View Full Version : Buying a Jupiter 3: Where to Begin?
As you know, there are different versions of the J-3. Brian Sweeney is an expert in figuring out the optical differences and in selecting the "right" J-3.
I am still learning.
For example, is this a good J-3? The lens #5501387 was made in 1955 at Russia at KMZ plant at Krasnogorsk town near the Moscow city.
Maybe we can have some useful pointers put together to assist us hunt down a good J-3.
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 07:08
Expert? HA! My secret weapon is a through-the-lens viewer for LTM lenses made for a 1950s repair shop. 39mm thread mount properly spaced to ground glass, high-mag finder, Black crinkle finish, and a Canon body cap. $15, Ebay, Sold!
I've had the best luch with the mid-50s through mid-60s lenses. The worst ever was from 1950. The 1980s lenses are much softer, but I suspect element spacing in the optical fixture is not as precise. One of the sharpest lenses that I did was a 1959 J-3 with a bad front element, that I replaced with a 1986 front element. The overall result was much sharper than the "before" shots.
Expert? HA! My secret weapon is a through-the-lens viewer for LTM lenses made for a 1950s repair shop. 39mm thread mount properly spaced to ground glass, high-mag finder, Black crinkle finish, and a Canon body cap. $15, Ebay, Sold!
I've had the best luch with the mid-50s through mid-60s lenses. The worst ever was from 1950. The 1980s lenses are much softer, but I suspect element spacing in the optical fixture is not as precise. One of the sharpest lenses that I did was a 1959 J-3 with a bad front element, that I replaced with a 1986 front element. The overall result was much sharper than the "before" shots.
Yes, you are the Expert!
In general,is the [older] chrome version a better choice than the black model J-3?
Is a 1950 version OK if adjusted properly?
wlewisiii
04-12-2008, 07:18
Of course, you could take the easy way & get a Kiev & lens? <G,D & R>
William
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 07:20
The chrome lenses are better than the black ones. I've tried about 5 black lenses with film.
The 1950 lens was made when they were still trying to get it right. Probably the move from German parts to some being made in Russia. It could not be shimmed to focus across the frame.
xayraa33
04-12-2008, 07:24
The KMZ one was reputed to be the best and first to be made, the very early ones had some Zeiss glass, but Brian ,IIRC, had some problems with one early sample he worked on and it was a little different mechanically.
the late 1950s/ early 60s Zomz J-3s seem the best for adjusting to a Leica standard.
Some of the latest black J-3s are dogs, and the rear lens group is cemented and cannot be adjusted like the old ones.
I find alot of the black J-3s to be soft at the large F openings.
I suspect that they were not as well put together optically as the older chrome J-3s.
This is my impression on the Jupiter 3 lens in LTM Raid.
Raid, the only way to insure a good J3 is to talk Brian into selling you one of his. I have a silver one from 63 and it's off, I think I have it fixed but haven't tried it yet. BTW don't you have enough 50's. esp. that lovely Canon 50/1.4?
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 07:59
I did sell him one! First one I ever worked on. I had to move the optics out over 1mm on that lens! After that, it was a great performer. I hope it went to someone here...
xayraa33
04-12-2008, 08:03
BTW don't you have enough 50's. esp. that lovely Canon 50/1.4?[/QUOTE]
One can never have enough 50's
I did sell him one! First one I ever worked on. I had to move the optics out over 1mm on that lens! After that, it was a great performer. I hope it went to someone here...
LOL...I think thats why I hang on to all my stuff. I always regret getting rid of it later on.
hans voralberg
04-12-2008, 08:04
Expert? HA! My secret weapon is a through-the-lens viewer for LTM lenses made for a 1950s repair shop. 39mm thread mount properly spaced to ground glass, high-mag finder, Black crinkle finish, and a Canon body cap. $15, Ebay, Sold!
Just asking Brian, could you make another one ?
Raid sold a Brian Sweeney J3? That's crazy. Sorry to say so, Raid.
I did sell him one! First one I ever worked on. I had to move the optics out over 1mm on that lens! After that, it was a great performer. I hope it went to someone here...
Brian,
I would never sell one of your lenses unless it is here for another fellow RFF member. [I feel "guilty"!]
Raid sold a Brian Sweeney J3? That's crazy. Sorry to say so, Raid.
Yes, I know,and thanks for rubbing it in.
BTW don't you have enough 50's. esp. that lovely Canon 50/1.4?
One can never have enough 50's[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the 50/1.4 is not a Sonnar design lens.
Also, I love to have a Brian Lens (also called a J-3 that is made special).
xayraa33
04-12-2008, 08:16
Why did you sell the first J-3 Raid?
Raid, the only way to insure a good J3 is to talk Brian into selling you one of his. I have a silver one from 63 and it's off, I think I have it fixed but haven't tried it yet. BTW don't you have enough 50's. esp. that lovely Canon 50/1.4?
GB: I goofed here; the J-3 that Brian put together for me was very sharp and did very well optically wide open. We all make mistakes ....:bang:
Pherdinand
04-12-2008, 08:19
do u have a sonnar, Raid? i mean the 50/1.5
:)
(oil on fire)
do u have a sonnar, Raid? i mean the 50/1.5
:)
(oil on fire)
No, I don't, and this is my little "problem" for LTM lenses.
I have a Summarit. Does it count?
I have a Zeiss Jena 5cm/2 Sonnar, and Brian sold me a Zeiss Sonnar 5cm/1.5 in Contax mount, and I have a Zeiss 5cm/2 in Contax mount.
xayraa33
04-12-2008, 08:24
A Summarit is not a Sonnar type.
I snagged a good one from a fellow RFFer, will have to look up the username. *edit* it was Mike Goldberg, real nice guy and helpful.
Mine is chrome and has the serial: N6406071
seems to be tack sharp and good contrast:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/2218386153_0cf60acdc3.jpg
link to larger if you want to see more details:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/2218386153_0cf60acdc3_b.jpg
Pherdinand
04-12-2008, 08:28
so you do have a sonnar. Mount does not matter.
A contax is a fine shooter, especially for 50 mm's.
You don't need to buy a jupiter-3.
You need to buy a contax.
:P
so you do have a sonnar. Mount does not matter.
A contax is a fine shooter, especially for 50 mm's.
You don't need to buy a jupiter-3.
You need to buy a contax.
:P
I have a Contax IIa and a IIIa.
My Contax mount lenses are very few.
I snagged a good one from a fellow RFFer, will have to look up the username. *edit* it was Mike Goldberg, real nice guy and helpful.
Mine is chrome and has the serial: N6406071
seems to be tack sharp and good contrast:
link to larger if you want to see more details:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/2218386153_0cf60acdc3_b.jpg
It seems that the first two digits of the lens serialnumber give the production year. In your case, it is a 1964 model.
Nice photo.
Hmmm...Let me speak in broad strokes here. Russian optical design: good. Russian mechanical design: bad. Russian quality control: depends on the hangover. I have a J-3 (that I love. I got lucky) but I have also spent time with Russian cine lenses both spherical and anamorphic and generally they are made very sloppily.
That being said, I love my J-3. First, I paid through the nose for a mint black one from fedka.com. I was very pleased with the accuracy of the seller's description and the quality of the lens. Still, I was afraid to use it wide-open as it wasnt focusing properly.
here is a shot from that lens with '86 optics:
@f/2.8
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1076/741306487_b8e24551b2.jpg
Anyway, I sent it to Brian, he worked his magic, swapped the optics for an '83 module and made it focus properly, wide-open. The lens has low-ish resolving power, but I love the rendering.
@f/1.5
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2040/2376389952_8383046a38.jpg
@f/4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2294/2168450506_bcce33a180.jpg
A Summarit is not a Sonnar type.
I know,and that's why I asked :does it count.
The Summarit is for special cases.
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 08:52
I remember that '86 lens module. Very Soft. It was NOT the optical elements. I used the front element of THAT module that was swapped out to replace the front element on a 1959 lens that was perfect "except" the scatched and chipped front element.
http://flickr.com/photos/oldcamerapictures/sets/72157602481458663/
The resulting lens was much sharper than either of the two lenses before the trade.
I just bought online a J-3, after Brian gave me his OK!
I've been lucky twice over. Got a chrome J-3 very cheap from Oleg K., who said in his description that it looked as if someone had taken a wrench to it. It sat for some while before the first serious work with it showed that its focus at near distances (at least) was off. Spoke of it here on RFF, and Kim Coxon offered to set it right. He found that it had been put together wrongly, and fixed that and no doubt other problems. After testing with film, he told me that I had a fine example -- not including the cosmetics, presumably. I've so far taken only a few quick test frames, and it seems to be bang on.
Seems to me that in finding a good J-3, the reputation of the seller is at least as important as such things as chrome/black, serial number and so on. Same for a J-9.
Highway 61
04-12-2008, 11:21
There is something here which I don't get in Raid's project.
Why not buying a ZM C-Sonnar 50/1.5 ?
You will have a superb build quality AND some close-focus focusing issues (the so-called "focus-shift") to deal with before you can put the lens at use to get some f:1.5 close-focus bokeh ecstasy.
So, the lens will have to be spannered and tinkered like a Jupiter-3 ; since it's pricey, having to take it apart yourself before use will be more exciting than with a cheap (well, not so cheap nowadays, because FSU stuff sellers know what amount of green paper a casual RFFer is ready to drop on their pieces of crap for now), and you will be left with something better at the very end.
Sounds like a good plan, huh ?
:D
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 12:56
HW-61,
At $85, the J-3 is about 1/10th the price of the new Sonnar-C. I've tested J-3's against Nikkor 5cm F1.4's, Canon 50/1.5's, and Canon 50/1.4's. A good J-3 is as sharp as the Nikkor and sharper than the Canons wide-open.
If I wanted a Sonnar-C, I could sell a couple of lenses to get one. I just prefer classic glass. Judging by your Avatar, I would think you had a couple of classic lenses.
funkaoshi
04-12-2008, 13:23
I'm actually waiting on that 1959/1986 hybrid J-3 to arrive in the mail. Another RFF member sold it to me. Strange the path these lenses take. Can't wait to try it out after reading through this thread.
HW-61,
At $85, the J-3 is about 1/10th the price of the new Sonnar-C. I've tested J-3's against Nikkor 5cm F1.4's, Canon 50/1.5's, and Canon 50/1.4's. A good J-3 is as sharp as the Nikkor and sharper than the Canons wide-open.
If I wanted a Sonnar-C, I could sell a couple of lenses to get one. I just prefer classic glass. Judging by your Avatar, I would think you had a couple of classic lenses.
Brian,
I agree with you 100%.
I sent you a pm now.
Raid
I've been lucky twice over. Got a chrome J-3 very cheap from Oleg K., who said in his description that it looked as if someone had taken a wrench to it. It sat for some while before the first serious work with it showed that its focus at near distances (at least) was off. Spoke of it here on RFF, and Kim Coxon offered to set it right. He found that it had been put together wrongly, and fixed that and no doubt other problems. After testing with film, he told me that I had a fine example -- not including the cosmetics, presumably. I've so far taken only a few quick test frames, and it seems to be bang on.
Seems to me that in finding a good J-3, the reputation of the seller is at least as important as such things as chrome/black, serial number and so on. Same for a J-9.
I just bought from Oleg a 1960 J-3 that is clean. Of course, I waited for Brian to give me his green light to get this one.
89rzweig
04-12-2008, 15:11
I've been lucky twice over. Got a chrome J-3 very cheap from Oleg K., who said in his description that it looked as if someone had taken a wrench to it. It sat for some while before the first serious work with it showed that its focus at near distances (at least) was off. Spoke of it here on RFF, and Kim Coxon offered to set it right. He found that it had been put together wrongly, and fixed that and no doubt other problems. After testing with film, he told me that I had a fine example -- not including the cosmetics, presumably. I've so far taken only a few quick test frames, and it seems to be bang on.
Seems to me that in finding a good J-3, the reputation of the seller is at least as important as such things as chrome/black, serial number and so on. Same for a J-9.
