀
 
Ko.Fe. said:
It is easy, if you are able to use this SLR you are not belonging to this thread. Why?
Some of us here can't stand any SLR, not just Canon, but even Nikon true F series. 😀
Click to expand...

Good point, because my SLR tolerance stops me from seriously considering this lens - every time I start thinking I need a fast 50mm, I remember I have Nikkor 50/1.2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Contax (C/Y) 50/1.4...
 
Ko.Fe. said:
It is easy, if you are able to use this SLR you are not belonging to this thread. Why?
Some of us here can't stand any SLR, not just Canon, but even Nikon true F series. 😀
Click to expand...

But that's the whole point, don't you see? It is a lens with a performance not on par with its price. On top of it that super new j3+ thing has no stories to tell. I bet that if it had a different look and a different name, nobody would give a damn about it, even if it was a real performer.

But when it comes to buying modern stuff excellence in performance is something that comes with the price. On their site they stated it being a lens of phenomenal performance (that's exactly their words), but you get something pretty average.
Btw, I am not using exclusively my leica and I am not affixed to 135 film only. I like rangefinder cameras, I love some SLRs, I never say no to large format trouble and I even have fun with toy cameras from time to time. 🙂
 
Graal said:
I found 2.665 photos on lomography, shot with the Jupiter 3+.
If you click on the photos, and then right click on each and select "show picture", you see it in quite big sizes (also click +). From this you get a pretty good idea of how the optics behave.http://www.lomography.com/search/photos?query=jupiter+3+
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are lots of photos from the original J3.

For example (under the link you post):
http://www.lomography.com/search/photos/6171534?order=trending&query=jupiter+3+

One easy way to filter them out is to check the upload date. In the first 6 or 7 pages you are likely to see photos really from J3+.

EDIT:
Try this link, seems it shows J3+ only:
http://www.lomography.com/lenses/1723-lomography-jupiter-3/photos?order=popular

It looks as good as the original J3 however sometimes it's too Lomo to tell.
 
Thanks for the links to the sample images. Based upon the sample photos, I decided I like the rendering of this lens. It draws somewhat like the classic J-3, but the modern revamp seems to impart a bit more contrast and sharpness.

It has a lot of character -- witness the spheroid shapes in the wide-open bokeh. Definitely not a modern "benign" look like the Zeiss C-Sonnar 50/1.5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom