cameosis
word? up!
hello, i wonder if anybody could tell me what the approximate production runs of the respective lens versions were (black / chrome), particularly the following lenses:
jupiter-3 / jupiter-8 / jupiter-9 / jupiter-12 / orion-15 / russar mr-2
after going through my fsu stuff recently, i realized that i have mostly black lenses (more by chance than by deliberate planning), except for the industar-22 and the orion-15 (all chrome).
what i'd like to know is how common the latter black versions are, my jupiter-3 is from 1987, the jupiter-9 is from 1968 and has a cyrillic engraving. were there any jupiter-12 lenses in black with cyrillic engraving or were they all marketed for export? finally, i have yet to come across a black orion-15, does anybody own one, or how many have been produced?
jupiter-3 / jupiter-8 / jupiter-9 / jupiter-12 / orion-15 / russar mr-2
after going through my fsu stuff recently, i realized that i have mostly black lenses (more by chance than by deliberate planning), except for the industar-22 and the orion-15 (all chrome).
what i'd like to know is how common the latter black versions are, my jupiter-3 is from 1987, the jupiter-9 is from 1968 and has a cyrillic engraving. were there any jupiter-12 lenses in black with cyrillic engraving or were they all marketed for export? finally, i have yet to come across a black orion-15, does anybody own one, or how many have been produced?
Attachments
vanyagor
Established
I see nobody gave you an answer yet, so I decided to make a quick response before I find the time to write a more detailed post.
I do have the data on Jupiters and possibly on the other lenses you have inquired about. I will look it up later tonight.
Typically later black versions are the most common ones. Also it is generally assumed they are poorer quality quite often. Of course any individual case might be different.
It would be really helpful if you specify the factory where your copies were made (a picture/description of the logo is enough), I can not see the logo in your picture of J-9 for example.
I assume you are talking about LTM mount lenses (not Kiev, not SLR mounts)
vanyagor
Established
Ok, I wasn't able to access all of my sources tonight, will try to do tomorrow for more info.
For now, here is the info I have:
Your Jupiter-3 is a later copy manufactured in Valdai. (As far as I understand all black versions were produced in Valdai since end seventies (1977?) unlike the earlier "white" ones which were produced at KMZ and Zagorsk). I have a copy exactly like yours from the same year. This is reported to be the worst of all J-3 produced. The drawbacks people cite are: 1) unlike in the earlier "white" ones, the optical module is "cemented in place" which limits the possibilities to adapt this lens to anything other than FSU bodies 2) it is not as sharp as the earlier copies.
Despite the above this has been my most heavily used J-3 (I have 2 "white" ones in LTM mount, which are famed to be better). Maybe because I got it rather cheap and I was not babying it as much as the 2 "white" ones. I was using the 1987 black Jupiter-3 on Leica M3 and despite the back-focusing issue, I haven't found it to be too terrible.
I'm sure this has been discussed multiple times on rff, I have a couple of very old threads bookmarked if you are interested.
For some reason the later black J-3 produced in Valdai is not mentioned at all in Princelles's wonderful book. (Though the book is not that great in covering the lenses.) Nevertheless it seems to be rather common. I will see what my other sources tell tomorrow.
Disclaimer: I have seen at least 1 report that the black version of J-3 is less common and sharper than the "white" version, though the source did not seem reliable.
For now, here is the info I have:
Your Jupiter-3 is a later copy manufactured in Valdai. (As far as I understand all black versions were produced in Valdai since end seventies (1977?) unlike the earlier "white" ones which were produced at KMZ and Zagorsk). I have a copy exactly like yours from the same year. This is reported to be the worst of all J-3 produced. The drawbacks people cite are: 1) unlike in the earlier "white" ones, the optical module is "cemented in place" which limits the possibilities to adapt this lens to anything other than FSU bodies 2) it is not as sharp as the earlier copies.
Despite the above this has been my most heavily used J-3 (I have 2 "white" ones in LTM mount, which are famed to be better). Maybe because I got it rather cheap and I was not babying it as much as the 2 "white" ones. I was using the 1987 black Jupiter-3 on Leica M3 and despite the back-focusing issue, I haven't found it to be too terrible.
I'm sure this has been discussed multiple times on rff, I have a couple of very old threads bookmarked if you are interested.
For some reason the later black J-3 produced in Valdai is not mentioned at all in Princelles's wonderful book. (Though the book is not that great in covering the lenses.) Nevertheless it seems to be rather common. I will see what my other sources tell tomorrow.
