Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Jupiter 9 question
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:19 pm    Post subject: Jupiter 9 question Reply with quote

I purchased a Jupiter 9 lens. I find the lens very soft. the images that it produces. my question is there a way to make the lens sharp. say with filters or any thing else or is this just the way this lens works. any help greatly appreciated.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The J-9 is a Sonnar design and basically a sharp lens. Wide open it is a little soft but stopped down it sharpens up smartly.

You don't say when the lens was made. The Soviets made that lens from the 1940s until, I believe, the early 2000s.

In that time the coatings varied widely, from no coating at all to a modern multi-coated lens. The quality and condition of the coating can affect sharpness.

Is there any internal haze? Are there a lot of 'cleaning marks' on the glass. This too could affect sharpness.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:44 pm    Post subject: Re: Jupiter 9 question Reply with quote

rockycarter wrote:
I purchased a Jupiter 9 lens. I find the lens very soft. the images that it produces.

Yes, most of the J-9s are soft and plagued by very high level of spherical aberration at apertures < f/4.0. Variation among different copies is big.

This test shot comes from my black "new style" J-9 (IIRC made in 1983) and was taken at f/2.0.
http://abload.de/img/f20vzk62.jpg

If you want a sharper ~80mm lens then look at ones which don't contain triplets in their optical scheme.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've owned a half dozen M42 and M39 J-9's. Only the early silver (alu) ones were sharp wide open. The later black ones were all soft wide in varying degrees. Lots of variation in quality between copies I tried.

I like some lenses that are a little soft wide open like Oreston 50 f1.8 and Volna 9. If you consider sharpness wide open to be the ultimate measure of quality then I would avoid.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The copies made in early 50s should be the sharpest one yet give smooth bokeh.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A few shots taken last month. A7II and late, black Jupiter-9. Shots are OOC JPG taken at f/2.0.









PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:31 pm    Post subject: thank you all Reply with quote

thank you all. I had to set the lens to 5.6. its great now. its my first time trying one of these lens. to set the aperture is different than most lens. again thank you all it is sharp no doubt this image is a plastic holder. I will have another question later for you all. I want to do experiment that was done by another photographer. the experiment he used a 50mm to 60mm lens as a corrective objective. the result he got was outstanding. I will ask you guys later for you input if you members don't mind have a great one. if I can recreate what he did you will all see what I mean. I am presently trying to buy some pieces to do this. thank you



PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow really like your images of your dog. that is very nice photos


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you. He is a much better companion than I am a photographer but he doesn't mind modeling, so long as the session doesn't interfere with his treats. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A search will show many posts and comments about soft J-9s. I read those before buying one and first went with a 1961 rangefinder version. I was first disappointed, but then found that I wasn't being precise enough with the focus. Additionally, it had a yellow cast which it still does.


I then found a mint M39 version from 1966 that has been very good. I avoided the black M42 and have been fortunate with the two I have.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thank you woodrim for the info. the lens had some haze on it that I removed. the lens is preforming very well nice and sharp. I like you photos very well done. I have read a lot of posts here. the images you all take are all I can say wow incredible. thank you


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeff Zen wrote:
I've owned a half dozen M42 and M39 J-9's. Only the early silver (alu) ones were sharp wide open. The later black ones were all soft wide in varying degrees. Lots of variation in quality between copies I tried.

Yes, I had a 70's M42 J-9 that was extremely "soft" (well, I might say blurry) wide open and even when closed, perfect for Hamilton's style...
I just get a silver M39 one (1960) and I'm very happy that it is a "good number", sharp wide open, not the sharpest lens I got of course but decently sharp for f/2 and very nice when closed.

Some pictures of this week-end, with A7s :

Wide open
[/url]

Wide open


Wide open (blurry because of the very windy weather at this moment)


f/8 or f/11, probably f/11


f/8


f/11


f/11


f/11
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/201511/big_4287_DSC04376_01_1.jpg]


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
A search will show many posts and comments about soft J-9s. I read those before buying one and first went with a 1961 rangefinder version. I was first disappointed, but then found that I wasn't being precise enough with the focus. Additionally, it had a yellow cast which it still does.

I then found a mint M39 version from 1966 that has been very good. I avoided the black M42 and have been fortunate with the two I have.


What a wonderful portrait and if my doggy senses are working correctly a very loving friendly sight hound, Greyhound or Whippet ? Nice clean teeth also, must be eating natural food I'm guessing and not the crap in polythene sacks. I must use my J9 had it for sometime but somehow never get around to using it lol


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caribou wrote:
Yes, I had a 70's M42 J-9 that was extremely "soft" (well, I might say blurry) wide open and even when closed, perfect for Hamilton's style...
I just get a silver M39 one (1960) and I'm very happy that it is a "good number", sharp wide open, not the sharpest lens I got of course but decently sharp for f/2 and very nice when closed.



really nice pics ! Much better than mine results with a non-MC black M42 version (though I really liked its bokeh).

guess I'll have to dig deeper into m39 version. Btw, why so much difference ?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tervueren wrote:


What a wonderful portrait and if my doggy senses are working correctly a very loving friendly sight hound, Greyhound or Whippet ? Nice clean teeth also, must be eating natural food I'm guessing and not the crap in polythene sacks. I must use my J9 had it for sometime but somehow never get around to using it lol


It's a Whippet. She lives down the street from me. The black spot at the end of her snout is from a copperhead bite.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

StyxD wrote:
Much better than mine results with a non-MC black M42 version (though I really liked its bokeh).

guess I'll have to dig deeper into m39 version. Btw, why so much difference ?
I don't know. About the M42 version in the 70's, I read somewhere that it was modified to give more soft focus... that was hype at this time (remember all those vaporous portrait and of course David Hamilton). Don't know if it is true but it would be an answer, plus the "famous" variation in the russians lens production.

