OK, this is totally not fair

dexdog

dexdog

Veteran
Local time
4:03 PM
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
3,575
but I am gonna post it anyways. Two lenses, a 1950 Jupiter 3 with CZJ 272 series optics, and a Jupiter 3+ circa 2016. Which is which? The 1950 lens was overhauled by Skyllaney in 2023. Sony a7III, both lenses have a tiffen UV filter, camera setting of natural (no color boosting), straight outta camera jpeg, similar histograms. First at f1.5. Lenses render very similar images, don't think I would be able to do any better than guessing after stopping down to f2.8 and smaller. Point of focus was the highest flower on the stalk. There is a breeze in my neighborhood, the flower in the third pic is sharp, but a leaf to the right and flower on the left moved a bit during exposure, so bear that in mnd, or just ignore that set.




 
Last edited:
Yeah, feel free to ignore second pair, or ignore this thread entirely. I am pretty sure some find theses type of posts obnoxious
 
At the risk of losing my reputation... and without being able to access the linked images with higher resolution...

The first image appears to cover more area, indicating a shorter focal length. That favors for the J3+. The first image also has slightly higher contrast, possible due to multicoated optics. Also J-3+.

Second image -even at this resolution- seems sharper corner-to-corner, indicates the 1950 J-3 with Zeiss optics.
 
dexdog said:
I do not own a leica lens. :p
Click to expand...
I used to have a Summitar, collapsible Summicron and Summarit. The Summicron was one of the yellow thorium lenses, sold for a ridiculous amount of money. I only had these lenses because they were attached to camera bodies I wanted.
 
Last edited:
Back when I did my Helios 103 vs Summicron V4(?) V5(?) tests, the only Leica lens I owned at the time was a DR Summicron, which wouldn't fit on my M9. And I really wanted to pit a $12 FSU lens against a nearly new Leica lens which cost more than my car. I borrowed the Summicron from a friend for my testing.
Phil
 
The lack of high resolution pics is the biggest reason that this is unfair. I was trying to get images at one meter, used the distance scale on each lens and adjusted where I held the camera to get there, not very much at all. I did not use the 0.7 meter close focus on J3+
 
Bertele built a workhorse. The Sonnars were good back in the 30's and they still are. The Russians in the FSU built the Jupiter clones which sometimes succeeded in being quite wonderful. QC was shaky and production goals had to be met. My point is that for one lens to have lasted this long and still stand up to what is being designed and made today is pretty remarkable. It's the old adage of, "Do it right the first time and you will only have to do it once."

I have a few, starting with LTM Jupiters because they were good and they were cheap. I grew into some wonderful Sonnars. I have some other nice lenses but the Sonnars can always be counted on. Bertele's workhorse.
 
boojum said:
Bertele built a workhorse. The Sonnars were good back in the 30's and they still are. The Russians in the FSU built the Jupiter clones which sometimes succeeded in being quite wonderful. QC was shaky and production goals had to be met. My point is that for one lens to have lasted this long and still stand up to what is being designed and made today is pretty remarkable. It's the old adage of, "Do it right the first time and you will only have to do it once."

I have a few, starting with LTM Jupiters because they were good and they were cheap. I grew into some wonderful Sonnars. I have some other nice lenses but the Sonnars can always be counted on. Bertele's workhorse.
Click to expand...
I have more J3s than Sonnars, mostly because they are usually cheaper, and were a LOT cheaper back in 2010 and earlier. I would buy the Skyllaney version of the Sonnar if they ever produce the damn thing.;)
 
Phil_F_NM said:
Back when I did my Helios 103 vs Summicron V4(?) V5(?) tests, the only Leica lens I owned at the time was a DR Summicron, which wouldn't fit on my M9. And I really wanted to pit a $12 FSU lens against a nearly new Leica lens which cost more than my car. I borrowed the Summicron from a friend for my testing.
Phil
Click to expand...

It was the v3 Summicron. The v4 and v5 both have much higher contrast. I have screenshots of your test saved somewhere.
 
dexdog said:
I have more J3s than Sonnars, mostly because they are usually cheaper, and were a LOT cheaper back in 2010 and earlier. I would buy the Skyllaney version of the Sonnar if they ever produce the damn thing.;)
Click to expand...

I have picked up Jupiters all for around US$100. That is a good price for a lens. I have had very good luck with folks on eBay. And my '57 J8 is really nice with that famous Sonnar 3D modeling. And it does color well, too. The SBS, yeah, great lens. If I did not already have one I would be shopping for one when and if they were re-issued. I was so-so on them until I looked at Skyllaney's posted color shots. That convinced me his SBS saw things nicely, in a way I liked. And that good luck that just seems to follow me around got me the lens. I can't tell you all of the good luck I have had. But trust me when I tell you that if life were fair I'd be dead. I am lucky instead.
 
Your photos are in no way, as you may believe, "obnoxious". Unexciting, maybe.

A little judicious editing and you could have some truly excellent images. I would crop the living daylights out of them, maybe darken them a little, play with highlights and shadows. Loosen your closeted creativity!

As for the rest, well. Home repairing photo gear requires skills I don't have, so I avoid it.

Unfortunately in the past I've bought gear (almost always on Ebay, which is significant so I will stick out my nose and say it) home-repaired by would-be tinkerers who stuffed up something in the job and then flogged off the item. All had to be returned as unworkable and on at least two occasions I had hassles and even battles with the sellers over refunds. I won in both cases but dealing with the customer service zombies at Ebay wasn't worth the bother.

I now buy my gear from reputable retail shops with reasonable guarantees.

From what I see in this thread when the work is done properly the results can be truly good. So there is hope for you snap shooters and the do-it-yourself addicts. For the former RFF is chokkers with good advice so I need not say any more. For the latter all will usually turn out good if you know your tools and what you are doing and have the sense to look up what there is on repairing the particular item, usually on YouTube. Even then, caution and a light hand with the screwdrivers and the wrenches are advised.

Sermon ended...
 
Last edited:
My Turn.

One is a Jupiter-3+, wide-open.
And the other is a 1943 LTM 5cm F1.5 Sonnar that I completely disassembled, repaired, cleaned, lubed, and adjusted on my Kitchen Table...





Click for full resolution, which also gives away the answer...
 
Sonnar Brian said:
My Turn.

One is a Jupiter-3+, wide-open.
And the other is a 1943 LTM 5cm F1.5 Sonnar that I completely disassembled, repaired, cleaned, lubed, and adjusted on my Kitchen Table...





Click for full resolution, which also gives away the answer...
Click to expand...

I do not know which is which but I like the second better.
 
Another pair, both at F1.5. On the M9, tripod mounted. I bought a Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.5 and the ZK Sonnar 5cm F1.5, original LTM out the same day.





The 1943 Sonnar- the middle triplet was not properly seated when I received it. That took me a while to figure out- I would shim it, test it, then it would lose focus. Maybe why the optics were so clean. It's a 272xxxx series. In my opinion, some of the best ever made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom