raid
Dad Photographer
How about : the Living Legend Brian?!
raid
Dad Photographer
My selfie in B&W.
Then, this is a B&W version (CZJ 5cm 1.5) of a quick snapshot of one of the senior staff members at JP.
Then, this is a B&W version (CZJ 5cm 1.5) of a quick snapshot of one of the senior staff members at JP.
The lens was sharp, and had good contrast. Was different from the others I've owned and used.
raid
Dad Photographer
Maybe you can find another lens like it one day. You know where to look.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
As yet another lover of 50s, This is a very dangerous thread for me. In RFs I have ZM C-Sonnar and a ZM Planar. I’ve also got a couple or three slr lens. Tbh, the sonar and planar cover all the bases, but… good work Raid
raid
Dad Photographer
You are welcome. Our RFF has many serious collectors and users of 50mm lenses. I always favored the 50mm lenses over any other lenses.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Does a legend have to be deceased? Sorry Brian if I managed to "off you" in one fateful move on RFF 
. I got my 57 J-3 from a fellow RFFer at least 5/6 years ago, likely more, and the legendary Sweeney touch was a primary selling point. I asked no further questions and forked over the cash .
I like the sonnar look and the fast lens look. My choices in 50 are somewhat limited. The 7A is one of the fastest, and less expensive.
. I got my 57 J-3 from a fellow RFFer at least 5/6 years ago, likely more, and the legendary Sweeney touch was a primary selling point. I asked no further questions and forked over the cash .I like the sonnar look and the fast lens look. My choices in 50 are somewhat limited. The 7A is one of the fastest, and less expensive.
Bingley
Veteran
My selfie in B&W.
Then, this is a B&W version (CZJ 5cm 1.5) of a quick snapshot of one of the senior staff members at JP.
I think these bw conversions are really good, Raid, and, along with the first photo you posted in post #94, confirm that a f1.5 Sonnar is all I’d need in a fast 50 (which I guess is good bc I’ve got several 1.5 Sonnars and Sonnar-clones). As much as I’m enjoying seeing what the faster f1.1 lenses can do, the 1.5 Sonnars have a punch to them that I really like.
Does a legend have to be deceased? Sorry Brian if I managed to "off you" in one fateful move on RFF
I like the sonnar look and the fast lens look. My choices in 50 are somewhat limited. The 7A is one of the fastest, and less expensive.
Thankyou- I was just joking, and always am embarrassed by "Legendary". There are old jokes about how many programmers does it take to screw in a light bulb- "None, that's a hardware problem". My version could be "How many Fortran Programmers does it take to screw in an optical block to a focus mount", "One, but he wrote a piece of code to figure it out"..
raid
Dad Photographer
For actual usage we don't need many lenses. The CZJ 5cm 1.5 or even 5cm 2.0 will do and do very well. If it happens that you also enjoy trying new things out, including lenses you have not used before, then using a 50mm 1.1 or 1.0 is a reasonable thing to consider.
As for old lenses. the combination of vintage lenses with modern digital cameras has now become well known in the film making industry. They even are designing and working with AF systems that can be used in film making with manual lenses from the past. It gives them a new look for movies.
That's like saying we need one red wine and one white wine!
I should open a vintage lens rental company.
I should open a vintage lens rental company.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Probable in a good, multi-course meal. White for fish or poultry, red for the cheese course, and so on. Aperitifs before and digestifs after. The proper wine is appropriate for the appropriate course. Likewise in lenses if you wish. My skills warrant little more than one lens. YMMV.
Duofold RF
Well-known
That's kind of luxiury life style, for working class, the best way is cheap vodka, one shot for all, even worse, rubbing alcohol will service the purpose.
We will serve no Sonnar before its time.
Wines, I leave to my wife.
Lenses- I know the best years for Sonnars and Jupiters.
1934 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5, a bright lens with a wonderful Bokeh and deep colors, center sharp. The formula was revised afterwards to reduce field curvature, but some situations want the world centered on the subject and nothing else.
Wines, I leave to my wife.
Lenses- I know the best years for Sonnars and Jupiters.
1934 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5, a bright lens with a wonderful Bokeh and deep colors, center sharp. The formula was revised afterwards to reduce field curvature, but some situations want the world centered on the subject and nothing else.
newst
Well-known
So, what were the best years for Jupiters?
The best years with consistent performance: KMZ, 1951 through 1955. Early 1956, but need to inspect the rear triplet for being German. I have a 1956 KMZ J-3, 56003xx, as good as my wartime Sonnar. Then picked up the 56040xx- "what went wrong". It is a new optical formula, uses Russian glass and I believe they were trying to reduce focus shift due to spherical aberration. That worked, at the expense of everything else?
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?
Valdai- I went through a dozen to find a good one, and it required major work. I replaced the front element with one from a 1960s ZOMZ, made it better. If you get a Valdai J-3, be sure to have an inspection period.
I have a Jupiter-3 made from the parts of 4 lenses, 1950 KMZ barrel, 1952 front element and middle triplet, rear triplet from a 1930s Sonnar. An acquired taste.
Nikki by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
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?
Valdai- I went through a dozen to find a good one, and it required major work. I replaced the front element with one from a 1960s ZOMZ, made it better. If you get a Valdai J-3, be sure to have an inspection period.
I have a Jupiter-3 made from the parts of 4 lenses, 1950 KMZ barrel, 1952 front element and middle triplet, rear triplet from a 1930s Sonnar. An acquired taste.
Nikki by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
raid
Dad Photographer
This is very useful information. Words of wisdom are spoken.
I've taken pictures with over 200 Jupiter-3 lenses, I lost count. Currently have 15 or so in mounts. A box of parts lenses. I've converted 50 or so CZJ 5cm F1.5 Sonnars, used all of them, worked on about as many sent to me. You go through a few hundred lenses- start to get impressions of them.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
It all depends where you live. It is common in some countries. There the working class knows the vintages, proper wines for courses and what is a good digestif for after the cheese course. After all, they invented the metric system, they are smart. They know the yeasts that make bread, cheese and wine possible. There life is an art form.
But I am adrift of the thread.
newst
Well-known
The best years with consistent performance: KMZ, 1951 through 1955. Early 1956, but need to inspect the rear triplet for being German. I have a 1956 KMZ J-3, 56003xx, as good as my wartime Sonnar. Then picked up the 56040xx- "what went wrong". It is a new optical formula, uses Russian glass and I believe they were trying to reduce focus shift due to spherical aberration. That worked, at the expense of everything else?
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?
Valdai- I went through a dozen to find a good one, and it required major work. I replaced the front element with one from a 1960s ZOMZ, made it better. If you get a Valdai J-3, be sure to have an inspection period.
I have a Jupiter-3 made from the parts of 4 lenses, 1950 KMZ barrel, 1952 front element and middle triplet, rear triplet from a 1930s Sonnar. An acquired taste.
Thank you, I must go search now.