Jupiter 9

ryan s · 03-17-2011, 10:29 AM

Very nice, thanks. That really backs up "all I've read on the net" as cliche as that sounds

Does anyone know (off hand) if the internal design ever changed? Weren't they all Sonnar(?) optical layouts?

Laurentiu Cristofor · 03-17-2011, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by aoleg

Silver and non-MC black versions were similar in sharpness. NO soft-effect wide open. Again, there was no softness wide open with both the old lenses! They do sharpen up by f/2.8, but they're quite OK wide open, the black being ever so slightly sharper.

MC lens has STRONG SOFT FOCUS effect at f/2; exactly the same type I've seen in samples posted everywhere on the net. Glowing halos around bright objects. Very sharp by f/2.8; the soft-effect disappears.

Considering others' reports on late Jupiter lenses, I just wonder whether the lens was redesigned to become a 'better' (in the eyes of its designers) portrait lens, or if it was simply the lack of certain types of optical glass that caused re-calculation (as a result of re-structuring in Russian (ex-Soviet) manufacturing infrastructure).

Very interesting summary. I believe the later Jupiters were intentionally made soft wide open - no accident there. Otherwise, we'd see such softness in other recent lenses, not just in the Jupiter-9.

Do you have any larger samples from the earlier Jupiters shot wide open? I'd like to see those.

aoleg · 03-17-2011, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Do you have any larger samples from the earlier Jupiters shot wide open? I'd like to see those.

The first image is a resize of the picture taken with the black M39 version of Jupiter-9. Next, there's a 100% crop from that lens followed by the 100% crop of the MC version. Note that, even as the two lenses are shot wide open, there's quite a lot of difference in rendering between the two. The MC lens looks like it has a smaller effective aperture - yet this is not the case! Shutter speed with the old lens was 1/1600, while the MC lens had 1/2000, meaning it transmits more light to the sensor for whatever reason.

Histograms: old lens / MC lens.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 03-17-2011, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by aoleg

The MC lens looks like it has a smaller effective aperture - yet this is not the case! Shutter speed with the old lens was 1/1600, while the MC lens had 1/2000, meaning it transmits more light to the sensor for whatever reason.

The MC is meant to help with light transmission, so that might explain the faster shutter speed with the MC lens.

Thanks for the comparison shots. Yes, the old ones lack the soft effect. Hmm - should I revive my LBA to get an old version ??? Glowing aside, the new ones still manage to capture details pretty well, but I haven't really figured out how to use that glow for a good effect.

Ikarus · 03-17-2011, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

but I haven't really figured out how to use that glow for a good effect.

It's a matter of taste, I guess, and certainly not always appropriate. To be honest, in the digital age, I believe adding glow would better be left to post-processing. Anyway, here is one of my attempts wide open that I believe came out pretty nicely (some crop and contrast boost applied in PP).

ultraviolet · 04-13-2011, 08:10 PM

Made my purchase!
Thanks to all for the info about J9.
I went with a 1971 LZOS similer to the second photo of my original post. 117 USD (115 CAD

) shipped. Hope to get it in couple of weeks. I was highly impressed with my Helios 44M, J9 will do the same hopefully.

04-13-2011, 08:10 PM	#21
ultraviolet Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 687 Original Poster	Made my purchase Made my purchase! Thanks to all for the info about J9. I went with a 1971 LZOS similer to the second photo of my original post. 117 USD (115 CAD) shipped. Hope to get it in couple of weeks. I was highly impressed with my Helios 44M, J9 will do the same hopefully. Last edited by ultraviolet; 06-26-2011 at 11:02 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Signage via Jupiter-9	deadwolfbones	Post Your Photos!	3	08-28-2009 06:41 AM
jupiter-9 and then?	platinum	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	11-26-2008 10:09 AM
Milky Way and Jupiter 8/30/08	fillerupmac	Monthly Photo Contests	5	09-25-2008 12:59 AM
Jupiter-9!	jsherman999	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	06-30-2008 09:37 PM

03-17-2011, 10:29 AM	#16
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Very nice, thanks. That really backs up "all I've read on the net" as cliche as that sounds Does anyone know (off hand) if the internal design ever changed? Weren't they all Sonnar(?) optical layouts?

03-17-2011, 03:24 PM	#17
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by aoleg Silver and non-MC black versions were similar in sharpness. NO soft-effect wide open. Again, there was no softness wide open with both the old lenses! They do sharpen up by f/2.8, but they're quite OK wide open, the black being ever so slightly sharper. MC lens has STRONG SOFT FOCUS effect at f/2; exactly the same type I've seen in samples posted everywhere on the net. Glowing halos around bright objects. Very sharp by f/2.8; the soft-effect disappears. Considering others' reports on late Jupiter lenses, I just wonder whether the lens was redesigned to become a 'better' (in the eyes of its designers) portrait lens, or if it was simply the lack of certain types of optical glass that caused re-calculation (as a result of re-structuring in Russian (ex-Soviet) manufacturing infrastructure). Very interesting summary. I believe the later Jupiters were intentionally made soft wide open - no accident there. Otherwise, we'd see such softness in other recent lenses, not just in the Jupiter-9. Do you have any larger samples from the earlier Jupiters shot wide open? I'd like to see those.

03-17-2011, 04:25 PM	#18
aoleg Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Berlin, DE Posts: 30	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Do you have any larger samples from the earlier Jupiters shot wide open? I'd like to see those. The first image is a resize of the picture taken with the black M39 version of Jupiter-9. Next, there's a 100% crop from that lens followed by the 100% crop of the MC version. Note that, even as the two lenses are shot wide open, there's quite a lot of difference in rendering between the two. The MC lens looks like it has a smaller effective aperture - yet this is not the case! Shutter speed with the old lens was 1/1600, while the MC lens had 1/2000, meaning it transmits more light to the sensor for whatever reason. Histograms: old lens / MC lens.

03-17-2011, 05:28 PM	#19
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by aoleg The MC lens looks like it has a smaller effective aperture - yet this is not the case! Shutter speed with the old lens was 1/1600, while the MC lens had 1/2000, meaning it transmits more light to the sensor for whatever reason. The MC is meant to help with light transmission, so that might explain the faster shutter speed with the MC lens. Thanks for the comparison shots. Yes, the old ones lack the soft effect. Hmm - should I revive my LBA to get an old version ??? Glowing aside, the new ones still manage to capture details pretty well, but I haven't really figured out how to use that glow for a good effect.

03-17-2011, 05:50 PM	#20
Ikarus Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 484	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor but I haven't really figured out how to use that glow for a good effect. It's a matter of taste, I guess, and certainly not always appropriate. To be honest, in the digital age, I believe adding glow would better be left to post-processing. Anyway, here is one of my attempts wide open that I believe came out pretty nicely (some crop and contrast boost applied in PP).