MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
DiskFreeVault safely moves Mac apps and data to external storage.
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

Jupiter 8 and 8m
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:30 am
Post subject: Jupiter 8 and 8m
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:30 am
Post subject: Jupiter 8 and 8m
Reply
For the longest time I was under the impression that the Jupiter 8 and 8m for kiev were identical aside from the lack of click-stops in the former. In looking at Princelle's "The Authentic Guide to Russian and Soviet Cameras" he says under the 8m "c.1957, using a recalculated 6 element formula..." I admit, I've not really invested a great deal of time in researching rangefinder lenses so maybe this is common knowledge/old hat? Apparently when production shifted from KMZ to Arsenal the rear element design was changed to a symmetrical one, making a modified sonnar scheme but not a direct copy as the earlier ones were.

Does anyone know if there's a real performance difference there? The older stuff is typically better, yes. Anyone tried an early 8 and an early 8m?

I'd appreciate any insights. Thanks so much!
~Marc


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:34 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:34 am
Post subject:
Reply
That's funny I had jusy wondered the same thing, will be interesting to see the responses. Wink


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:18 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:18 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Aww, I thought someone might know given the rising popularity of these in the forum recently.

Let me approach it from another way. The LTM Jupiter 8 appears to have never been altered from its sonnar design origins. At least there is no mention or indication of a change. Why was this? Why no "8m" in LTM?


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:28 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:28 pm
Post subject:
Reply
themoleman342 wrote:
Aww, I thought someone might know given the rising popularity of these in the forum recently.

Let me approach it from another way. The LTM Jupiter 8 appears to have never been altered from its sonnar design origins. At least there is no mention or indication of a change. Why was this? Why no "8m" in LTM?


I believe there was a Jupiter-8H ( if translated "H" means "N" ) in LTM , but they were released in super small quantities and are very rare nowdays. It`s body was indeed different ,but I can`t say anything about the optical part. Maybe it was something simmiliar to the Jupiter 8m model?

Click on this link and at the end of the page you can see it : http://sovietcams.com/index.php?-483601546


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Jupiter 8 and 8m
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Jupiter 8 and 8m
Reply
themoleman342 wrote:
Apparently when production shifted from KMZ to Arsenal the rear element design was changed to a symmetrical one, making a modified sonnar scheme but not a direct copy as the earlier ones were.


I rather doubt that. For one, a symmetrical Sonnar would not be a Sonnar, as the Sonnar is triplet derived and a triplet won't grow symmetric, regardless how often you split its elements. For the other, there is no visible difference in the off-element reflections between my '55 "P" Jupiter 8 and '69 8M. The Sonnar 2/50 and all Jupiter 8's are six element/three group designs, by the way - so there is no change there either. Recalculated very often merely means "to the same formula using different (cheaper|better) glass" - personally I suspect the former. as the performance (of good samples at least) did not change one way or the other.


Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:00 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:00 pm
Post subject:
Reply
You may very well be right. I was following the lead of the comments on this flickr picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/heritagefutures/6163025121/ and this forum thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-77463.html

I honestly don't know. Maybe I'm perpetuating mis-information, in which case, I apologize.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1