Jupiter 3 question

The little lady does not deserve to be treated thus, Raid. Just think. Where would your lens tests be without her? I remember a similar mixed-light portrait I did some years back. Ultimately the easiest way out was to make it monochrome.

Marsopa, is the focus in the B&W picture on the nearest pillar (to the left)?

My search is probably over. Oleg K. just got a battered J-3 which, he says, appears to have been removed from a camera body by brute force. He's promised to do whatever is needed and then send it to me. Just $40 including shipping. He knows I don't give a damn what it looks like.
 
payasam said:
The little lady does not deserve to be treated thus, Raid. Just think. Where would your lens tests be without her? I remember a similar mixed-light portrait I did some years back. Ultimately the easiest way out was to make it monochrome.

Marsopa, is the focus in the B&W picture on the nearest pillar (to the left)?

My search is probably over. Oleg K. just got a battered J-3 which, he says, appears to have been removed from a camera body by brute force. He's promised to do whatever is needed and then send it to me. Just $40 including shipping. He knows I don't give a damn what it looks like.
Click to expand...


payasam,

I modified the colors a little in Dana's photo.
Good luck with the "new" lens.
How is Oleg contacted?

Raid
 

Attachments

  • J-3.JPG
    J-3.JPG
    58 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Hi payasam,

can you edit and reformat that in such a way to make it less digestible for address-harvesting spam bots? I guess it would be suboptimal if Oleg's address was getting spammed because of a posting on RFF.

Philipp
 
It's not my sharpest lens, but I can't resist the smoothness of the J3. The Fed 50 and the J3 are frequently my 2-lens kit. Here's a quick untouched wide open comparo, ISO 800 (my J3 is sweenified, an '84 module in a '57 mount)...

815532608_706564711b.jpg


815532586_5994b58533.jpg
 
Last edited:
You're welcome, Raid. Thanks for the examples, Steve.

Looks as if my guess was correct after all: that the J-3 at f/2 or smaller is a decent performer, while f/1.5 should be used for "special effects" unless the extra speed is crucial.
 
payasam said:
You're welcome, Raid. Thanks for the examples, Steve.

Looks as if my guess was correct after all: that the J-3 at f/2 or smaller is a decent performer, while f/1.5 should be used for "special effects" unless the extra speed is crucial.
Click to expand...

that's exactly the value of the J-3/Sonnar 1.5, IMHO 🙂
 
I find my J-3 fairly usable at widest aperture in general, but that might be just me.
 
It's main problem is flare from strong light sources in the frame; hard to expect otherwise from early 1930s design though. In terms of pictorial quality (when I manage to hold my hand steady) I found it adequate, although what is fine for me might be not for someone else.

One of the nice things about 1.5 Sonnar design is that, while it can never match the definition of modern Planar derivatives, the undercorrected spherical abberation gives it a bit of extra DOF (yes, it really does) at widest opening. Again, I often find that handy in low light situations.

main.php


main.php
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Adjusting focus on a new Jupiter-3+
Replies
18
Views
1K
Alizarinus
A
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
3
Views
242
NIKON KIU
NIKON KIU
T
Jupiter 3
Replies
19
Views
2K
Sonnar Brian
Sonnar Brian
J
  • Article Article
A Breed Apart: Leaf shutter 35s wth lenses faster than f/1.7!Two are rare, two aren’t, and two are easy to find and quite affordable!
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Camera Guy Orlando
C
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
Timmyjoe
Timmyjoe
Back
Top Bottom