Is it really worth it????

[colyn]

The J-3...

Is it really worth the $200+??

I know it can be found for less but most of those are in bad condition..

What is a fair price to pay for a good working example??

[OlympusRF]

two years ago they would cost almost half the price...
its too much for this lens in my opinion.
I also wanted one for my zorkis (I have one J-3 for the kiev), but I won't pay that kind of money

[sevo]

That price might be a reason to get a Kiev one, along with a Kiev, for half the money.

It is a risky lens at the best of times, and the LTM ones now are deep in high risk territory - Soviet quality control never was that excellent, and got worse over the course of time. And LTM mount Jupiters always were somewhat rare, and now are very rare compared to Contax/Kiev ones - with shrinking supply and rising demand, flea market dealers with little mechanical experience beyond tinkering with their Lada have cobbled up "LTM Jupiters" from just about any box of mismatched spares, so that the risk of encountering a Frankenlens with none of the optical properties the J-3 was famous for is fairly high...

[goamules]

My J-3 is my favorite lens, among many. What would you buy instead for 200 dollars that has such a distinctive look? Just buy from a known vendor, not the unknown eBayers.

[colyn]

Originally Posted by goamules

My J-3 is my favorite lens, among many. What would you buy instead for 200 dollars that has such a distinctive look? Just buy from a known vendor, not the unknown eBayers.

Don't need one. I already have a 5cm f/1.5 Summarit. I was just wondering if it is really worth it when most lens from Russian sellers need a lot of work. Even Fedka lens sometimes need work...

[Coldkennels]

I really like mine - I paid about £200, but got a Leningrad and a Jupiter 11 included in the deal.

The catch? I can only seem to get a reliable wide-open focus with it on a Fed 2. Even the Zorkis I have won't play nice with it, for whatever reason. Something somewhere isn't calibrated right, obviously. I just haven't tracked the gremlin down yet.

But yes, on that Fed 2, it is wonderful. Takes lovely images, particularly portraits. If you could get one in good condition and calibrated for the body you want to use it for, I'd say it's well worth the money - especially when you consider dog-rough Summars can sometimes go for more.

[David Murphy]

Probably not. I have paid around $110 for nearly new ones in the recent past.

[rxmd]

$200 seems too much. A good J-3 is a very good lens, but it may take some waiting, watching, comparing build years and possibly tinkering with the lens.

It's the kind of lens that is not worth it if you have to buy it RIGHT NOW. It's a fine lens if you have the time to watch eBay and the classifieds here and possibly some eBay sellers for a good specimen at a good price.

Prices for some FSU gear has gone through the roof. I can now get close to a 1:10 return on investment on some flea market lenses I bought four years ago. For example I have a 85/f1.5 Helios-40 and a 135/f2.8 Tair-11a that cost about the same when I bought them, yet now one would cost me worth five times more than the other. It's one of the absurdities of internet hype.

[goamules]

Originally Posted by colyn

Don't need one. I already have a 5cm f/1.5 Summarit. I was just wondering if it is really worth it when most lens from Russian sellers need a lot of work. Even Fedka lens sometimes need work...

How much was your Summarit? Was it worth it? Has anyone ever had a Summarit that needed work also? These are rhetorical questions for you.

I have a Canon 50/1.5 Sonnar type that goes for twice as much as a Jupiter-3, but I prefer the Jupiter 3. I paid a C note for mine, but 200 isn't too much when other Sonnars go for double that amount. The question is, is it worth paying a lot more for a Leica, Zeiss, Canon, etc. Sonnar? With a J-3, you don't "get what you pay for" you get more.

[xayraa33]

You cannot get any other 50mm f1.5/1.4 lens in LTM for around the 200 dollars mark now, except for maybe an ugly condition Canon 50mm/ f1.4 lens for just a little more if you are lucky. ( KEH had one recently)

[raid]

It is worth the $200, in my humble opinion. The lens can be superb if appropriately shimmed. I may have 4 of them. I bought for $225 or so a ZK, which is an earlier J-3 with German optical parts. I know from Brian that the silver ones from the 50's are often the best to get.

[colyn]

Originally Posted by goamules

How much was your Summarit? Was it worth it? Has anyone ever had a Summarit that needed work also? These are rhetorical questions for you.

I got it with a Leica IIIc off eBay for less than $200 but that was around 2000-2002 and it was worth it..

My Summarit is clean with only a couple of very minor cleaning marks and as yet has not needed work..

Originally Posted by goamules

I have a Canon 50/1.5 Sonnar type that goes for twice as much as a Jupiter-3, but I prefer the Jupiter 3. I paid a C note for mine, but 200 isn't too much when other Sonnars go for double that amount. The question is, is it worth paying a lot more for a Leica, Zeiss, Canon, etc. Sonnar? With a J-3, you don't "get what you pay for" you get more.

I'm not doubting the quality this lens can have. I just have a problem with paying that much for a lens that will in all probability need a lot of work to get it up to specs...and everything I have bought from Russian sellers have needed a considerable amount of work..

