HU: BLACK J-3 50mm/1.5 in LTM

[raid]

I have no connections with the seller here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180128320287&ssPageName=ADME:B:WNA:US:12


Some of you want a mint J-3... for Father's Day?

Raid

 

[Avotius]

crap, someone got it over me...i didnt expect it to go so high

 

[raid]

A clean J-3 can sell for more than $100 these days. This one was mint and in black.

 

[xayraa33]

a lot of money for a late black one.
some of these late ones cannot even be shimmed properly.

 

[raid]

a lot of money for a late black one.
some of these late ones cannot even be shimmed properly.

This is useful information. I did not know this fact. :bang:

Raid

 

[xayraa33]

yes Raid, Kim Coxon had a late Black J-3 that could not be correctly shimmed. Something about the rear lens group that was cemented instead of threaded like what is on the older J-3's.
Kim or Brian S. can elaborate more on this subject.

 

[raid]

The difference is the max aperture of 1.5, with a Sonnar look in the resulting images. As for collapsible Summicrons, some of them still sell for $300 or so. The J-8 always has been a super bargain.

Raid

 

[Bluesman]

F2eyelevel - that avatar pic has to be Marilyn, huh? "Last sitting"?
Love that pic - and you, my man , have good taste!
Cheers /Richard

 

[Stephanie Brim]

My LTM J-3 was an exceptional performer. For the $80-100 you'll pay, you really can't get a better lens. Then again, I had an older chrome model.

 

[raid]

I did not buy the FSU lenses to have them replaced by others. Quite often we buy beyond our needs for photography.

I have used a Canon 50/1.4 but I liked the Canon 50/1.5 better. There are advocates for each of these two lenses; I have neither one. The J-3 was a relatively inexpensive way to get a 1.5 lens in LTM for me. The Summarit most of the time has "problems", and it costs more than a J-3. My reshimmed J-3 cost me $75. I agree with Stephanie's comment above.

Raid

 

[xayraa33]

I don't get the point of paying $100 or more on a possibly not correctly shimmed FSU lens in LTM when you can have a very nice LTM Canon 50/1,8 for that price. Actually.

and not to mention the mickey mouse aluminium construction of the Jupiter- 3.

 

[raid]

The construction of the J-3 is truely poor. I wish that they would make the construction better, but this is not an option.

 

[Nokton48]

I have had a multitude of FSU lenses, and I enjoy "whippin' them into shape" and consequently creating something truely great with them, in terms of images. That to me is part of the allure of the lowely FSU products.

 

[raid]

I don't agree with you about the J-3's optical low level performance. Maybe it is simply a matter of personal taste. When comparing the J-3 to eleven other 50mm lenses here on RFF, several people chose the J-3 as the lens with excellent performance. I got my J-3 after owning many 50mm lenses, made by companies such as Zeiss, Leitz, Canon and Nikon. It really is a nice lens optically.

I sold my Zeiss Opton. [no good reason]

Raid

 

[vrgard]

I gotta agree with Raid. I (still) have a Jupiter 3. And I paid just a bit more than $100 for it. Bought it from a fellow rff member. And it's a black one. Guess it's not a late model black one since it was properly shimmed by Brian Sweeney (before I bought it, hence the price I was willing to pay for it). Like Raid said, it's a relatively fast 1.5 lens with the great (in my opinion) Sonnar look. Yes, I have other fast lenses. And some of them are Sonnar designs, too. Doesn't mean I'm not happy shooting with my J-3. May just be one man's view, or perhaps two if you count Raid's, but for the record I am a believer in mine.

-Randy

 

[raid]

Optically, no doubt, since it's a Sonnar 50/1.5 clone as for the glass (although manufacturing a lens based upon the same optical schemes with different refraction glass might be a huge issue by itself).

The issues are mainly mechanical. Shimming and collimation, but also lens barrel assembly and construction tolerances. One fraction of millimeter missing here, and a fraction surplus there, can ruin a lens that is otherwise optically excellent.

I guess it's mainly a matter of quality control (or of lack of some). That's why the early 1950's KMZ Jupiter-3 lenses are the most sought after, and the rarest on the market. These ones were still made under critically controlled manufacturing tolerances.

