Duncan Ross
Say it with flashbulbs
Just took delivery of /another/ Kiev 4, this one has a Jupiter 8 on it.
However part of the bargain is that I need to sell my existing Kiev 4 which has an 8M on it. Don't ask, it's a husband-wife-camera-quantity thing. And the shoes argument doesn't work.
Ok, the question is; is there any appreciable difference between a Jupiter 8 and an 8M. Manufacturing variances aside I would have expected the 8M to be better but were the J8s made at a time that average lens quality was better overall?
It's going to be hard for me to do a side-by-side test; my local lab produces nasty 6 x 4 prints full of digital artifacts so only the most obvious lens faults would show, but I would like to keep the best one should the day arise that I start using slides again!
Any ideas...?
However part of the bargain is that I need to sell my existing Kiev 4 which has an 8M on it. Don't ask, it's a husband-wife-camera-quantity thing. And the shoes argument doesn't work.
Ok, the question is; is there any appreciable difference between a Jupiter 8 and an 8M. Manufacturing variances aside I would have expected the 8M to be better but were the J8s made at a time that average lens quality was better overall?
It's going to be hard for me to do a side-by-side test; my local lab produces nasty 6 x 4 prints full of digital artifacts so only the most obvious lens faults would show, but I would like to keep the best one should the day arise that I start using slides again!
Any ideas...?
sockeyed
Well-known
I thought that the only difference was that the 8M had click stops on the aperture, but I could be wrong. If you want to pick up a 'different' kind of lens for your Kiev, try out a Helios-103 (if you don't already have one). It's a gauss design rather than a sonnar, and it's 1.8 instead of 2.0.
I just sold mine for $12.
I just sold mine for $12.
Duncan Ross
Say it with flashbulbs
Thanks for the advice; I am probably wrong but I thought the main difference between the Jupiter 8 and 8M (M=modified) was that they had combined two of the elements into a single element in an attempt to reduce flare. Am I barking up the wrong tree here...?
Thanks again - I have actually tried the Helios but actually preferred my 8M, maybe I got a bad one!
Thanks again - I have actually tried the Helios but actually preferred my 8M, maybe I got a bad one!
dll927
Well-known
I have three Kievs - 3, 4, and 4a. They came with, respectively, J8, J8M, and Helios 103 - which Yuri at Fedka threw in because the J8 had "slight cleaning marks". The 4a actually has the J8 too. (He sent both lenses!)
I've bought some of them recently enough that I can't give a real 'test result' comparison, but since I use just print film in them (slide film can go in newer ones), I'd be pretty hard-pressed to say that I notice much difference. Yes, the J8M does have click stops, but so does the Helios.
I've bought some of them recently enough that I can't give a real 'test result' comparison, but since I use just print film in them (slide film can go in newer ones), I'd be pretty hard-pressed to say that I notice much difference. Yes, the J8M does have click stops, but so does the Helios.
As I recall, Yuri says the only differences between the J8 and J8M are that the M has aperture click stops and also has the aperture numbers engraved twice, "top and bottom," for better visibility as the lens rotates in focusing.
taffer
void
Indeed you're right Duncan, two glass elements were put together in the J8M, you can see that on one of those FSU lenses charts around the net. Apart from this and the click stops, I'm not sure if the original J8 only had a set of aperture scales or not.
Maybe the coatings were also changed for a more modern ones on the J8M.
A side-by-side test is required
Maybe the coatings were also changed for a more modern ones on the J8M.
A side-by-side test is required
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
To resurrect a very old thread, I have wondered about this also.
But why wasn't the J-8M formula extended to the LTM Jupiter 8 for the Zorki?
There seems to be less sample variations in quality control on the J-8M than the J-8, even for the J-8 made in the Kiev/Contax mount.
Odd that the J-8M was built better mechanically than the previous J-8, chromed brass vs aluminum, and the double f stop numbers were a very good idea on the J-8M.
Camera gear got crappier and crappier as time moved on in the USSR but the reverse happened here for some strange reason. Mind you some would argue that the round diaphragm of the original J-8 produced better bokeh than the jagged one on the J-8M .
If you are lucky enough to luck into a J-8 in Kiev/Contax mount that is top notch photo quality wise, it is a thing of beauty that is hard to describe, something about it that it produces a 3D like quality to the photos that I never have gotten from the J-8M lens.
The problem is finding such a gem, as most J-8s even in Kiev/Contax mount are good to so-so good to very common crappy.
But why wasn't the J-8M formula extended to the LTM Jupiter 8 for the Zorki?
There seems to be less sample variations in quality control on the J-8M than the J-8, even for the J-8 made in the Kiev/Contax mount.
Odd that the J-8M was built better mechanically than the previous J-8, chromed brass vs aluminum, and the double f stop numbers were a very good idea on the J-8M.
