[Cloapex]

I´m about to buy a Jupiter 9.

I thought about some other brands too, but I like the bokeh and the output of the Jupiter 9 and the 15 blades. (so no comarisons of other brands please)

I heard rumors that the older glass should be sharper than the newer ones, because of russians wanted it to be more soft for portaits by the later times, and that the quality wa little poorer in the end.
But hey plastic is plastic and steel is steel.

If you notices any other differences in quality, please let me know.
Otherwie I will go with a seventees older look. I like metall best.

Cheers
And all input will be regarded.

Thanks.

[stevebrot]

I heard rumors that the older glass should be sharper than the newer ones, because of russians wanted it to be more soft for portaits by the later times, and that the quality wa little poorer in the end.

Well, that is a new one.

The main thing you get with a more recent copy is multi-coated optics (labeled MC). This feature is not found on the older (single-coated) versions. I bought mine new (made in 2007) and don't believe that my results (LINK) are any softer than other examples I have seen.

Here is a link to a thread on the Jupiter-9 group on Flickr regarding new/old:

Flickr: Discussing OLD vs NEW jupiter9 in Jupiter 9 85mm lens

A few bullet points:

• A hood is a must have, regardless of age
• Focus is difficult using the stock Pentax focus screen. I was very disappointed in my results until I upgraded to a Katz Eye screen.
• Older lenses often come with "cleaning marks" due to soft coatings
• Be aware of differences in mount. Only the M42 and M39 (Zenit SLR) versions can be adapted to an SLR camera or Pentax K-01 (M39 Zenit requires two adapters). To be safe, stick with M42.

[Cloapex]

Thank you.

Very good input.

I have seen that discussion before. I guess the rumours occured more due to different quality among the lenses.
I will go for an M42 version. Its not worth it to struggle with two adapters.

When did they begin with the multicoatings?
Even if multicoated it has problems with flare as I understand?

In the ebay ads, they often mention cleaning marks and that it wont effect the pictures. Can you rely on that?

My Helios 44-3 (the one you has to cut down withe sand paper to use) has problems with flare as well as the 44-2 without MC. :/
Can I aspect the same issues?

For now I still would prefer metall.

[stevebrot]

When did they begin with the multicoatings?
Even if multicoated it has problems with flare as I understand?

In the ebay ads, they often mention cleaning marks and that it wont effect the pictures. Can you rely on that?

I am not sure when the MC lenses started, but yes, even the MC versions have issues with flare.

As for the cleaning marks not effecting the image, this would be true for a few light marks on the front element, but not true for any scratches on an internal element or on the rear element. Shop around until you find one without scratches. They exist.

I don't know what you mean by "For now I still would prefer metall". All Jupiter-9 variants are made out of metal...very heavy metal.


Steve

[Cloapex]

Thanks for this Steve!!

I just assumed later models were made of plastic.
As for the more reputaded sellers on ebay they´re very good in mentioning cleaning marks in the description.

Is there some production years that are consider better than others?

[yusuf]

A year back, I was offered a Jupiter 9 MC (newer version) relatively cheap and picked it up despite of I am having a lovely 1959 version. Somehow I was disappointed at f2 performance compared to the 1959 version I have. Needless to say, I returned it shortly.

Also, as I read somewhere, Russian glasses made in 90s have inferior quality compared to previous one. It was the time when Russia going through political nightmare and probably that had the impact.

[Cloapex]

Despite my comment in the beginning to not compare...

If the prices were similar would you go for the Jupiter 9 or the M 85 2???

[yusuf]

Despite my comment in the beginning to not compare...

If the prices were similar would you go for the Jupiter 9 or the M 85 2???

I love both, but if you want to keep only one lens, it should be M85

[Cloapex]

I have none of them and I want to avoid having to many lenses.
But do you get hese nice portaits using the M 85?
Probably its a safer bet with quality? Looking throught out the forums, they say finding a good jupiter 9 takes some shots, and thats just not fun to deal with. But if you do, you probably apreciate the rendering and bokey more than the sharpness of the M?

[stevebrot]

Also, as I read somewhere, Russian glasses made in 90s have inferior quality compared to previous one. It was the time when Russia going through political nightmare and probably that had the impact.

This would be very true for cameras, but I have never heard that in regards to lenses with the possible exception of the most recent generation of Zenitar 50mm. The big slide in camera quality happened in the mid-late 1970s through the early 1980s while lenses made in the same period continued to be good (I have several of that vintage). I have a 1962 Jupiter-9 in Contax/Kiev mount and while it is in stunning condition, its optical performance, while good, is not particularly stunning*. My 2007 copy does a much better job. It should be noted that LZOS (the maker of the M42 J-9s) is still in operation and that consumer optics is only a small part of its business. The J-9 they make today is, aside from coatings, essentially identical to the what they made in the early 1970s.

All that being said, it is easy enough to avoid lenses made in the 90s if that is a concern. The first two digits of the serial number generally reflects the year of manufacture.


Steve

* It might help if I were to get a hood for that lens. It was not unusual for FSU lenses from the 1960s and earlier to have 0.5 filter thread pitch rather than the more common 0.75 pitch. 0.5 pitch hoods and filters are very hard to find as are step-up converters to 0.75 pitch.