Exactly. That is why I can I've been 90% successful, when acquiring FSU LTM lenses.
On the other hand, if look at the history, Russian technology and everything was at its peak in the first half of 1960's, then begun the twenty years of decline (Brezhnev era) and finally collapse -- including camera industry. So one can really make an educated guess, that a lens from 1960's is more likely to be better than the same lens from 1980's.
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 15:27
I'm actually waiting on that 1959/1986 hybrid J-3 to arrive in the mail. Another RFF member sold it to me. Strange the path these lenses take. Can't wait to try it out after reading through this thread.
I shot a roll with it. It was spot-on, and very sharp.
The test pictures are still up. I have the test roll from the 1986 lens that I removed the front element from on my computer. I'll have to upload some of them as well.
http://flickr.com/photos/oldcamerapictures/sets/72157602481458663/
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 15:31
As far as buying a Sonnar-C...
I've got a couple of Sonnars for my Leica's...
A pre-war 5cm F2, uncoated
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=58127&stc=1&d=1208042998
And a pre-war 5cm F1.5 on a custom M-Adapter with a special-cut cam.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=58128&stc=1&d=1208043008
Both lenses date to 1935.
Raid, Good luck with the J3 & thank you for the post. I got off my lazy behind and went out for some test shots to see how close I got the rear element to the film plane. Hope it works. I just got a J-8 and tomorrow i'll take that lens out and finish up the roll.
Such threads are "inspiring", the least to say.
It is interesting for me to think of what brian is doing with regard to custom adapting Contax mount lenses to Leica mount. I bet that in 30 years from now, his customized lenses will be as valuable as we now view customized CZJ lenses from the 40's.
Brian Sweeney
04-12-2008, 15:58
It's fairly easy to customize the Sonnar into the J-8 mount. This one is very smooth now as I re-lubed the helical with Vacuum Pump grease while I had it open. It just worked out really well, and is nicely proportioned for the CL.
Brian Sweeney
04-13-2008, 06:07
Well, after all of this I picked up another J-3 and J-8 in LTM last night. The Russian seller combined shipping for the lenses, sign of a good seller! I'll post on the lenses when they arrive. The J-8 is going to get a Sonnar module, and not sure about the J-3 yet!
xayraa33
04-13-2008, 06:30
Well, after all of this I picked up another J-3 and J-8 in LTM last night. The Russian seller combined shipping for the lenses, sign of a good seller! I'll post on the lenses when they arrive. The J-8 is going to get a Sonnar module, and not sure about the J-3 yet!
Can a Helios 103 lens module go in a J-8 focus unit Brian?
love to have a Menopta/Helios 103 on an LTM Leica.
Can a Helios 103 lens module go in a J-8 focus unit Brian?
love to have a Menopta/Helios 103 on an LTM Leica.
I think, Brian already has done such conversions a few months ago.
Brian Sweeney
04-13-2008, 11:07
I've never managed to get a Menopta/Helios into an LTM mount. I modified them for my Nikon RF's. The 1981 Helios-103 has a secondary shim for the rear group. I polished it down by ~0.4mm to shorten the focal length to the Nikon standard. On the Menopta and later Helios, I just back the entire module out 1/2 turn and tighten the set screws. It works.
BUT- the optics are too big for a J-8 mount, and you would need a J-3 mount to get it into place. I have used them in my Contax to M-Adapter, but that is not cheap/
OK. I stand corrected.
There is something strange about my Menopta.
It fits well on my Contax IIIa but the fit is bad on my IIa.
Brian Sweeney
04-13-2008, 15:39
You can check the locking tab and the bayonet flanges. That particular one went right onto my Kiev and Contax IIIa. It was a tight fit on the Nikon S3, and I just left it for the Contax rather than breaking out the file. I converted the other 6 Menopta's to the Nikon, but left this one alone.
You can check the locking tab and the bayonet flanges. That particular one went right onto my Kiev and Contax IIIa. It was a tight fit on the Nikon S3, and I just left it for the Contax rather than breaking out the file. I converted the other 6 Menopta's to the Nikon, but left this one alone.