Camera gear got crappier and crappier as time moved on in the USSR but the reverse happened here for some strange reason. Mind you some would argue that the round diaphragm of the original J-8 produced better bokeh than the jagged one on the J-8M .
If you are lucky enough to luck into a J-8 in Kiev/Contax mount that is top notch photo quality wise, it is a thing of beauty that is hard to describe, something about it that it produces a 3D like quality to the photos that I never have gotten from the J-8M lens.
The problem is finding such a gem, as most J-8s even in Kiev/Contax mount are good to so-so good to very common crappy.
Valkir1987
Well-known
The Soviets did a lot of experiments on the old Sonnar, the optical formula remained the same but the Jupiter 8 uses slightly different glass and shapes. It's even softer wide open than the original Sonnar, compared on an autocollimator you can see this clearly.
I cannot prove or claim, but I seem to experience that the Jupiter 8M has slightly better contrast than the Jupiter 8. Arsenal used a different coating on this type of lens. Never really had a Jupiter 8 that was bad, unless its glass was mistreated. What can be improved is the adjustment of the optic groups and the blackening inside the lens.
I cannot prove or claim, but I seem to experience that the Jupiter 8M has slightly better contrast than the Jupiter 8. Arsenal used a different coating on this type of lens. Never really had a Jupiter 8 that was bad, unless its glass was mistreated. What can be improved is the adjustment of the optic groups and the blackening inside the lens.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I suspected that the Soviets did a lot of experimenting with the Sonnar design. They ran out of Schott glass by the early 1950s and re-formulated the Sonnar design to fit the native glass mixtures and lens coating improved by that time in all nations.
I had two really bad Jupiter 8s, one was so bad that I replace the whole optical block from a known good 1965 J-8 that had a jammed focusing helical and the other is a paper weight, both were LTM types.
Most of my J-8s are OK, a few are exceptional and year of manufacture did not matter. My ultimate two J-8s are a 1955 J-8 in Kiev mount, the lens is battered on the outside but the glass is pristine and the other is a minty 1976 black J-8 that came on a Zorki 4K, also in very good condition. Most of my J-8Ms are very consistent in quality, not super outstanding but certainly not bad at all.
Valkir1987
Well-known
You can find some of these prototypes on Aidas's website, it might be interesting.
http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1674256906
The Jupiter 17 has two cemented elements replaced by one block.
I had a Jupiter 8 once with a very badly damaged optic part, replaced it with a new old stock optical part from ebay. This is one of my Jupiters now that really stands out.
http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1674256906
The Jupiter 17 has two cemented elements replaced by one block.
I had a Jupiter 8 once with a very badly damaged optic part, replaced it with a new old stock optical part from ebay. This is one of my Jupiters now that really stands out.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
I have a Jupiter 8M (No. 5926058) that I got on a Kiev 4, but I use it on a Contax I. It is a super fine lens, very sharp and contrasty. It only has some pincushion distortion. I am really surprised by its quality.
Contax I v4, Jupiter M8 50mm f/2, Tmax400.
Erik.
at full aperture:
Contax I v4, Jupiter M8 50mm f/2, Tmax400.
Erik.
at full aperture:
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Thanks for the link to that interesting site.
It says that the J-8M is a modernized version of the J-8.
I wonder if "modernized" means only click stops, different diaphragm, dual f numbers and brass construction but optically it stayed the same?
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I have a Jupiter 8M (No. 5926058) that I got on a Kiev 4, but I use it on a Contax I. It is a super fine lens, very sharp and contrasty. It only has some pincushion distortion. I am really surprised by its quality.
Contax I v4, Jupiter M8 50mm f/2, Tmax400.
Erik.
at full aperture:
You got a real beauty of a lens there, Erik
It rivals anything made by the famous and well known optical manufacturers .
Valkir1987
Well-known
This is kind of typical for the non symmetric Sonnar design which derived from the Tessar. The pin- cushion distortion should depend on the position of the aperture.
The shot below is f8 taken on Provia 100f on 1/60.
Valkir1987
Well-known
I still had to finish a roll of TMax-100 in my Kiev 4a so I decided to test my fathers prewar Jena Sonnar, a Jupiter 8 from '55 and a Jupiter 8M from 1980. All shot on 1m at f4 with 1/250.
The Sonnar:
The Jupiter 8 1955:
And the Jupiter 8M 1980:
The Sonnar:
The Jupiter 8 1955:
And the Jupiter 8M 1980:
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I still had to finish a roll of TMax-100 in my Kiev 4a so I decided to test my fathers prewar Jena Sonnar, a Jupiter 8 from '55 and a Jupiter 8M from 1980. All shot on 1m at f4 with 1/250.
The Sonnar:
The Jupiter 8 1955:
And the Jupiter 8M 1980:
The photos are all naturally very similar, but the 1955 J-8 shot would be my top of the pops pick.