Disclaimer: I have seen at least 1 report that the black version of J-3 is less common and sharper than the "white" version, though the source did not seem reliable.
cameosis
word? up!
ivan, thanks a lot for your elaborate reply -- the jupiter-9 is from lzos, just as the jupiter-12. compared to "white"/aluminum versions, i haven't seen many black jupiter-3, so i was intrigued to find out more. of the black jupiter-12, i have yet to see one with cyrillic engraving (and a black orion-15 at all).
in regard to condition, all of them are new old stock (aka "dead stock") -- never used before. i bought them several years back before the hype inflated the prices 2-3 times, so i assume at least nobody has tampered with them.
thanks again,
tomis
in regard to condition, all of them are new old stock (aka "dead stock") -- never used before. i bought them several years back before the hype inflated the prices 2-3 times, so i assume at least nobody has tampered with them.
thanks again,
tomis
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Just a question about your J3 and J8: they are cyrillic and as far as I could ascertain, all black cyrillic lenses were not coated: looking at your pictures, yours do not seem coated (whereas the export models with roman lettering seem to be all having coated lenses).
btw I am still looking for a black J3, and they seem rarer than the chromium models that were produced over a larger span of time.
ps if you would be interested in the serials of my fsu lenses I could provide a list...
btw I am still looking for a black J3, and they seem rarer than the chromium models that were produced over a larger span of time.
ps if you would be interested in the serials of my fsu lenses I could provide a list...
cameosis
word? up!
ron, the jupiter-08 is not pictured here -- from left to right: jupiter-03, jupiter-09, jupiter-12
serials of most of the fsu lenses i own:
jupiter-03: 870432 (black / domestic)
jupiter-08: 7740220 (black / domestic)
jupiter-09: 6806171 (black / domestic)
jupiter-12: 7407281 (black / export)
industar-22: 10883 (chrome / domestic)
industar-22: 5446205 (chrome / domestic)
industar-61 l/d: 9389359 (black / domestic)
industar-61 l/d: 9389575 (black / domestic)
orion-15: 5904210 (aluminum / domestic)
serials of most of the fsu lenses i own:
jupiter-03: 870432 (black / domestic)
jupiter-08: 7740220 (black / domestic)
jupiter-09: 6806171 (black / domestic)
jupiter-12: 7407281 (black / export)
industar-22: 10883 (chrome / domestic)
industar-22: 5446205 (chrome / domestic)
industar-61 l/d: 9389359 (black / domestic)
industar-61 l/d: 9389575 (black / domestic)
orion-15: 5904210 (aluminum / domestic)
vanyagor
Established
Ron, I'm interested in J-3 versions/serial numbers. I'm working on filling the gaps in existing lists of various J-3 modifications now. Please post the ones you have either here or elsewhere or pm to me. What would be helpful is a picture from the front which shows all the markings as well as the picture from the side that shows all the markings. (Right now the variations before 1963 seem to be well covered, while between that and 1977 is a gap). I'm especially interested if you own a "white" J-3 with a serial that is NOT 7 numbers. I will make a special thread on that later.
On coating: I believe all J-3 were coated (single-coated). Coatings did change with time. Maybe only a particular coating types were exported, while the local market had more variations, I don't think the statement that all black Cyrillic versions were uncoated is true, though I don't know for sure. What is the source of this statement?
Abundance of a black J-3: it does seem that the black J-3 is rarer than the white ones. My feeling is the reason for that is beyond the actual production numbers. I agree if we consider all production years combined there might be more "white" ones, however there is also much more variation in the "white" ones. If you consider individual variations, I believe the black J-3 will be the most common one. Also, it is interesting to consider yearly production of J-3s. For instance I've heard of several black J-3 from 1983 or 1987, while how many 1965, 1966 or 1970 "white" J-3 have you heard about? (and between 1964 and 1970 there were at least 4 different designs).
It seems to me the black version is valued more sometimes simply for the looks. Black just looks cooler especially when people adapt it to digital cameras. This is of course only my personal perception, reality may be different.
vanyagor
Established
tomis, on J-3 that is all I have so far (see my response to Ron too). There is more, but it is all original-research-still-in-preparation and I don't have it ready for posting yet. I do intend to estimate production numbers of J-3s of different years eventually, though, still a lot of work to do there.