Last edited by caribou on Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:59 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caribou wrote:
I don't know. About the M42 version in the 70's, I read somewhere that it was modified to get more soft focus... that was hype at this time (remember all those vaporous portrait and of course David Hamilton). Don't know if it is right but it would be an answer, plus the "famous" variation in the russians lens production.

Yes, I've heard this story too. On top of this, there was a guide suggesting moving the front lens by a fraction of millimeter further away from the front triplet. This was supposed nullify the "soft effect".


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
Tervueren wrote:


What a wonderful portrait and if my doggy senses are working correctly a very loving friendly sight hound, Greyhound or Whippet ? Nice clean teeth also, must be eating natural food I'm guessing and not the crap in polythene sacks. I must use my J9 had it for sometime but somehow never get around to using it lol


It's a Whippet. She lives down the street from me. The black spot at the end of her snout is from a copperhead bite.


Our whippet really hates the grass snakes we have in our garden. Must be some shared breed memory!
Have to say he is wasting his time, apart from an ability to produce a nasty smell they are completely harmless


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 12:51 am    Post subject: how many deer in this photo Reply with quote

I have a image taken with a trailcam. I know how many deer are there. I wonder if you guys can see them all. the most I seen this year at once was 8 large adult doe's. no fawns. last winter the snow was very deep. I saw 1 large mature buck twice. thought about it said to myself see you next year old timers. I hope next year to try a sony camera and zoom lens. enjoy


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have a trail camera setup. The white tail come to and through my yard. A pair of shots from a week or so back...






The neighborhood is surrounded by large tracts of woods and the deer travel from one prime feeding area to the next. I have seen groups of twenty or so but single deer or pairs are most common. They are protected in the city and have absolutely no fear of people. I had one buck walk out from behind some shrubbery not twenty feet from me, stop to stare me down, then amble slowly across the street and into my neighbor's yard. Of course I didn't have a camera then.


As for your puzzle, I see five deer but those animals disappear so quickly in the woods that I wouldn't bet money on it.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow steve wonderful the first buck is probably the second buck father. see they are both non typical. all the first bucks off spring will carry his horns. very nice thank you for sharing. great photos


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow steve wonderful the first buck is probably the second buck father. see they are both non typical. all the first bucks off spring will carry his horns. very nice thank you for sharing. great photos


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you but they are not great photographs, just heavy crops of shots taken under poor conditions. Still, I like them.

I hve no idea whether the two are related. All I can say is that they passed through the yard on the same day, several hours apart.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

About the M42 version in the 70's, I read somewhere that it was modified to give more soft focus... that was hype at this time (remember all those vaporous portrait and of course David Hamilton). Don't know if it is true but it would be an answer, plus the "famous" variation in the russians lens production.

I've never heard about the soft focus alteration suggestion which, taking in to account the contemporary Soviet attitude to Western culture, seems to me to be highly unlikely.

I suspect there's another, far more prosaic, explanation. I wonder if the M42 version is actually a modified computation that was needed to allow use on the deeper SLR bodies? I ask this because in the late 1950s Nikon gave up trying to modify their rangefinder 85/2 "Sonnar" lens so it would fit on the then new Nikon F. The back focus of the rangefinder lens was too short and (according to Rotoloni's major book on the Nikon rangefinder system, and the Nikon "1001 Nights" webpages) "tweaking" the design was not feasible in the same way that it was with their 105 "Sonnar". The implication is that image quality deteriorated to a degree which was regarded as unacceptable.

I own both the rangefinder and "tweaked" SLRS versions of the Nikkor 105 and although the image quality from both is excellent, there are some differences. My thinking is that a stronger "tweak" to the rangefinder Jupiter 9 might well have resulted in a more noticeable change in image quality. User observations on the M42 version of the Jupiter 9 do seem to say consistently that it isn't as "good" as the other.

In the past I had both versions of the Jupiter 9 and the M42 version certainly gave different results to the rangefinder model. The mid/late-1970s Jupiter 9 I have now is certainly less sharp wide open than the 85/2 Nikkor I tried earlier this year but it's still quite acceptable for a design dating back to pre-WWII.

Of course, I could be wrong about the Jupiter 9 changes . . . Wink


PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

scsambrook wrote:
About the M42 version in the 70's, I read somewhere that it was modified to give more soft focus... that was hype at this time (remember all those vaporous portrait and of course David Hamilton). Don't know if it is true but it would be an answer, plus the "famous" variation in the russians lens production.

I've never heard about the soft focus alteration suggestion which, taking in to account the contemporary Soviet attitude to Western culture, seems to me to be highly unlikely.

I suspect there's another, far more prosaic, explanation....
Perhaps, again I have no confirmed sources about that. But the soviet lenses production was also sold in western. And at this time (70's) there were sold by both Western countrys and Soviet union "soft focus" filters, precisly to reduce the sharpness of the portrait lenses.