Mine was a 1959 GOMZ one and obviously, I didn't hit the jackpot when buying it. Lesson learnt.

Reshimming is almost a must.
Unless I am mistaken, Brian chose a KMZ version J-3 for me, followed by a careful shimming and testing. I am a lucky guy.
By the way, Quality Control is my field of expertise.
😀

 

[varjag]

Well, I do have a 1.5/50 early KMZ J-3, I use it most of the time.

There's a used camera shop here where am a welcome visitor, so the owner kindly allows me to try all the lenses I can mount on my cameras. Surely modern and previous version crons have everything over J3 except a stop and the sonnar look, but it seems an old J3 can compare decently to Leitz optics from 1950s. I was offered a great deal on 1st gen summilux-m 50, but after much thinking turned it down: wide open I've seen no advantage over my j3.

The only wartime coated CZ Sonnar 2/50 coll. I tried was totally off the focus. I had to try it twice, thinking I didn't collapse it all way out first time, but no. It also had the worst lens mount I've seen ever.

Main attraction of the jupiter to me is rather unique combination of (usable) speed, Sonnar look, and low weight&bulk. The last point must be stressed: it is smaller than Summilux, Summicron, Industar-50 3.5/50, and a few millimeters longer than CV Heliar 2/50 collapsible.

The drawbacks are the rather cheap mount, and yes, the prices that are getting well over $100 for good samples.

 

[raid]

It does have such a logo. I am quite sure of it, and I will check once I go home. Brian told me that such a lens was most likely meant for military applications and that it supposedly had better QC. maybe that's why I like this lens so much. It really performs well.

 

[raid]

Well, I do have a 1.5/50 early KMZ J-3, I use it most of the time.

There's a used camera shop here where am a welcome visitor, so the owner kindly allows me to try all the lenses I can mount on my cameras. Surely modern and previous version crons have everything over J3 except a stop and the sonnar look, but it seems an old J3 can compare decently to Leitz optics from 1950s. I was offered a great deal on 1st gen summilux-m 50, but after much thinking turned it down: wide open I've seen no advantage over my j3.

The only wartime coated CZ Sonnar 2/50 coll. I tried was totally off the focus. I had to try it twice, thinking I didn't collapse it all way out first time, but no. It also had the worst lens mount I've seen ever.

Main attraction of the jupiter to me is rather unique combination of (usable) speed, Sonnar look, and low weight&bulk. The last point must be stressed: it is smaller than Summilux, Summicron, Industar-50 3.5/50, and a few millimeters longer than CV Heliar 2/50 collapsible.

The drawbacks are the rather cheap mount, and yes, the prices that are getting well over $100 for good samples.

Eugene: I also like the light weight and relatively small size of the J-3. I use a squarish lens hood [made by Franka] with the lens becuase the lens hood is chrome and is very light too.

I have a war-time Zeiss 50/2, which is quite rare in LTM. I had to send it twice to DAG to get it back in shape. First, I sent it to well-known precision repairshop, but they told me that it would be cost prohibitive to repair this lens, and they mailed it back to me. Don Goldberg did a wonderful job in adjusting the shimming and in making the lens barrel turn smoothly after it was stuck. He then [in the second round] cleaned the lens from inside.
As for its lens mount, my lens also has a horrible one. It appears as if the Zeiss glass was inserted into a Leitz lens barrel, but I never figured out how the lens really was put together. According to two people at the Zeiss Historical Society, my lens is one out of a batch of 200 lenses that were ordered by Sweden in return for metal ore. This part is the most fun for me. Lenses I have plenty, but a piece of history is precious.

Raid

 

[raid]

KMZ Jupiter-3 are actually the best, and the rarest.
If your J-3 is a KMZ one, it must have the following logo on the name ring near the s/n.

The symbol on my J-3 is similar but not identical. It is similar to an eye ball with a straight error though it. On the other hand, my rigid I-50 has the same symbol for KMZ that you have posted above.

Raid

edited:

I searched the net, and I found the "truth"; My J-3 was made by ZOMZ, which is little known, and which has been associated with KMZ! It is making J-3 lenses.