I will see if I have any info on other lenses you have mentioned later.
cameosis
word? up!
found a test of 50mm fsu lenses where the late black jupiter-3 scored the best results (together with the zeiss glass jupiter-3):
http://www.collection-appareils.fr/avoscrayons/html/50mm.php
http://www.collection-appareils.fr/avoscrayons/html/50mm.php
vanyagor
Established
Interesting find. However it does look like a bit of "wishful thinking" on the part of the author. I did a background check and a couple of "red flags" on his credibility as a J-3 expert are definitely there: 1) he has used Leica M7 for his tests and yet he seems to be completely unaware that using J-3 on the M would require special adjustments (after going through a bunch of his posts on French-speaking forums) 2) he did make wrong statements before (such as claiming that black J-3s were manufactured at Lytkarino) which may indicate he is not thorough in his research.
On that particular comparison: he doesn't explain how exactly he assigns the grade (out of 6), so one can never tell if his methodology is flawed or not.
Btw, my opinion posted in this thread is no better than the opinion of the author of that comparison. However my opinion is based on the reports by several people who have vast experience adjusting J-3s and who saw a bunch of different models come through their hands. In particular the opinion by Brian Sweeney posted on this very forum Brian has mentioned he has seen 8 black J-3s and neither was "anywhere near as sharp as the earlier chrome lenses". Brian had sampled over 100 J-3 total.
cameosis
word? up!
ivan, i wasn't questioning your assessment, i just thought it'd be worth checking out a test i hadn't known about previously -- never trust a comparison you haven't manipulated yourself. 
i have followed brian's posts on the jupiter lenses, and do consider his opinion on the matter important/valuable, thanks again for the link.
i have followed brian's posts on the jupiter lenses, and do consider his opinion on the matter important/valuable, thanks again for the link.
vanyagor
Established
ivan, i wasn't questioning your assessment, i just thought it'd be worth checking out a test i hadn't known about previously -- never trust a comparison you haven't manipulated yourself.
i have followed brian's posts on the jupiter lenses, and do consider his opinion on the matter important/valuable, thanks again for the link.
No worries. I wouldn't mind you questioning my assessment anyway
I'm no expert and I've only used 4 different J-3, only 3 of them in Leica mount and only 1 black and I haven't really put them to through testing. Another person on this forum who has adjusted several black J-3s is Kim Coxon (I've got my black J-3 from him). I seem to recall his opinion was close to Brian's, though I'm not sure and too lazy and tired to search now.Unfortunately both Brian and Kim seem to be gone from RFF
What a loss to FSU community here! P.S.: just for fun I will try to find time to test my 3 J-3s, though I'm not really a fan of technical tests and I will not set up a precise "lab" test
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Attractive list! Here is mine:
LTM:
Industar 26M: 039890 (chrome / domestic) - tabbed
Industar 61 L/D: 9257965 (black / domestic)
Industar-22: 7071861 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-03: 5603522 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-03: 6004873 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-03: 6103102 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-03: 6107730 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-03: 6400875 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-08: 006743 (chrome / domestic)
jupiter-08: 7520720 (black / export)
russar-MP2: 950448 (black / domestic)
KIEV:
jupiter-08: 7541018 (chrome / domestic)
The serials of the ltm chromium J8 and the Industar 26m have always puzzled me, not sure which year they were produced. I also had some tabbed J8's in the past but sold them.
Not a 'hard' source, but I never saw a coated black domestic J3 or J8; if some fellow member has one, please leave a note! So now I got one myself: with beautiful amber coatings - see some postings ahead
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
For what it's worth, here's mine, along with the indicated maker (I thought that might be an interesting extra piece of information):
LTM
Industar 10: 4577 (chrome, presumably export?; FED)
Industar 22: 50884239 (chrome, domestic; KMZ)
Industar 22: 38095 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ. Unusual lens!)
Industar 26M: 002849 (chrome, domestic; FED) (Tabbed)
Industar 50: 5637331 (chrome, domestic; KMZ) (Rigid)
Industar 61: 9100905 (zebra striped, domestic; FED)
Industar 61 L/D: 9008109 (black, domestic; FED)
Jupiter 3: 6205995 (chrome, domestic; ZOMZ)
Jupiter 8: 7658434 (black, export; KMZ)
Jupiter 9: 5808231 (chrome, domestic; KMZ)
Jupiter 11: 6708769 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 11: 7301965 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 12: 7412136 (black, export; LZOS)
KIEV:
Jupiter 8M: 7033791 (chrome, domestic; Arsenal)
Jupiter 11: 7801520 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 12: 8721672 (black, export; LZOS)
Helios 103: 8357103 (chrome/black, domestic; Arsenal)
I don't know how useful that is to you, Cameosis, but I learned two things from this exercise:
- I have a LOT of domestic lenses. I'd never looked at/thought about it before. This surprises me for some reason.
