ARCHIVIST
Well-known
I am thinking of buying a Jupiter 11 135mm tele in LTM.
Have any of you had experience of this lens please?
I have noticed that there are some Leitz Hektor 135mm lenses selling for the same price as some of the higher priced Jupiters - around the $100AUD to $125AUD price points. Which would you buy - is the Hektor better?
Cheers
Peter
Have any of you had experience of this lens please?
I have noticed that there are some Leitz Hektor 135mm lenses selling for the same price as some of the higher priced Jupiters - around the $100AUD to $125AUD price points. Which would you buy - is the Hektor better?
Cheers
Peter
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
I have no experience with the Jupiter-11, but Leitz HEKTORs are very underrated lenses in my opinion. That seems to keep their prices low.
Same goes for the 90mm f/4 Elmars.
Isn't the Jupiter-11 a Sonnar 135mm copy though?
Same goes for the 90mm f/4 Elmars.
Isn't the Jupiter-11 a Sonnar 135mm copy though?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I was reading reviews about this lens just yesterday, in Russian. Several times it was mentioned it is not "portrait" lens. LTM RF min. focus distance is ... 2.5 meters.
goamules
Well-known
The best 135mm LTM lens I've found, hands down, is the Canon 135/3.5.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
The Hektor and Elmar generally are superior. But individual samples of the J-11 can be excellent. Be warned that the Hektor and Elmar were Visoflex kit lenses, so the barrel and helical are removable components - apparent bargains on ebay sometimes lack one or the other.
02Pilot
Malcontent
There's a Nikkor 135/3.5 in LTM that's also quite good (and heavy).
David Hughes
David Hughes
I was reading reviews about this lens just yesterday, in Russian. Several times it was mentioned it is not "portrait" lens. LTM RF min. focus distance is ... 2.5 meters.
Hi,
That's odd isn't it. About 8ft away seems reasonable and usable indoors...
Regards, David
pschauss
Well-known
I have 3, one each in LTM, Kiev, and M39 Zenit mounts. I have not used any of them in some time, but all of them produced acceptable results, especially based on the prices I paid when I bought them. The main problem I had with them on my rangefinders was framing.
paw080
Paw080
Hi Peter I've had a Jupiter-11 for about ten years. I got it on ebay for less than $30.00.
I used it a lot for about a year and a half. Mine must be a good one;
I gives a very sharp image, and I'm happy with it. Oh yes, its in LTM.
Tony
I used it a lot for about a year and a half. Mine must be a good one;
I gives a very sharp image, and I'm happy with it. Oh yes, its in LTM.
Tony
julio1fer
Well-known
I have used Jupiter-11 in LTM and Kiev mounts. As said above it is very sharp, similar to the classic Sonnar. I did not use it very often because I do not feel comfortable using long lenses in RF cameras - above 85mm I go to the old SLR.
ARCHIVIST
Well-known
Thanks all for very informative feedback.
Now, finders - do I go for the FSU turret finder or another makers dedicated finder?
Cheers
Peter
Now, finders - do I go for the FSU turret finder or another makers dedicated finder?
Cheers
Peter
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
The ex-USSR (? KMZ) clone is a good finder and you can use it with other lenses as you get them...
One point, there's a right handed and a left handed version of the finder. You need the right one for your camera but it doesn't matter for Kievs and Contaxes. The body has to clear the shutter speed dial and so should be on the left side of the shoe when seen from the rear of the camera.
Regards, David
The ex-USSR (? KMZ) clone is a good finder and you can use it with other lenses as you get them...
One point, there's a right handed and a left handed version of the finder. You need the right one for your camera but it doesn't matter for Kievs and Contaxes. The body has to clear the shutter speed dial and so should be on the left side of the shoe when seen from the rear of the camera.
Regards, David
ARCHIVIST
Well-known
Thanks David.
Good info.
Cheers
Peter
Good info.
Cheers
Peter
pschauss
Well-known
I have used a KMZ finder but I have found that the Leica finder is more accurate.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
In my experience, it is the sharpest of all the Zorkii/Kiev lenses.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
David Hughes
David Hughes
I have used a KMZ finder but I have found that the Leica finder is more accurate.
Hi,
Probably true but I only know about pre-war ones and the Ukrainian made stuff.
Having said that, I wonder why people worry about VF accuracy given the amount of cropping that is done with film. Slides lose a bit all around the frame, 5" x 7" crops the sides by half an inch and so on. I can't imagine all the film users on this forum getting 4" x 6" done as the aspect ratio is correct and no one mentions 8" x 12" which is also 3:2. Most mention 8" x 10" as their large prints and that crops a good bit (2 inches) off the sides too.
I guess that will be seen as pedantic but I look for the weakest point in things that have several processes done (like film use) and the KMZ finder fits into my specification of more than adequate film camera stuff, meaning within spec. as we say...
Regards, David
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
Yesterday I was reading this page regarding some lenses in Kiev/Contax mount,
http://kiev4.narod.ru/tutorial/kiev4_e.html
There is a table on the page showing resolutions and stuff, including J-11.
http://kiev4.narod.ru/tutorial/kiev4_e.html
There is a table on the page showing resolutions and stuff, including J-11.
fer_fdi
Well-known
I have a very clean m39 1960 Kazan Jupiter-11 and love it.
Sharp and sweet at the same time (Sonnar). Very nice OOF. Nice colors also.
Sharp and sweet at the same time (Sonnar). Very nice OOF. Nice colors also.
ARCHIVIST
Well-known
Thanks for all the replies and info/opinions.
Very much appreciated.
Cheers
Peter
Very much appreciated.
Cheers
Peter
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
I vote for the Canon 135mm
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.