david.elliott
Well-known
Thanks for the followups on the color rendering question.
Seems like generally a more muted, less bold palate than one might get with the same film and another lens.
Seems like generally a more muted, less bold palate than one might get with the same film and another lens.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
Oh, sure. Quote one of the worst sentences I've ever written.
Let me try it again:The tabbed lenses are easier to use with gloves on which is nice,
considering where we live.
And I absolutely agree about using a hood with this lens.
Rob
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I have one that was given to me (an old chrome one) and one I got cheap on ebay (black version in beautiful condition). Problem is, both backfocus severely. Totally unusable. When I have a little extra $$ I'm going to send one of them to Fedka for focus calibration. I'd still like to use these, but I'd be afraid to buy another.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Physically, I like the early tabbed J-8 , with its non rotating front, but my sharpest ones turned out to be the late black ones with the all white numbers.
This is just the way things turned out for me and your own personal discovery, by going through a bunch of J-8s will be different.
This is just the way things turned out for me and your own personal discovery, by going through a bunch of J-8s will be different.
QUAsit
Established
I mean that I saw heck a lot of nice J8 from 50-60-70-80s and a pile of absolutely rubbish samples from 50-60-70-80s.
I can give you a guideline just like: the best of best J8 I`ve seen is 1954 J8 from Zorki-3. And J8 of 1957 from Kiev... and friend of mine have stellar black J8 of late 80s. And plently of people will say that non-tabbed silver J8s are great. Though I met only mediocre and bad lenses from that group.
raid
Dad Photographer
A J-8 makes a good shell for a Sonnar 5cm 2.0. This is its main purpose, isn't it? :angel:
Ouch.
Actually, my favorite J-8 is a 1955 in tabbed mount and it is quite good. And collimated for use wide-open and close-up.
I still prefer J-3's, and just ran a test roll with a 1953 KMZ after rebuilding it. My '55 and '56 KMZ are quite good. One for the COntax, one for the Nikon RF. And the '53 for LTM.
Actually, my favorite J-8 is a 1955 in tabbed mount and it is quite good. And collimated for use wide-open and close-up.
I still prefer J-3's, and just ran a test roll with a 1953 KMZ after rebuilding it. My '55 and '56 KMZ are quite good. One for the COntax, one for the Nikon RF. And the '53 for LTM.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Trouble is; if someone pays a lot of money for an old lens, then they see it as a valuable antique and don't mind spending a lot of money on it. But if they pick it up for pennies they see it as an old secondhand lens and are expecting it to fail.
I've a lot of old cameras and lenses and I see Leica Elmars that are badly damaged by idiots who think they can easily be CLA'd without even using the right sized screwdriver and I see the same in the FSU ones. (Sometimes I think they use the breadknife instead if a screwdriver... ) When restored both are good lenses. But because the labour is what you are paying for both cost about the same to work on: people just don't see why they should pay the same for a £3 camera as a £300 one.
Leicas often get neglected as they are/were old fashioned and (2) because people expect them to last forever without any attention...
Both, imo, need overhauling by someone who knows what they are doing and has the right tools and equipment to deal with whatever may be wrong. After all the things can't have spend the last 40, 50, 60 or even 70 years wrapped in cotton wool.
As for the lubrication, I've spent a lot of money on a Leica body having the dried up grease and oil removed and the internal rust dealt with and so on. And I've FSU cameras that cost a pittance (UK £10 or US $15 or so) and which were brilliant.
So it's all a matter of luck.
As for J-8's, my experience of the black one is that it's a nice lens and I use it on the Leica M2 and the Fed 2. You can get a vented lens hood made for Leicas that fits and, of course, will improve things no end. My one is Chinese and the label say "For Leica 40,5mm".
I said "of course" as any lens will be improved with a lens hood and using one without is a good way of spoiling a lot of pictures (but they blame the lens and not their technique).
BTW, whatever you do, don't squirt thin oil into lenses to free the dried up grease because oil can get on the coating and that will destroy the lens.
Also FSU owners have a reputation for selling off their rubbish and homemade repairs, when a proper repair would be a better idea . (There's a lot of repairs that can be done in seconds with the right knowedge and tools but without them you are asking for trouble.)
OK rant over.
Regards, David
I've a lot of old cameras and lenses and I see Leica Elmars that are badly damaged by idiots who think they can easily be CLA'd without even using the right sized screwdriver and I see the same in the FSU ones. (Sometimes I think they use the breadknife instead if a screwdriver... ) When restored both are good lenses. But because the labour is what you are paying for both cost about the same to work on: people just don't see why they should pay the same for a £3 camera as a £300 one.
Leicas often get neglected as they are/were old fashioned and (2) because people expect them to last forever without any attention...
Both, imo, need overhauling by someone who knows what they are doing and has the right tools and equipment to deal with whatever may be wrong. After all the things can't have spend the last 40, 50, 60 or even 70 years wrapped in cotton wool.
As for the lubrication, I've spent a lot of money on a Leica body having the dried up grease and oil removed and the internal rust dealt with and so on. And I've FSU cameras that cost a pittance (UK £10 or US $15 or so) and which were brilliant.
So it's all a matter of luck.
As for J-8's, my experience of the black one is that it's a nice lens and I use it on the Leica M2 and the Fed 2. You can get a vented lens hood made for Leicas that fits and, of course, will improve things no end. My one is Chinese and the label say "For Leica 40,5mm".
I said "of course" as any lens will be improved with a lens hood and using one without is a good way of spoiling a lot of pictures (but they blame the lens and not their technique).
BTW, whatever you do, don't squirt thin oil into lenses to free the dried up grease because oil can get on the coating and that will destroy the lens.
Also FSU owners have a reputation for selling off their rubbish and homemade repairs, when a proper repair would be a better idea . (There's a lot of repairs that can be done in seconds with the right knowedge and tools but without them you are asking for trouble.)
OK rant over.
Regards, David