Helios 103

[Spyderman]

If I could choose between a superb lans with terrible bokeh, or a very good lens (just very slightly worse than superb) with smooth bokeh I would choose the later.

I must admit I never shot with a H-103, but I guess the H-44 is the same construction (Biotar) and I didn't like the bokeh on the H-44.

That's why I would always pick a Sonnar over a Biotar. But that's just me.

 

[Marc-A.]

Notice I didn't say Jupiter 8 is a bad lens, just that H-103 tends to be better

If I could choose between a superb lans with terrible bokeh, or a very good lens (just very slightly worse than superb) with smooth bokeh I would choose the later.

I'm in big troubles because I agree with you both. In term of sharpness, grey range, I think the H103 is superior to the J8 (it's less obvious with the J8M, don't know why); I agree with Varjag then. But the bokeh of the J8 is much better and bokeh is important, often more important than sharpness. So agree with Spyderman too.
Could we say that the H103 is better than the J8 for some purposes, and the J8 is better than the H103 for other purposes? For instance, I wanted so bad the H103 because I need a sharp lens for street photo, and I can't afford another Summicron right now (I had one, but I had to sell it ...:bang: ). When I see its performance (for $15!!!) I wonder why I still want a Summicron. Stupid snobbery. But for portrait, I probably won't use much the H103, I prefer my Summitar and its wonderful bokeh.
Best,
Marc

 

[ed1k]

I still think though that in a blind pick you'll have better luck with the Helios.

Yeah, you see. People want bokeh! It's not as scientific as resolution but anyway it is important characteristic. Defining luck as a probability to get sharp lens - you're absolutly correct.

Some fine examples posted in this thread shows quite good bokeh. I think if one have to stop lens down to f/4 - f/8 for not-so-nice J8, similarly H103 should be stoped down to reduce OOF and related artefacts, but _any_ H103.

Well, I guess Marc has put it right, for some purposes H103 could do a great job, something different J8 can handle better.

Here is an example of ugly Sonar bokeh, yes J8 produce sometimes fancy artefacts. Though this is not good case to talk about lens sharpness I also attached 100% fragment, full neg scanned @3200 dpi (K-M Dual IV).

APX 100 at EI 64, f/2 - my memory tells me it was 1/10 but knowing it was handheld I think my memory cheat on me and it was 1/25. Bottom right corner of fragment shows some resolution good enough for skin facture.

Eduard

 

[ed1k]

Can't be just my bad influence

Actually I think you underestimate your influence. I don't remember you saying nonsense or illogical things. I listen to your opinion. I think many do. If I didn't have J8 I would think "if varjag saz J8 is crap - that's it, don't ever bother to look for one. Who could know about FSU stuff better". That's why I jumped into discussion. I just was not aware that J8 is such a lottery.
Eduard.

 

[varjag]

Ooh, so I got a rep!

Admittedly I don't do much portraits in general, and with 50mm in particular, so my demands to bokeh performance might be comparatively low.

We'll see how this new old J-3 works though