Jupiter 12 and Minolta CLE

While I've never owned a Minolta CLE, I believe it has a swing-out meter sensor and thus would not work with the Jupiter-12 which has a very deep rear element.

A better choice would be the 35mm Summicrom, Summaron or Elmar.... in that order. Or, perhaps one of the faster Canon lenses or the new CV wide angles.

Walker
 
Thanks Walker, but it's the CL that has the swing-out meter. I think I might be answering my own question here when I say that the CLE's meter reads the light off of a pattern on the shutter curtain. Hmmm, this lens might block the meter.

Keith
 
Right, Keith... The CL and M5 have related metering stalks that stick up behind the lens. but the CLE's meter cell is in the base of the mount area reading light reflected off the pattern of white dots on the shutter curtain. It also reads the light off the film during the exposure and adjusts the shutter or quenches the flash as required in real time. Pretty tricky, but it's possible the J12's rear element could "shade" the meter cell or even physically interfere with internal baffling and such. I have a CLE, but my J12 is in Kiev mount so I can't give it a try. Certainly no problem with the CV 25mm lens.
 
Thanks Doug, I answered my own question and you confirmed it. The rear of the Jupiter will block the meter from taking a reading. Now that I have the camera in front of me, I can see that it will. I was looking for a cheap mid-range lens for this camera. Something that I will only occaisionally use.

Yes, the 25 CV works fine, as does the 12 CV.

Cheers,

Keith
 
Keith if the only difficulty is the rear of the lens interfering with correct metering, that's a trivial problem, if I may characterize it that way! The camera works fine with manual control of shutter speeds, so this should not be a show-stopper, especially if only for occasional use. AE is handy, but not essential...
 
I have a jupiter 12 and CLE. You can use it on CLE in auto mode, just set your exposure compensation. On mine I set it to -1.5 and pictures came out lovely.
 
I find the metering varies with focus: i.e. I get higher readings (more light through to the meter) with closer focus. For reason I don't use my J12 on the CLE. It can be done, but I just don't feel confident.
 
the rear element moves inwards when focusing farther, I guess that's why...

I guess one could measure the difference in reading at close focus distances and at infinity and apply more or less compensation accordingly.
mothertrucker said -1.5, no idea if that will work better at closer or farther distances;
the glass mushroom will be more/less in the way of the metering cell...
 
Minolta CLE exposure compensation for Jupiter-12

Minolta CLE exposure compensation for Jupiter-12

.

I measured the variation in metering by watching how it changes when focusing, as the rear element moves backwards while you focus towards infinity.
Using a constant light source, I took an initial reading with my Summicron-C at f2.8. Then, to get the same reading with the Jupiter-12 set at 1m (and f2.8) I had to apply -1/2 stop (minus half stop exp. comp.)
I moved focus slowly towards infinity to see where/how much it changed while monitoring finder LEDs.

From my initial observations it looks like compensation should be aprox:
-1/2 stop from 1m to 2m
-1 stop from 2m to 4m
-1.5 stop from 4m to infinity.

Developed film will tell, but this are my initial observations just by watching the finder LEDs react to focus.
mothertrucker said to be successful applying always a -1.5 stop compensation when using this lens.

Hope this helps. * Please report your experiences *

.
 
It makes sense that the exposure compensation could be different for different focus distances. When I decided on -1.5 stops, what I had done was compared the selected shutter speed of the CLE w/ jupiter 12 to another camera (I think it was my OM1).

When I got the shutter speed and aperture that matched at that ISO, I just stuck with that exposure compensation. I didn't check the exposure compensation at various distances though - good call fer_fdi and scrambler.

Maybe -1 stop would be the best - I don't have a CLE anymore though so I can't test it.
 
just uploaded 3 photographs to my RFF gallery of a CLE test roll with 1986 LZOS Jupiter-12 on Portra 160.

The one of the table has a -1 compensation and was shot at min focus distance or very near.
The one of the flare dog has -1 comp. Distance around 3 meters I'd say.
The buildings night shot should be -1.5 comp.

Next roll I'll shoot without compensation and see.


here is the first one, -1 stop compensation; I'd say it's within correct exposure. Overcast outside:

med_U51586I1458054328.SEQ.0.jpg
 
New test with no compensation applied on camera (1986 LZOS J-12, at f2.8, Lomo 100)

Shot at min. focus distance (1 meter) so it has an implicit "over-exposure" of aprox. +half stop:


med_U51586I1462396495.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Your J12 seems much better than what I had. Mine was a dog of a lens, worst lens I mounted on my Leica ever
 
sad to read that Kay, my 80s LZOS is great
and my 50s KMZ is great too and draws a bit different (the problem is missfocus)
Love this lens from any era and will try to repair the KMZ since it is very special to my eyes

also, the 80s one fits my digital X-E1 and produces very very good images
 
I hate the J12s. I got two of them, a late black and an earlier silver. They work perfectly and produce great photos on my Zorki, but none of them works properly with a voigtlander M to L39 adapter on my Leica M4-P. It is as if the back of the lens cannot drive the rangefinder CAM all the way from near to infinity.
(and I cannot afford wasting money on one more J12).
 
papaki said:
I hate the J12s. I got two of them, a late black and an earlier silver. They work perfectly and produce great photos on my Zorki, but none of them works properly with a voigtlander M to L39 adapter on my Leica M4-P. It is as if the back of the lens cannot drive the rangefinder CAM all the way from near to infinity.
(and I cannot afford wasting money on one more J12).
Click to expand...

Hi,

You should hate the people who spread rumours on the internet about these lenses. Jupiters should work (like yours do) on the camera bodies they were designed around but I don't think the makers (until recently with the new, modern one) ever claimed they would work on Leicas etc.

FWIW, it worries me that good, sensible cameras and lenses are being ruined forever because of the internet rumour mill. People should see FED and Zorki as makes of good, cheap RF's that are ideal for taking pictures and learning the craft the old fashioned way and nothing else but they won 't all the time these myths are being spread.

Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom