Best soft- Bokeh 50 LTM?

[Bill58]

I hate to ask such a dumb, elementary question, but I'm a total d______w/ respect to Russian lenses. Would anyone please educate me?

Thanks,

Bill

 

[IGMeanwell]

Do you mean like a soft focus lens? Or just 50mm that has a real soft bokeh wide open? or just a soft bokeh in general?

 

[Bill58]

Slighly soft in the center and very soft on the outside.

 

[Spyderman]

Jupiter 8 wide open.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Jupiter 3 would fit your bill, Bill. 😀

Jupiter-3 at F:1,5 with Leica M3 (Neopan 400 film in Rodinal):

Jupiter-3 at F:1,5 with Leica M3 (Chinese BW ISO 100 in paRodinal):

Jupiter-3 at F:1,5 with Zorki-1 (Chinese BW ISO 100 in paRodinal):

The more common (and less expensive) Jupiter-8 also makes good bokeh.
At F:4 (with a Zorki-1 and Chinese BW ISO 100 ), here is what it does:

Jay

 

[Didier]

The Canon 50@f1.2:

 

[santino]

def. Jupiter 3 or 8 (when it comes to FSU) 🙂

 

[rover]

def. Jupiter 3 or 8 (when it comes to FSU) 🙂

Both Zeiss Sonnar "copies"

Jupiter 3 is 50/1.5
Jupiter 8 is 50/2

 

[oscroft]

One more vote for the J-8 for me (and I can't vote for the J-3 because I haven't used one)

 

[ZorkiKat]

The Canon 50@f1.2:

Were there FSU Canon 50 F:1,2 ? Soviet Canons must be very rare! 😀

 

[santino]

I've got a pre-war 2/50 Sonnar in Kiev mount and it's even softer than my J8's
must be the coating 🙂

 

[rover]

Coatings and improvements.

I said before that the Jupiters are Sonnar "copies," I wonder to what degree if any improvements/changes were made to the optical formulas through the years. I guess there have been some as the J8 became the J8m and there is the Helios 103 which is a derivative too right?

 

[santino]

is the Helios 103 a derivative?

 

[Spyderman]

No. H-103 is a Biotar symmetrical design. Something completely different.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Coatings and improvements.

I said before that the Jupiters are Sonnar "copies," I wonder to what degree if any improvements/changes were made to the optical formulas through the years. I guess there have been some as the J8 became the J8m and there is the Helios 103 which is a derivative too right?

The older "white" Jupiter 50mms seem to be better than the latter ones. I only have the the white J-3, late 1950s vintage, but have several J-8 for comparison. Aside from quality control (shimming, RF coupling accuracy etc), the construction of the earlier Jupiters were of higher quality. Front filter rings and the RF cams did not rotate as the lens was focused. Non-rotating RF cams could be worth noting by those who are concerned that the rubbing, rotating action might wear out the cam or the sloped tip of the RF arms found in FED or Zorki cameras.

In contrast, the later Jupiter appear to have simplified mechanisms, with focusing movements similar to those found in single-helical collapsible Industars. The front ring rotates, the coupling cams rotate, barrel material seem softer and lighter, loose aperture rings with a generally 'cheaper' feel.

Optically, the Jupiters appear to retain their good points, regardless of vintage. The older ones may appeal to those who prefer a 'different' (aged? romantic?) look associated with older lenses. The later Jupiters however seem to do better in colour. The 'blue' glass of the older Jupiter often makes a strange yellow-greenish cast in some colour exposures.

Jay

 

[rover]

I believe the Helios 103's part in this picture is that it was optimized to for color photography. I had to read that somewhere on the web, wish I could remember where.

 

[Richard Black]

I have both the J3 and J8 and both have the characteristics you desire. I have a collapsible Industar 50, f3.5 that would also meet your requirements.

 

[Bill58]

I'm gonna try: the Industar 22 rigid; J3; and Industar 61 L/D and compare the results.

 

[Didier]

Were there FSU Canon 50 F:1,2 ? Soviet Canons must be very rare! 😀

Never heard of Kanonski?
🙂

 

[Bill58]

Kanonski--a Polish guy w/ a Leica?