- I have a lot more lenses that I thought I did.
Also, while searching around for info, I remembered Soviet Cams now has a lens section:
http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1674256906
Had you seen that before, Cameosis?
LTM
Industar 10: 4577 (chrome, presumably export?; FED)
Industar 22: 50884239 (chrome, domestic; KMZ)
Industar 22: 38095 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ. Unusual lens!)
Industar 26M: 002849 (chrome, domestic; FED) (Tabbed)
Industar 50: 5637331 (chrome, domestic; KMZ) (Rigid)
Industar 61: 9100905 (zebra striped, domestic; FED)
Industar 61 L/D: 9008109 (black, domestic; FED)
Jupiter 3: 6205995 (chrome, domestic; ZOMZ)
Jupiter 8: 7658434 (black, export; KMZ)
Jupiter 9: 5808231 (chrome, domestic; KMZ)
Jupiter 11: 6708769 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 11: 7301965 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 12: 7412136 (black, export; LZOS)
KIEV:
Jupiter 8M: 7033791 (chrome, domestic; Arsenal)
Jupiter 11: 7801520 (chrome, domestic; KOMZ)
Jupiter 12: 8721672 (black, export; LZOS)
Helios 103: 8357103 (chrome/black, domestic; Arsenal)
I don't know how useful that is to you, Cameosis, but I learned two things from this exercise:
- I have a LOT of domestic lenses. I'd never looked at/thought about it before. This surprises me for some reason.
- I have a lot more lenses that I thought I did.
Also, while searching around for info, I remembered Soviet Cams now has a lens section:
http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1674256906
Had you seen that before, Cameosis?
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Thanks for the link to Soviet Cams' new section: it's fascinating.
Regards, David
Thanks for the link to Soviet Cams' new section: it's fascinating.
Regards, David
vanyagor
Established
Currently it offers the most complete classifications of some of the FSU lenses, Jupiter-3 being one example.
cameosis
word? up!
thanks, tony,
the lens section @ soviet cams was the reason for me to start this thread!
another good source of info is lens club, a russian site:
http://lens-club.ru/lenses/item/c_935.html
http://lens-club.ru/lenses/systems/c_55/p_2.html
http://lens-club.ru/pdf/c_52.html
some additional info on my lenses: all are ltm/m39 and all are coated.
orion-15: kmz / model pt0530 (soviet cams) -> looking for model pt0560 in black!
jupiter-03: vomz / model pt1660 (soviet cams)
jupiter-08: kmz / model pt3110 (soviet cams - but mine has cyrillic engraving, i.e. it is domestic)
jupiter-09: lzos / model pt7060 (soviet cams)
jupiter-12: lzos / model pt0835 (soviet cams)
industar-22: kmz / model pt5870 (soviet cams)
industar-22: komz / model pt5770 (soviet cams)
industar-61 l/d: fed / no info about version changes @ soviet cams
recently, i saw a picture of a late kmz jupiter-8 which had a six-digit serial number without the year prefix and all its aperture stops and focus distance were engraved, not printed on. it was an export version with roman characters. the barrel looked similar to one of a black jupiter-3.
i bet there are still some models/variants out there that haven't been catalogued yet.
cheers,
tomis
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Yes, it's a lovely site. And very easy to get lost in it.
My problem is that it encourages me to buy things (I don't need encouragement as much as money). So I end up with things like this;
Or worse still (but really nothing to do with Soviet Cams) like this:
And think of the hours we then spend going through the heap of old cameras to check what we've really got! I don't know why I do it at times...
Regards, David
Yes, it's a lovely site. And very easy to get lost in it.
My problem is that it encourages me to buy things (I don't need encouragement as much as money). So I end up with things like this;
Or worse still (but really nothing to do with Soviet Cams) like this:
And think of the hours we then spend going through the heap of old cameras to check what we've really got! I don't know why I do it at times...
Regards, David
cameosis
word? up!
you're not alone. i too have the old aluminum container, combined with the m-compatible cassette, however.
great stuff!
i too have the old aluminum container, combined with the m-compatible cassette, however.great stuff!
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Well, if anything needs a huge website devoted to it in all the details I'd say it was the Leica and Contax re-loadable cassettes. Just try checking that the spool inside i the right one. I'd bought dozens before I found one with Contax on the end as it ought to be...
Regards, David
Well, if anything needs a huge website devoted to it in all the details I'd say it was the Leica and Contax re-loadable cassettes. Just try checking that the spool inside i the right one. I'd bought dozens before I found one with Contax on the end as it ought to be...
Regards, David