Leica LTM Leica IIIa - which lens to buy? Jupiter-8?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
6x7

6x7

Member
Local time
6:38 PM
Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
30
I bought a IIIa with a Summar a few years ago. The Summar was heavily scratched so I sold it. Now I am looking for a replacement. I had a Nokton 1.5/50 but the finder blockage was annoying. A Color Skopar 2.5 50 would be nice but I cannot find one. What lens would you recommend? How is the finder blockage with a Jupiter-8?
 
How much speed do you need? The obvious choice here is an Elmar 50/3.5, which is a perfect fit and makes the camera that much more pocketable, but it is slow. Anything larger is going to have some sort of finder blockage. The other question is whether or not you have considered an external finder. A SBOOI (or equivalent) makes these cameras much easier to use quickly, and eliminates the finder blockage issue.
 
If you can get one, another Summar would be great. Check the Summar thread to see what that lens can do. There's no significant finder blockage and, if you like funky, there's a special lens hood. A Summar would also be age-appropriate for that camera.
 
Dralowid said:
A SBOOI will now cost as much as a useable lens...
Click to expand...

+1.

And protective filter, plus hood. To avoid to have another lens for sale due to scratches.

And then add Jupiter-8 black, it is easier to re-shim and could be one from nineties.
 
splitimageview said:
Depends on what the definition of 'usable' is. :) Sure, there are cheap LTM lenses, but there is a reason they are cheap... :)

SBOOI are not all that expensive, but they are so nice to use.
Click to expand...

I went from Summar, Summarit, Summitar to all 50 Crons including current formula.
I also re-shimmed and used many FSU 50mm ltm lenses.
The only reason FSU lenses are cheap is because people lazy or incapable.
My re-shimmed, re-lubed, optically still clear from day one J-3 is just as good as huge and heavy Summarit with chalk soft glass which is welcoming fungus.
Here is absolutely nothing wrong with J-8. It has glass which doesn't fogs, separate, fungus and else which all Canon, Leitz ltms are famous for.
 
I can't compare it to any Leica lenses but my J-8 from the 70s is clear like a new lens, too. Shimming it wasn't very hard and it makes nice pictures with that Sonnar look.
 
A collapsible I-22 or I-50 lens would be my choice.

I got a nice preforming I -22 on my Leica III right now and it is as good as my 50mm Elmar on my other Leica.
 
"A collapsible I-22 or I-50 lens would be my choice."

For testing purposes, I mounted my late model I-50 on my A7II and was really surprised/pleased with the image quality. It is now mounted on my IIIf.
 
Gerry M said:
"A collapsible I-22 or I-50 lens would be my choice."

For testing purposes, I mounted my late model I-50 on my A7II and was really surprised/pleased with the image quality. It is now mounted on my IIIf.
Click to expand...

If you get a good FSU lens...the quality of photos it produces is equal to the best of the best from Germany or Japan.

The bonus of the collapseable I-22 or I-50 lens is that they are as quality made mechanically as any 50mm Elmar lens.
 
xayraa33 said:
If you get a good FSU lens...the quality of photos it produces is equal to the best of the best from Germany or Japan.

The bonus of the collapseable I-22 or I-50 lens is that they are as quality made mechanically as any 50mm Elmar lens.
Click to expand...

I've run comparison tests with eight different I-22's and three different Elmars (all coated) shooting newspaper targets at one meter. The camera, a IIc, was on a tripod and the lenses were all at f3.5.

The I-22's were OK performers but none of the FSU lenses was a sharp as any of the Elmars. I agree that the mechanical construction of the FSU lenses was equal to that of the Elmars.

If you choose to go with a FSU collapsible, best to close it down a couple of stops.
 
An interesting lens to consider is the Taylor Taylor Hobson T 2 (f2) 2” Amotal. This lens was made for the Bell and Howell Foton about 1948 but many remained unused after production of the Foton, and were converted to LTM mount. It’s a 6 element Coated lens built to Cine quality. To see How the images look from this lens check Mike Eckman’s review of my Foton. You’ll be highly impressed what the TTH Amotal does.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I went from Summar, Summarit, Summitar to all 50 Crons including current formula.
I also re-shimmed and used many FSU 50mm ltm lenses.
The only reason FSU lenses are cheap is because people lazy or incapable.
My re-shimmed, re-lubed, optically still clear from day one J-3 is just as good as huge and heavy Summarit with chalk soft glass which is welcoming fungus.
Here is absolutely nothing wrong with J-8. It has glass which doesn't fogs, separate, fungus and else which all Canon, Leitz ltms are famous for.
Click to expand...


It has been my experience (20 or so lenses, silver and black bodies both) that most J-8's don't require shimming; only ran into one that did.

Similarly, with four J-3's, three of the four required substantial shimming, the other one, the oldest, was spot on.

BTW, the J-8 makes a pretty good enlarger lens.
 
IIIg said:
I've run comparison tests with eight different I-22's and three different Elmars (all coated) shooting newspaper targets at one meter. The camera, a IIc, was on a tripod and the lenses were all at f3.5.

The I-22's were OK performers but none of the FSU lenses was a sharp as any of the Elmars. I agree that the mechanical construction of the FSU lenses was equal to that of the Elmars.

If you choose to go with a FSU collapsible, best to close it down a couple of stops.
Click to expand...

With FSU lenses you have to pick the best of the litter.

I got plenty of J-8 and Kiev J8m and I-22 lenses and some J-3 lenses, most came on the camera bodies.

Some are fantastic, most are average and a few are plain dogs.

I got J-8 lenses from Zorki 4 cameras that are the equal of any f2 Zeiss Sonnar, one beat up J8 old style in Kiev mount that is so good it is almost unbelievable

The dog J-8 lenses are just too soft and simply just unuseable.

I had better luck with the I-22 lenses, some are as good as an Elmar... the I-10 lenses are junk in what I experienced and the J-3 lenses are all different, some even better than my Zeiss Opton 50mm f1.5 Sonnar.....but the last made J-3 lenses in black finish are too soft at full bore and cannot be adjusted properly to work on the Leica standard.. unlike the older aluminium finish J-3 lenses.
 
I think the problem is that we are talking about lenses that are all secondhand and of varying ages and histories. F'instance a FED 10 could be nearly 85 years old and who knows what has happened to it in those years? Add in the problems caused by the cold war and the lenses come out of it well.

I don't know about the rest of you but I wouldn't expect a 10 year old car to be perfect and so on with anything else secondhand. I have even been quoted well over UKP 200 for a Leica lens to be sorted out...

No one has mentioned the Industar-61 (L/D) which I like and use from time to time on the M9, they are f/2.8 and that makes them a bit cheaper and so a bargain for what you get. I'm assuming bargains are being sought from the mention of the J-8 in the opening post. Here's a sample full frame and then a crop using the M9 and the Industar-61:-

Industar-61%20at%20f2.8-L.jpg


Industar-61%20at%20Centre-L.jpg


If you want Leitz glass and to match a IIIa, then the bargain is the Summitar; they come coated and uncoated depending on their age and were fitted new to IIIa's from the late 30's.


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