I won't even buy a Leica, Canon, etc LTM lens if it is in need of a lot of work..

[goamules]

Originally Posted by colyn

I got it with a Leica IIIc off eBay for less than $200 but that was around 2000-2002 and it was worth it..

My Summarit is clean with only a couple of very minor cleaning marks and as yet has not needed work..

I'm not doubting the quality this lens can have. I just have a problem with paying that much for a lens that will in all probability need a lot of work to get it up to specs...and everything I have bought from Russian sellers have needed a considerable amount of work..

I won't even buy a Leica, Canon, etc LTM lens if it is in need of a lot of work..

You bought the Leica at a time when a J-3 was about $30. I just got my first Leica this year and you want to talk about needing work? I had to get a curtain job, then get a winding problem fixed, and finally was told on the 2nd CLA the shutter bounce setting was maxed out.

But we're talking about lenses. I don't know what "a lot of work" would be on a LTM lens. All the ones I've had and handled are clear (some coating scratches are normal), with smooth working irises, and have accurate focus on the cameras I use them on. One had a tight, bumpy focus, so I read up on the net how to relube it, disassembled and relubed in about a half hour, and it works great now. Any 50 year old American, Japanese, British, German or Russian camera will by now be working very roughly, if it's not been maintained the past decades. I think the statements that Russian lenses "need a lot of work" is bunk. I very carefully selected from 4-5 Jupiters offered by a Russian friend. They were all the same, the one I picked had a different tone due to coating changes over the years. My 2 J-8s I got for under $20 and they are outstanding too.

[colyn]

Originally Posted by goamules

You bought the Leica at a time when a J-3 was about $30.

I agree..but......did I have to shim the Summarit?? No...every Russian len in my collection had to be shimmed to work with my Leicas...that translates to extra costs...and yes they are fine performers but still not up to par with my Leica and Canon glass..

When considering value performance should be factored in..

Originally Posted by goamules

I just got my first Leica this year and you want to talk about needing work? I had to get a curtain job, then get a winding problem fixed, and finally was told on the 2nd CLA the shutter bounce setting was maxed out.

Sounds like over-tightening of the opening curtain spring tension or....the ecentric is worn which the tech should be able to tell which then would be a simple replacement..

Originally Posted by goamules

But we're talking about lenses. I don't know what "a lot of work" would be on a LTM lens. All the ones I've had and handled are clear (some coating scratches are normal), with smooth working irises, and have accurate focus on the cameras I use them on. One had a tight, bumpy focus, so I read up on the net how to relube it, disassembled and relubed in about a half hour, and it works great now. Any 50 year old American, Japanese, British, German or Russian camera will by now be working very roughly, if it's not been maintained the past decades.

I agree... lens need to be serviced from time to time..

Originally Posted by goamules

I think the statements that Russian lenses "need a lot of work" is bunk.

Have you ever spent hours or days cutting shims and shimming a lens in order for it to focus properly??

I have a J-12 that after shimming it it now is a fine lens. The cost (purchased last year) was $64 plus my time. My Summaron and Elmar still beat it though in performance. The point is I would not pay the $100+ wanted by eBay sellers..

Originally Posted by goamules

I very carefully selected from 4-5 Jupiters offered by a Russian friend. They were all the same, the one I picked had a different tone due to coating changes over the years. My 2 J-8s I got for under $20 and they are outstanding too.

So far J-8 prices have not gone into orbit...however based on factors involving bringing a J-3 to workable condition makes the $200+ price tag too steep in my opinion and yes I have used a J-3. Several in fact. My Summarit beats it hands down meaning I would be willing to pay no more that $150 tops for the J-3..

Overall I think you missed the point of my question...I was in no way putting down Russian glass...just wondering if the $200+ is really worth it.. I've even seen asking prices over $300 for this lens..

Most Russian lens require a stripdown with cleaning and relubing then shimming to work properly..

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by colyn

Most Russian lens require a stripdown with cleaning and relubing then shimming to work properly..

Even that statement I would call into question - especially if you mean that it's you who has to do the stripdown. Whether "most" require one, or only "some", or whether you have to do the stripdown after the purchase or the seller does it for you beforehand, is mainly a function of the distribution channel.

If you buy from the wrong places, you're inviting trouble. EBay largely is a wrong place. Someone like Ulrich Witte (http://fotos.cconin.de/kameras/sell/kamerase.htm) would be a right place, he only sells cameras and lenses that he has verified and, if necessary, fixed himself. You pay for that privilege of course, and he has less on offer at any given time (but a good turnaround). But 40 EUR for an Industar-61 that you know has been disassembled and relubed is still a good price.

I've only ever bought three FSU lenses online, one of them was from a good-at-the-time distributor (a J-3 by the way), one was from a repairman in Russia that also sells stuff, and one was a $8 eBay auction where I got lucky. Everything else I bought from places where I could look at the lens before buying it. If you follow that kind of strategy, your likelihood to end up with good lenses suddenly is a lot higher.

