"poor man's" fast 85mm lens (yet another Jupiter-9 thread!)

Hi,

My second nature is passion to do all kind of test comparison...This comparison was maybe a little too challenging (so many different lenses+my limited time ;-D)

However, because I spent so much time for these test shots, I have almost forced to show them for you my friends.lol!..So - I'm sorry, but enjoy!

Tested lenses:

• Jupiter-9 (85/2(
• Helios 44M (58/2)
• Pentax-A 50/2
• Panagor 55/3 macro (same than Vivitar 55/2.8)
• Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO DG
• and Pentax DA 18-55 WR just for comparison

All shots with K20D (+tripod, 2sec MLU), external flash used with stofen bouncer, but also some natural light from window.

These first sample pics are a collage, not maybe too easy to inspect, but perhaps more easy compare than 18 full size files ;-)

NOTE: My following posts will contain resized originals.

So, this white porcelain cow was my test subject:



Only cow's eye and this small PENTAX/Aikaarska text are 100% crop samples in next collage charts...

cheers,

Ari
--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

• Jupiter-9 (85/2(
• Helios 44M (58/2)
• Pentax-A 50/2
• Panagor 55/3 macro (same than Vivitar 55/2.8)
• Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO DG
• Pentax DA 18-55 WR just for comparison

All shots with K20D (+tripod, 2sec MLU), external flash used with stofen bouncer, but also some natural light from window.

Only cow's eye and this small PENTAX/Aikaarska text are 100% crop samples in charts...

First f/2 and f/2.8 apertures:



Then f/4, f/5.6:



NOTE: My following posts will contain resized originals.

C&C welcome,

Ari

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

Note: these are "almost" original frames, some cropping allowed - and of course resizing. Not much other PP. No extra sharpening.

Jupiter-9 - f/2:



Jupiter-9 - f/2.8:



Helios 58/2, f/2.8:



Helios 58/2, f/2:



Panagor 55/3, f/3:



Pentax-A 50/2, f/2.8:



Pentax-A 50/2, f/2:



Next: Last set - Resized originals at f/4 & f/5.6
--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

Okey, here comes my last comparison serie! Now f/4 and f/5.6 apertures...C&C welcome.

Jupiter-9, f/4:



Jupiter-9, f/5.6:



Pentax DA 18-55 WR "kit" at 55mm, f/5.6:



Helios 58/2, f/5.6:



Helios 58/2, f/4:



Panagor 55/3 macro, f/4:



Panagor 55/3 macro, f/5.6:



Pentax-A 50/2, f/5.6:



Pentax-A 50/2, f/4:



Sigma 70-300 APO DG at 93mm, f/4:



Sigma 70-300 APO DG at 93mm, f/5.6:



Happy shootings,

Ari

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

All shots with Jupiter-9 & trusty K20D:

1. f/2



2. f/2.8



3. f/2



4. f/2



5. f/2



comments welcome,

Ari

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

Thanks for the testing. That is a lot of work, well done.

Hi,

Liwei Sheng said:

Thanks for the testing. That is a lot of work, well done.

Click to expand...

Thank you for kindly words, Liwei ! Much appreciate ;-)

Happy shootings,

Ari

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

6. f/2.8



7. f/2.8



8. f/2 - my B&W conversion...



9. f/2.8 - it was rainy day....



10. Yep. I like autumn colours ;-D



I think Jupiter did these pretty well, or what you think ?

cheers,

Ari
--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

good review.
i suggest you also check Jupiter-21 and Jupiter-37x MC

Hi,

SkyShoot2 said:

good review.
i suggest you also check Jupiter-21 and Jupiter-37x MC

Click to expand...

You mean these 200/4 and 135/3.5 (jupiter-37A) lenses ?

Jupiter 135/3.5 I had some time ago, and it was quite neat little lens - not bad performer at all.

Never had Jupiter-21, but I'm sure it's not bad either! These Russian lenses are a great photograpic adventure indeed ;-D...And not very costly trip.

cheers,

Ari

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

also not bad was Jupiter-12(in fact best from Line, IMO).
be sure also check latest reincarnation, called "Rubinar", which still produced.

and you can order it directly from factory[most issues with used lens is conditions of lots] at
http://lzos.ru
for example there is Rubinar 10/1000
http://lzos.ru/internet-magazin/299

just $20 lens[without overseas delivery(you may need hire some postal services agency to transfer lots from Russia in case no overseash shipping)]. or find Russian LZO factory dealer, who's ship overseas[i don't know this well, because prefer buy(nearly anything)directly].