Now that I have from you a CZJ 5cm/1.5 in addition to my CZJ 5cm/2, the Menopta can rest on the IIIa since it works smoothly on this camera.
Brian Sweeney
04-13-2008, 15:56
Raid- I sent you a CZO 50mm F1.5! I have my very first CZJ 5cm f1.5, and just dropped off the test roll today. Neat lens, from 1935. Stops down only to F11. It will be interesting to compare with my CZO 50/1.5's. I still have two left, one for the Contax and one customized for the Nikon S-Mount. I moved the rear module in and shimmed it for S-Mount. I wrote "S-Mount" on it.
Brian,
I did not pay much attention to the lens being an Opton vs. it being a pre-War lens. I already have an uncoated CZJ 5cm/2 LTM, so the Opton was welcome.
On the other hand, I would warmly welcome to my home any pre-war Sonnar LTM lens.
xayraa33
04-13-2008, 16:37
Brian,
I did not pay much attention to the lens being an Opton vs. it being a pre-War lens. I already have an uncoated CZJ 5cm/2 LTM, so the Opton was welcome.
On the other hand, I would warmly welcome to my home any pre-war Sonnar LTM lens.
The last 50/f1.5 Sonnars from west Germany, marked Opton and later Carl Zeiss (no Jena) are magnificent works of art in their optical and chrome splendor.
Lovely coatings on these lenses.
Well, after all of this I picked up another J-3 and J-8 in LTM last night. The Russian seller combined shipping for the lenses, sign of a good seller! I'll post on the lenses when they arrive. The J-8 is going to get a Sonnar module, and not sure about the J-3 yet!
So do you drop in lens elements from other old Zeiss sonnars into J-8 bodies? Say the lenses from an Opton into a J-8?
Brian Sweeney
04-14-2008, 02:33
The optics from a Zeiss-Opton or a post-war Zeiss Jena will not screw into the J-8 mount. The Zeiss-Opton lens is completely redesigned. I shimmed a Zeiss Opton 50mm f2 for my Nikon RF. The post-war Zeiss Jena 5cm f2 Rigid was also redesigned. The module is bigger in diameter, and the size of the elements also appears to have increased slightly. I left it for my Contax.
I am happy with my Contax mount Opton from you, Brian, so my LTM Opton will have to wait until the "Powers" decide my fate!
Brian Sweeney
04-15-2008, 15:37
LTM pre-war Jena- Easy to get into a J-8 mount. Post war, you will need to buy a Contax to LTM adapter. That's how I use my Zeiss Opton's on the Canon 7.
LTM pre-war Jena- Easy to get into a J-8 mount. Post war, you will need to buy a Contax to LTM adapter. That's how I use my Zeiss Opton's on the Canon 7.
Then maybe I should aim at a nice 1935 CZJ in J-8 mount! ;)
One day ... I shall be relieved.
The optics from a Zeiss-Opton or a post-war Zeiss Jena will not screw into the J-8 mount.
Interesting. I have a postwar Jena f2 module (dating about 1958) that looks exactly like J8 module. Should try fitting it later this week.
Brian Sweeney
04-16-2008, 01:44
Let me know how it does. I also have a Post-War module that would not fit. Calipers revealed it was slightly larger in diameter. I did try!
I saw those adapters sold by jonluk something on ebay lately, he states that they are checked by a tech for focus accuracy, but I also saw the thread here where it had to be hacked to work poperly. I wonder if they have improved much since that thread.... Maybe I should add this adapter to the Voightlander wish list thread.
Brian Sweeney
04-16-2008, 10:56
I've found that it can be "hit and Miss". I have one that works perfectly with a Nikon 5cm F1.4 lens in S-Mount, byt the Sonnar was off. It works perfectly with the Sonnars that I shimmed for my Nikon.
If you are going to use it with a couple of lenses, and those lenses will be mostly used with the adapter, you can always adjust the lens for any residual error.