[goamules]

Originally Posted by colyn

...Most Russian lens require a stripdown with cleaning and relubing then shimming to work properly..

Not in my experience. I now have 8 FSU lenses, some rare ones. J-3, two J-8s, IL-61, IL-something else, FED-10, FED 50/2.0, FED 100/6.3. None has needed work, or shimming. I lubed a Jupiter 8 just for fun, it took 30 min. They all work on my Canon IVSB, Canon P, and the Fed bodies they came on. And of course on my m4/3 G1 which I mostly use them on. But I will concede to your point, J-3s were a better deal at $100.

The only thing they might not work on is a Leica. My only Leica, a IIIC, has been a nightmare of problems, back to 2 different techs 3 times (both highly rated on this board). It still is not reliable, and has the above mentioned shutter bounce the last tech warned me about (unable to adjust any more he said) and random light leaks. So I haven't tried any FSU on it.

It looks like a Summarit in good shape costs $500, as does a LTM Sonnar, or a Canon 1.5. Is it worth paying less than half that for a Jupiter-3, when I know I haven't had to work on ANY FSU lens to work on my Canons or G1? Yes. Is it worth it to get one to work on a finicky Leica? Maybe not, they were a better deal at $100. I know I now have more money in the IIIc body than in ALL my 8 FSU lenses.

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I'll second that and since the OP said he has "too many other RF cameras to mention" I wonder why every one assumed it would go on something it won't work on.

Anyway, I think that's far too much to pay for it.

FWIW, I'm pleased with all my FSU lenses and my Leica lenses and my Contax lenses but the Leica ones have cost a fortune to repair and, in a couple of cases, then write off. OTOH, I've more Leica glass than any other make.

Regards, David

[David Murphy]

Looking at recently completed eBay auctions, the going rate seems to be about $160-$180 including shipping for the LTM version - not worth it in my opinion - I'd rather own a slightly slower, sharper, and well calibrated Canon 50/1.8 or Canon 50/1.9 for this sort of money.

[goamules]

Originally Posted by David Murphy

Looking at recently completed eBay auctions, the going rate seems to be about $160-$180 including shipping for the LTM version - not worth it in my opinion - I'd rather own a slightly slower, sharper, and well calibrated Canon 50/1.8 or Canon 50/1.9 for this sort of money.

Here are two shots, one with the Canon 50/1.8 and the other the Jupiter 3 50/1.5 (the sun was setting, and I tested 4 lenses at 3 apertures, so the light changes unfortunately. Which is which?

[goamules]

More J-3 shots. A Sonnar has a look that other designs don't have. And oh yes, it can be sharp, even wide open.

[colyn]

Originally Posted by David Hughes

Hi,

I'll second that and since the OP said he has "too many other RF cameras to mention" I wonder why every one assumed it would go on something it won't work on.

Those other rangefinder cameras are fixed lens versions.. If I am talking about them I go to the forum for that particular model..

I am referring to using the lens on a Leica...

[colyn]

Originally Posted by goamules

Not in my experience. I now have 8 FSU lenses, some rare ones. J-3, two J-8s, IL-61, IL-something else, FED-10, FED 50/2.0, FED 100/6.3. None has needed work, or shimming. I lubed a Jupiter 8 just for fun, it took 30 min. They all work on my Canon IVSB, Canon P, and the Fed bodies they came on. And of course on my m4/3 G1 which I mostly use them on. But I will concede to your point, J-3s were a better deal at $100.

Every Jupiter I have or now own required shimming to work on my Leicas.. The only Russian lens I have that did not is my Industar 50mm.

I recently picked up a J-3 for $120 which needed shimming and yes it is a good lens but I don't think $200 + is a good price to pay.

[sparrow6224]

In the test pictures: I think the second is the Canon. Ergo the first would be the Jupiter.

I bought a jupiter 3 about 18 months ago for considerably less than $100. It works fine. A bit soft wide open at f/30 and f/15 but that's probably in part from camera shake. Somewhat lower contrast than the Canon f/1.8 or the Summicron Rigid I also own/have owned. But nice. I like it. I tend to adjust contrast in post in most cases anyway.

PS Anyone know -- I have a Fed 2 with a clone Elmar 50/3.5. What's that lens called???

[sparrow6224]

PS If I decided I really wanted a Jupiter 3 because I could not afford $400+ for the other LTM Sonnar options, I'd put in a snipe bid of $175, I think. Something about the $200 mark for an FSU lens just seems not right to me. Then again two years ago I could get an actual Zeiss (Contax mount) 50/1.5 sonnar for less than $200. Not so easy now.

[colyn]

Originally Posted by sparrow6224

PS Anyone know -- I have a Fed 2 with a clone Elmar 50/3.5. What's that lens called???

You have one of the Industar lens. There were a couple of different models..