Kindly Rate My New J-3

[ruben]

My first J-3 has arrived and I feel somewhat emotional. I will thank you if you could rate its quality. All the pictures but one have been shot at f/1.5, and mostly at very short distances around 1,5meter or closer (short distance is part and parcel of the toughest lens test). The single shot at middle apperture is the first.

In order to help you I can add the following info:

- Film is Tmax 100 somewhat overdeveloped (adding unnecessary grain) due to problems of low temperatures here, leading me to higher than desired dev temperature and mental compensation in shortening time. (= "Bardak", in our local sleng)

- Scanner: Epson 2450

- You may notice here and there some misfocusing. So pick those you see correctly focused.

- All the pictures have been cropped. The last one, extremely cropped.

If you notice there is a reason for which you cannot rate, kindly inform me. Kindly put aside compositional likes or dislikes, as I have to decide if this lens is a "keeper", or I have to start discussing with the seller ($125) .

Thank you indeed for your help.
Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ruben]

Picture No-1 - Middle Apperture

 

[ruben]

Picture No-2

 

[ruben]

Picture No-3

 

[ruben]

Picture No-4

 

[Keith]

Hi Ruben,

I have rated it good ... I haven't used my own J3 for a long time but I seem to remember it being sharper than I expected when I got it!

I love 'those eyes' in pic 2 ... such emotion!

Cheers ... Keith.

 

[ruben]

Picture No-5

 

[ruben]

Picture No-6

 

[ruben]

Picture No-7

 

[rxmd]

Looks fine to me.

#1 suffers from development. So does #2.
In #2 and #4 it would be helpful to know if focus is where you wanted it to be.
#6 is out of focus. Difficult to say something on that one.
#8 looks fine. It would be easier to say something if one knew where you had focused and how extreme the crop was.

All in all it looks OK. For saying whether it is great or not one would need better scans and a film without too much development problems.

 

[ruben]

Looks fine to me.

#1 suffers from development. So does #2.
In #2 and #4 it would be helpful to know if focus is where you wanted it to be.
#6 is out of focus. Difficult to say something on that one.
#8 looks fine. It would be easier to say something if one knew where you had focused and how extreme the crop was.

All in all it looks OK. For saying whether it is great or not one would need better scans and a film without too much development problems.

Hi Philipp,
I agree with most of your points.
As for your questions, #2, focus was obviously on the girl face, #4 on the baby face.
#6 I will try to replace it for a better one. #8 I will attach besides the full frame pic. At #8 I focused for the whole bunch as it was the best I could. Nevertheless take into account that the issue of where I have focused is of lesser importance, since it points to the camera rangefinder accuracy - not to the lens sharpness.
Development was indeed quite problematic. Now I am going to scan the full frame of #8.

Thank you for your comments,
Ruben.

 

[rxmd]

Nevertheless take into account that the issue of where I have focused is of lesser importance, since it points to the camera rangefinder accuracy - not to the lens sharpness.

Er, yes. I was just asking since the single most criticised issue of the J-3s is the focusing accuracy wide open. However I remember that you are probably using a Kiev anyway where this seems to be less problematic.

 

[xayraa33]

The photos look good Ruben, although Max's old 1971 J-3 seemed to produce a crisper image.
in a perfect world Max should have never sold that one.

 

[Ducky]

the lens is excellent. Sharp and with good definition. With such a shallow DOF it is dificult to define your focal point as already stated. I think #s 3 and 7 show the quality of the lens with a clearly defined focal point.
Nice shots, Ruben, I particularly like # 7.

 

[robbiechad]

Hi Ruben, Nice photos I would be more than happy with a lens that produces pics like those wide open, I would like to see some of the lens stopped down to see just how sharp it is, I would rate the lens as good.

 

[brachal]

Looks good to me. I would think that if you're really interested in assessing the quality of the lens you should do more scientific shooting in a "lab" type environment. I think these shots all look good, but, as others have pointed out, there are too many variables in the: focal point, processing, cropping, etc to make an authoritative assessment.

Personally I avoid doing this. If I like the pictures, it's a good lens. I don't WANT to know if my J-3 is backfocusing by 2.5 cm at f/1.5 and 1 meter. It would only depress me. I like the pictures I get from it, and that's good enough for me!

 

[varjag]

I didn't vote: some of the shots seem to suffer from motion blur, others from misfocusing, or combination of the two. It is best to give lens a try with static subject in daylight to have an idea how good it is.

 

[jolefler]

Nice pics, Ruben.

Nice pics, Ruben.

I have a J3 and seem to get very similar results, again not knowing where you focused while looking at the shot complicates matters. It seems to me that in my J3 usage the DOF is not centered on the focus point....I usually have more DOF behind the focus point than in front of it. Oh, I use mine on a Barnack...I think that matters. That's just subjective guessing, though.

 

[shadowfox]

Ruben, the pictures look a bit soft to me also. I have pictures from J8 (also Contax mount) that is sharper than those, but then again the J8 can't go to f1.5.

If you're like me, I find that doing lens tests is very annoying, but maybe spending about 12 frames doing a tripod portrait session with those subjects by a window, and bracket both for focus and aperture, will tell you definitely if the lens has problems or not. Tripod being the key here.

 

[ruben]

Hi Pitxu, Bill and Eugene,

I agree with you, and before I got the lens I was thinking about making a test wide open of all Jupiters and Helios I have, tripod mounted and static subject.

First I confess I feel lazy. There is such a snow and cold now outside that I don't know what to do in order to warm my home more, so I am eating and eating.

However, there is another point of view, perhaps, to judge this pics here. These will be very much the kind of shots I will be submitting to the gallery, in their optical aspect. I will be photographing mooving people like here, and under some time pressure, and misfocusing sometimes. I purchased the J-3 to shoot at f.1,5 like I have done here.

So perhaps untill the day I make the mother of all tests (and I will), you can or cannot tell me if the lens is to be kept or start negotiations with the seller for return.

As for the full frame negs, I tried several times, but it seems to me that perhaps there is a quota alocated to each member among the new changes, and I may have filled that quota - RFF software doesn't allow me any single image more to this thread.

The average level of cropping can be estimated around some 70%.

So instead of participating in the poll you could tell me: a) Keep the lens b) Return the lens, or c) The pictures provided here are not enough to judge even a) or b)

Cheers,
Ruben