Jupiter 8 v Summicron

[Peter_Jones]

Unscientific test 🙄

Consecutive shots, same aperture/exposure/lighting. One is a Jupiter 8 50mm f/2 , one is a Leica Summicron 50mm f/2.

Guess which is which ? (Excuse poor cheapo lab scans, it's much more obvious in the negs)

Lens "A"

Lens "B"

Both were f/8, so why the difference in DOF and shadow detail ?

 

[estenh]

Is this mounted on a FSU camera or a Leica? Because it looks like the focus is off on one of them. Maybe?

 

[Mikael.N]

I guess A is Jupiter lower contrast

 

[Benjamin]

Interesting test, but as stated above it's not the depth of field that is different it's just that some Jupiter lenses focus in the 'wrong' place. I guess it's probably due to poor tolerances.

Do I get any prizes for guessing that the image above is the Jupiter 8?

Benjamin

 

[Kozhe]

My Jupiter has a lot of contrast so I vote B is the J8 but... but A has a bit more of a yellowish tone and that´s pretty common with russian glasses as far as I have seen. Sky color on B looks a lot more like with my Elmar 2.8

Also "A" looks pretty bad imho. Is this lens in good shape, any scratches or marks in the glasses?

 

[Peter_Jones]

The scans are a poor representation. I'll try to do a better scan.

Both lenses are in good shape (appearance-wise anyway), the Leica lens is spotless. Both were mounted on a Bessa R2 (J8 with adaptor) and both fitted with hood but no filters.

 

[Svitantti]

I just had some problems focusing a J-3 on Bessa R2 with an adapter of course. I think the problem was the adapter: the focus mark didn't align straight up... Changed the adapter and now it looks better, though I'm not still very sure about the correct focus.

 

[Peter_Jones]

Lens "B" is the Jupiter ! - not what I expected, however one quick rough comparison doesn't condemn it. Anything could have happened, possibly reflections from a passing vehicle illuminated the statue ? I'm staying open-minded about it.

(I think I should borrow the lens again and do a better test with in-date film in a more scientific manner) 😉

 

[blazejs]

Thank you for this test! This might save me lots of money I planned to save for Leica lens 🙂

 

[Peter_Jones]

There are plenty of very good examples of Summicron and other Leica lenses in the gallery, I wouldn't judge a lens just by my quick grab-shot comparison. I'm reserving judgement on this until I can borrow it again 🙂

 

[Nikon Bob]

It is a good idea to stay open minded about Russian lenses. If you can get a good example of just about any of them and they can be focused properly the results are nothing to sneer at. There might be a more of a visible difference on big enlargements though. Can't say I have ever been too disappointed with the Russian glass that I have tried and for the price what can you say.

Bob

 

[blazejs]

I'm waiting for a Jupiter 3 in Kiev mount from 1951 to arrive soon. I really like Sonnar type lenses.

 

[yanidel]

I own both and really they are not comparable. They really serve two different purposes :
- portrait with a soft effect for the Jupiter 8 af F2.
- landscapes or anything for detail, sharpness and contrast for the Summicron.
The summicron is significantly sharper at all apertures IMO. My J8 back focuses a bit, but not big issue.
Now, it does not mean one is better than the other, they are just different which is why I keep both.

 

[Svitantti]

As the exposure or at least contrast seems different, the noise removal etc. can be different too, for automatic lab-scans. Also as many have said, focusing difference etc. or maybe even camera shake may cause these differences easily.

Still, I know russian lenses can be very good optically, even though their build quality wouldn't be up to the standards.