most USSR-designed lens[i mean consumer segment]was based on CZ-design from WWII era, like many others [surely more well-known]vendors.

sadly really inovative{and surprisingly breathtaking-performing] lens, designed in late 80'-early-90' still not begun producing yet[maybe someone invest in that ?]

i can assure in case of Russian lens, similar[as Chineese] productions cost presume [significally]better quality[with same attention to QC].

http://lzos.ru/optika-dlya-vas/rubinare-10-1000-photoobjective
just $800 for such lens is like STEAL

SkyShoot2 said:

also not bad was Jupiter-12(in fact best from Line, IMO).
be sure also check latest reincarnation, called "Rubinar", which still produced.

and you can order it directly from factory[most issues with used lens is conditions of lots] at
http://lzos.ru
for example there is Rubinar 10/1000
http://lzos.ru/internet-magazin/299

just $20 lens[without overseas delivery(you may need hire some postal services agency to transfer lots from Russia in case no overseash shipping)]. or find Russian LZO factory dealer, who's ship overseas[i don't know this well, because prefer buy(nearly anything)directly].

Click to expand...

--

• Ari Aikomus -

'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

--
Ted
-6 GMT



http://tlfaust.zenfolio.com

while manufacturer provide good quality/QC-made products

for example, few existed on marked is made with signinficantly more POOR quality, than similar lens lens, from same vendor, at similar prices.

p.s.
i missed [correct]prices.
actual one for 1000 is ~$800.
which is anyway like steal

5.6/500, 8/500, 4.6/300 also provide very consistet[over shooting distances and picture lens/area]picture quality/sharpness/resolution.
thats why they are so loved by astronomers, btw.

and as said before, Maxutov-Gerber lens, can perform DEADLY good, pictures, when manufactured with good quality/materials.

While I was searching for some specs on this lens, I stumbled on this old thread..

I did find what I was looking for with the 1st post...Thanks for that..

And I thought I would awaken this thread with a few photos from my 1953 Jupiter 9 (S#: 5300400) in a Kiev/Contax RF mount. (this lens was 1st produced in 1949 in the LTM mount, later in the Kiev RF and even later in the M42).

as stated, it has a large QC variance.

I bought it for use on my Olympus E-M5..

I am very pleased with Color and sharpness of my sample.

f/2 seems pretty sharp, and f/5.6...it shines....for a 60 year old lens that may or may not have Zeiss Glass in it. (the earlier did have Zeiss Glass in it, but I don't know the cut-off year when they started making their own glass elements).

Some samples.

f/2 (focus on right eye: viewers left eye)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

f/2.8 (focus on sign)



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

f/5.6 (Focus on small cut-off branch end in lower left area)



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

f/4 or f/5.6 (focus on viewers left, end of hand rail top/front)





Any Who...

if you get a good sample, it can be magical.

Pre 1965 may be the better ones as as internals and QC., The rule-of-thumb is that "The earlier the better -- in materials and workmanship. Any changes that where made through the years, where for making it faster and less cost, mostly. (First 2 numbers are the year made)



One more....

f/5.6 (focus on the Ice Falls)





--
Olympus OM-D E-M5 | Nikon FE
Too many lenses ;-D

DNG2 said:

While I was searching for some specs on this lens, I stumbled on this old thread..

I did find what I was looking for with the 1st post...Thanks for that..

And I thought I would awaken this thread with a few photos from my 1953 Jupiter 9 (S#: 5300400) in a Kiev/Contax RF mount. (this lens was 1st produced in 1949 in the LTM mount, later in the Kiev RF and even later in the M42).

as stated, it has a large QC variance.

I bought it for use on my Olympus E-M5..

I am very pleased with Color and sharpness of my sample.

f/2 seems pretty sharp, and f/5.6...it shines....for a 60 year old lens that may or may not have Zeiss Glass in it. (the earlier did have Zeiss Glass in it, but I don't know the cut-off year when they started making their own glass elements).

Some samples.

Click to expand...

Very nice samples indeed!! Thank you for sharing them

Yep, I still use Jupiter-8 (85/2) lens . However now more with NEX6 camera and with Metabones Speedbooster which makes itlike 60mm, f/1.4 APS-C lens - pretty neat?

Here are couple of my recent samples with Jupiter-9 (with NEX6+speedbooster)...

F/3.5:



...wide open, f/2:



not particularly bad performance?

Here is f/4 sample for comparison:



Merry Christmas to you and your family,



Ari





--
- Ari Aikomus -
'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

--
- Ari Aikomus -
'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

That lens is something for me for next year's LBA attack! Thanks for reminding!