J3's from 50's, 60's, 80's.. even ones with elements mixed, but was 70's left unmentioned intentionally ? ;) how does this vintage and factory (logo in second picture) usually stand compared to others ?
One can never have enough 50's
very true, but because of this not every weekend and holiday snapper (like me) have enough time to try every 50's, and are instead hanging around here asking others opinions on them :p bad excuse I know..
Highway 61
04-21-2008, 11:09
J3's from 50's, 60's, 80's.. even ones with elements mixed, but was 70's left unmentioned intentionally ? ;) how does this vintage and factory (logo in second picture) usually stand compared to others ?
Quoting Alfred Komp's website about the factory : "ZOMZ : Industrial Amalgamation Zagorsk Optical-Mechanical Factory. Zagorsk (now known as Sergeiev Posad) is located about 45 miles NE of Moscow, and is famous for its monasteries. The plant has produced many accessory lenses for 35mm RF and SLR cameras, and appears to have been associated with KMZ. Current status unknown."
Can't answer about how the ZOMZ Jupiter-3's perform.
I had a 1956 MMZ Jupiter-3 that was terrible.
Brian Sweeney
04-21-2008, 11:17
I've never owned a J-3 from the 70s, but have collimated them before. The optics are fine, construction better than those from the 80s. The rear module comes out, and is not cemented in like the later black lenses from the 80s.
thank you both for the data. physically I dont find any problems with the lens, perhaps very light cleaning marks in front element. metal feels lighter and cheaper compared to similar German lenses, e.g. Summarit. gues I have no option than try how this works for me :)
The J-3 that Brian put together for me was a 1963 J-3 that was made by ZOMZ. After Brian's adjusments, the J-3 was very sharp, with a beautiful out of focus behavior for the backgrounds.
xayraa33
04-21-2008, 11:35
Quoting Alfred Komp's website about the factory : "ZOMZ : Industrial Amalgamation Zagorsk Optical-Mechanical Factory. Zagorsk (now known as Sergeiev Posad) is located about 45 miles NE of Moscow, and is famous for its monasteries. The plant has produced many accessory lenses for 35mm RF and SLR cameras, and appears to have been associated with KMZ. Current status unknown."
Can't answer about how the ZOMZ Jupiter-3's perform.
I had a 1956 MMZ Jupiter-3 that was terrible.
The ZOMZ J-3 from late 50s/early 60s is one of the better ones.
the worst is the late 1980s black VALDAI made J-3.
Max, aka darkavenger, used to own a Contax/Kiev mount 1970s J-3 that was the cat's meow.
he might remember the factory logo on that one.
sorry I could not resist, call it "Jupiter porn" if you want :D
I recently bought a book of Soviet propaganda photos from the early 1900's to the bitter end of 1991. Posing on top of book are my Jupiters, 3 & 11.
even had to find USSR hymn to play few times when putting this down :) ... so times change.
xayraa33
04-21-2008, 12:02
sorry I could not resist, call it "Jupiter porn" if you want :D
I recently bought a book of Soviet propaganda photos from the early 1900's to the bitter end of 1991. Posing on top of book are my Jupiters, 3 & 11.
even had to find USSR hymn to play few times when putting this down :) ... so times change.
Any pictures of uncle Joe man of steel in that book?:rolleyes:
Your 1971 Zomz J-3 might be a good one, only trying it out will tell.
If anything, it just might need the Sweeney shim treatment and a helical relube.
Brian Sweeney
04-21-2008, 12:12
I hereby declare my 1963 J-3 as a tribute to Valentina Tereshkova. She just made the news this month -again-.
Any pictures of uncle Joe man of steel in that book?:rolleyes:
no Joseph, and not so many other political leaders as well. its mainly photos of Soviet advances in space race, in agriculture, dam constructions, nuclear plants.. and that sort light subjects :p
Your 1971 Zomz J-3 might be a good one, only trying it out will tell. If anything, it just might need the Sweeney shim treatment and a helical relube.yes, this J3 will be in test drive coming weekend, perhaps earlier. Leitz glass is on wait list this time.
imajypsee
04-22-2008, 11:37
would you choose the J3 over the Nokton 50 f/1.5? I'm waiting for B&H to reopen so I can order one from there. For the time being I'm getting a J8 from Fedka... but, if you have thoughts on the J3 over the Nokton, I'd like to know them. If you've explained your thinking in this thread.... sorry to have missed it.
