andrealed
Established
Hi, I'm looking for a j9 for my kiev:
- I've heard horrible stories about focusing problems.
- I've heard about contax mount was better than lsm in that sense
- I've heard black newer j9 (lykhtarino) were better too.
Is this the truth? Is a black lyhktarino a winning bet?
thank you
ciao
Andrea
- I've heard horrible stories about focusing problems.
- I've heard about contax mount was better than lsm in that sense
- I've heard black newer j9 (lykhtarino) were better too.
Is this the truth? Is a black lyhktarino a winning bet?
thank you
ciao
Andrea
rolleistef
Well-known
Well, newer lenses are better optically talking because they're multicoated, and the crafmanship is better than back in the USSR days.
But if you find a good old 1950s lens, you can have a good surprise. But it depends on whether you want an "old fashioned" looking lens or not.
For the contax mount : they were made in different plants. Kiev mount production was not as big as LTM one, hence the quality was slightly better.
Focusing problems occur on every lenses. But as there are not as many J9 as J8 or J12, you have chance to get a bad lens. But the most of the time older is better. Avoid the 1960s-1980s (I know it's a lot) and pray. That's all I can say!!
Otherwise, try a 2/85 Zeiss Sonnar
(post war and coated of course).
good luck!
But if you find a good old 1950s lens, you can have a good surprise. But it depends on whether you want an "old fashioned" looking lens or not.
For the contax mount : they were made in different plants. Kiev mount production was not as big as LTM one, hence the quality was slightly better.
Focusing problems occur on every lenses. But as there are not as many J9 as J8 or J12, you have chance to get a bad lens. But the most of the time older is better. Avoid the 1960s-1980s (I know it's a lot) and pray. That's all I can say!!
Otherwise, try a 2/85 Zeiss Sonnar
(post war and coated of course).good luck!
Spyderman
Well-known
1: yes, but only if someone had tinkered with the lens - they are quite complicated internally
2: don't know, but I guess the Contax/Kiev mount has less helicals, since the RF-actuating helical is in the camera body
3: I guess it depends more on the state of particular lens, than on production date
I have a black one, made by LZOS (Lytkarino) and it's a great performer. But I CLAd the lens, and chcecked collimation before I started shooting with it.
2: don't know, but I guess the Contax/Kiev mount has less helicals, since the RF-actuating helical is in the camera body
3: I guess it depends more on the state of particular lens, than on production date
I have a black one, made by LZOS (Lytkarino) and it's a great performer. But I CLAd the lens, and chcecked collimation before I started shooting with it.
colyn
ישו משיח
My chrome 62 vintage J-9 arrived today and checks good on a ground glass at the film plane at all focus points with the rangefinder.
Image looks sharp on the gg too..so hopefully it will be a good picture taker.
Image looks sharp on the gg too..so hopefully it will be a good picture taker.
ErnestoJL
Well-known
J9 is a copy of the CZ Sonnar 2/85mm made both prewar (uncoated) and post war (coated) by CZ, plus some versions made in the former DDR.
The original design has a helical inside the lens barrel, which drives the body mounted helical which drives the RF assy. Then the only way why RF con go wrong is if the lens was badly assembled, or the body mechanism is badly adjusted.
The RF of the Contax/Kiev is quite complex as only 50 mm lenses are focused from the body, while any other lens should be focused from the lens helix.
Ernesto
The original design has a helical inside the lens barrel, which drives the body mounted helical which drives the RF assy. Then the only way why RF con go wrong is if the lens was badly assembled, or the body mechanism is badly adjusted.
The RF of the Contax/Kiev is quite complex as only 50 mm lenses are focused from the body, while any other lens should be focused from the lens helix.
Ernesto