Hi! Has anyone used the Jupiter 8 lens? I bought one recently and I shoot negatives. The results: Indoors with sufficient light: the prints were ok (with apeture wide open at F2) Indoors with dim light: without flash, the color rendering was very poor outdoors with bright sunlight: all prints have a blue tint, why ? Shout I get a Leica 90mm lens and discard the Jupiter 8? Thanks.

-- Chih-Chien (chihchienlintw@yahoo.com.tw), December 06, 2001

Answers

The best way to check to make sure your lens is not worth keeping is to get your film developed from a different place--preferably professional. I had some Leicaflex shots using lens from the 1970's and I kept on having a greenish tint on my shots in indoor settings. However, I did the pictures at Wal-mart and obviously that is a problem in processing so basically I would try another roll of film and have it developed in a different place.

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

From the yahoogroups [russiancamera] site, I got a reply:

"Good news is that the Jupiters and Industars won't pale when compared with Elmars and Summitars- Russian glass might even better! My Leica M3 now has a Jupiter 8 for its normal lens, and after seeing the pictures made with it, I no longer miss the Summicron which used to be there :).

Jay"

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

Alfie - you're absolutely right! SOMEBODY had to say that eventually, didn't they? 8^)

Chih-Chien - You just can't used color prints to judge a lens - there are too many variables introduced in the printing process, even if you're doing your own prints or they're custom-made (well maybe, if you include a gray card in the shot and use that for your color balancing). I can make the best lens in the world (whatever that may be) look bad with a color print.

For "testing" you need to shoot a good 50-to-100 slide film, and include some comparison shots with a lens you already know and approve of on the same roll (even slide processing can vary some). Kodachrome 25 used to be a standard of sorts - now there really isn't one, but one of the following can serve: Kodak 100 EPN, Kodak 100S, Kodak Ektachrome 64, Fuji Provia (although IMHO it runs a little blue with ANY lens). Velvia will EMPHASIZE any "color" differences between lenses and show maximum sharpness (among E6 films), but can easily look very weird if you're not used to its color palette.

Also - "indoors with dim light without flash" - what kind of light and how dim? Color negative film HATES underexposure, and if the light was mixed (some window light, some artificial light) or all artificial, that can easily throw off color balance, espcially run through an automated printer.

Many printing machines set the color balance on the first frame, and then never change it again. Others may 'read' each negative and make filtration changes, but how does the machine know what kind of light you were shooting under?

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 06, 2001.

I'm confused, as it is the Jupiter 9 that is a 85mm f2.0 lens, not the 8. The older versions of that lens are reputed better at B&W photography than color, as they tended to have a yellow cast to the glass. The one I tried was way so far off in the focus that I send it back and the one that replaced it has problems as well-very stiff focusing. So I haven't even been able to even find one that would focus--you are way ahead in the game if just the color is off! Try shooting slides to eliminate the possibility the lab is at fault. It is hit or miss with the Jupiter stuff, and unfortunately I haven't had too much luck so far. The 50mm f1.5 I tried was decent, but no where near the quality of any of the 50mm Leica lenses I have shot with.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 06, 2001.

Hi, It's me again. I am very sorry that I made a mistake; it's a Jupiter 9 80/2.0 lens. I think that all of you are right. I test only one roll of negative film which was mixed with all light conditions: indoors, outdoors ..... Maybe the automated printer was fooled. I am lucky as compared with Mr. Schank; because I have bought 3 Jupiter lenses and they are ok (take into consideration that they are so low- priced!). I will try slide film later and I hope everything will come out right. Best Regards. Chih-Chien

-- Chih-Chien Lin (chihchienlintw@yahoo.com.tw), December 06, 2001.

When you say they're "OK", I have a specific question: at their closest setting does the focus fall right where you intended it, or about 4 to 6 inches behind that point? If you haven't really noticed, take a look at some pix and tell me what you see.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

I don't have the Jupiter-9, but the 8 (which is a 50/2 sonnar copy) from 63, which I got in exchange for a no longer needed Yashica and a danubia lens (both worth together about 25$). Tough quite low-priced, the pictures turned out to be very good shooting BW and also very nice shooting color (slides). No color cast in the lens and no off- focus. The only problems are the not-so-good finish (they tend to oxidate ?!) and the non-stopped aperture, which you have to be careful not to touch after adjusting.

Here are some examples of what the lens is capable of: Example in BW and Example in color

I'd really likt to try the 85/2, given the case that it is also a sonnar copy and until now I only had great lenses with this formula on my Rollei, Contax SLR and Leica ;-). Unfortunately especially the 85/2 seems to be quite sought after if you look at the eBay prices and you might get an old elmar 90/4 for the same price.

Concerning lens tests: The others are right: Don't try to judge a lens from negatives and not-calibrated metering - try to use a meter you trust is essential especially for slides or do alot of bracketing (+/- 2 stops in half steps, if you don't know meter & slide film). This seems to be a lot of work, but consider the price of the lens compared to that.

Kai

-- Kai Blanke (Kai.blanke@iname.com), December 07, 2001.