Mary in Fort Myers
The J-3 that Brian put together for me was a 1963 J-3 that was made by ZOMZ. After Brian's adjusments, the J-3 was very sharp, with a beautiful out of focus behavior for the backgrounds.
Brian Sweeney
04-22-2008, 12:29
> would you choose the J3 over the Nokton 50 f/1.5?
1) I suspect you mean the modern Cosina Nokton 50/1.5. The original Voigtlander 50/1.5 is from the 1950's and is one of the finest lenses of that decade. The new one is one of the finest lenses of the 21st century using aspheric surfaces. The new one will cost about 3x the price of a J-3. The Old and New Nokton's are Planar formula lenses. The J-3 is a Sonnar lens. The "look and feel" of the Sonnar are unique, unlike most modern lenses that went the way of the Planar.
2) Which would I choose- I prefer the look of the older lenses. For the money, a good J-3. The last $300 that I spent on a lens was a a 1950's Collapsible Summicron in perfect condition.
januaryman
04-22-2008, 12:39
I think I'd look around for a Canon 50/1.5 - I wanted one for too long and settled on a 1.4 instead. All the Canon rf lenses are underrated, I think.
funkaoshi
04-22-2008, 12:52
The Canon 1.5 is a pretty slick lens. Its the 50mm I'm most interested in getting -- as soon as I can justify buying a lens again. Some good examples here. (http://flickr.com/photos/monochromejournal/tags/canon50mmf15ltm/)
Brian Sweeney
04-22-2008, 12:54
The Canon 50/1.5 is a first rate lens, and is closer to the original Zeiss Sonnar look than the Nikkor 5cm F1.4. The Canon is made with very heavy brass, feels like a rock. It's one of the smallest fast-fifties that you can find. It's also about 3x the price of the J-3. My Canon 50/1.5 was optimized for F4, I changed the shim on it.
I have a "complete Canon 50/1.5", and a hacked one. The formula of the J-3 and Canon is close enough, that I made a lens out of the left over parts from a junk Canon 50/1.5 and a J-3. Used the rear optics of the J-3 with the front optics of the Canon. It worked.
The ZOMZ J-3 from late 50s/early 60s is one of the better ones.
the worst is the late 1980s black VALDAI made J-3.
Max, aka darkavenger, used to own a Contax/Kiev mount 1970s J-3 that was the cat's meow.
he might remember the factory logo on that one.
I have a '61 J-3 from ZOMZ that is superb. Focuses beautifully, and not even a cleaning mark on the glass. The pre-1963 ZOMZ logo is hard to describe. It is supposed to represent three lens elements glued together. The later ZOMZ logo looks like an eye with an arrow through it.
I have a '61 J-3 from ZOMZ that is superb. Focuses beautifully, and not even a cleaning mark on the glass. The pre-1963 ZOMZ logo is hard to describe. It is supposed to represent three lens elements glued together. The later ZOMZ logo looks like an eye with an arrow through it.
Bill,
I recently ordered a 1961 or 1960 J-3, so if it is a ZOMZ made lens, it should display that logo too. Can be there be another factory making a 1960 lens?
Bill,
I recently ordered a 1961 or 1960 J-3, so if it is a ZOMZ made lens, it should display that logo too. Can be there be another factory making a 1960 lens?
Raid,
According to Princelle, the LTM J-3 was made by KMZ until about 1956, after which production was moved to ZOMZ and MMZ-Belomo (in Minsk). He lists no other sources for LTM J-3s at all.
xayraa33
04-22-2008, 19:15
This was confusing till a member pointed out that the three lens element logo and the eye with the arrow logo are both ZOMZ.
wlewisiii
04-22-2008, 19:24
If it's any help, the 1956 J-3 I recently got for my Kiev 4a has the 3 element logo. Commiecameras.com has a page with the logos on it.
William
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.