test jupiter-9 against canon 85 1.8 AF

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

I made a small compare of 85mm
Jupiter show very good result

canon 40D, liveview focus, white balance daylight , F5.6
contax 80-200, jupiter 9, canon 85 1.8, contax 85 1.4

center

border

extreme border

after I got tired of test and go to take a swim Wink

contax 28-85

yalcinaydin · Joined: 20 May 2008 Posts: 825 Location: Izmir, Turkey

I was planning to buy a Jupiter-9 but I didn't like the color tones of the lens, is this a general performance or specific to this copy? I know that canon 85 1.8 is optically very good lens but in this samples Contax 85 1.4 is clearly the winner Smile

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Definitely the Contax 1.4/85 wins this lens battle! What a lens!
But I am surprised how good the 80-200 performs.

lulalake · Expire: 2011-11-18

Very interesting.

I'll do a test also. I don't have a Canon 85 but have several others in similar ranges.

(PS. I'll also test some several Ouzo 1 ltr glasses)

Jules

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

What impresses me is how architectonically coherent the landscape has stayed. All the houses under the castle are made in the same typical style and order. Obviously the local politicians are very intelligent and able to make laws to impose respect of architectural traditions - something quite rare unfortunately in the mediterranean beach places, where most often than not, old houses, new houses big hotels etc. are chaotically arranged.

As for the lenses, I have two of them (Jupiter and Contax 1.4/85) and the test is consistent with my own impressions.
-

yalcinaydin · Joined: 20 May 2008 Posts: 825 Location: Izmir, Turkey

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Very nice place ! Seems a photographer paradise, many thanks for this valuable samples!

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

maddog10 · Expire: 2015-02-12

Looks like we mostly all agree, has that ever happened before!

All lenses do an adequate job. This is how I would place them.

1. Contax 1.4/85
2. Canon 1.8/85
3. Contax Zoom
4. Jupiter 9

Now the important comparison - what are the prices for each lens.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Jupiter 9 is around 100 USD others lot more.

maddog10 · Expire: 2015-02-12

Color cast can be fixed in PP, somewhat, although it is extra step in work flow. If you are on a budget, the Jupiter 9 would get the job done (going by these examples).

yalcinaydin · Joined: 20 May 2008 Posts: 825 Location: Izmir, Turkey

I'm not experienced in MF lenses yet but I know EF line AF lenses and this Canon EF 85/1.8 is 380-400$, yep a bit pricey, EF AF 100/2 is like 400-420$, Jupiter-9 is still cheaper when compared with them Smile

I realy wonder the price of the Contax Smile

Himself · Expire: 2013-05-30

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

esrods · Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 148 Location: Sydney Australia

Very informative test, Poilu. And very nice photos.
The outcome of Jupiter 9 is expected as it is known as a soft lens suitable for portraiture.
Contax 1.4/85 is very impressive. Another one to my list Sad

yalcinaydin · Joined: 20 May 2008 Posts: 825 Location: Izmir, Turkey

I'm curious, in this test if there was also a Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 85mm f1.9, where would it fit?

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

Very nice pictures. I like the place.
To my eyes, The 1,4/85 is the best.
But I don't think that the canon is better than the jupiter. Between both, I see more a difference in tonal rendition than in sharpness. Look at the extrteme borders and you can see (up in the image) a similar definition of the plants and rocks (may be a very very little diferences in the sharpness for the canon, and this is so minimal than hardly justify the price's difference between both, for me, endeed).
In the center, look at the "individual", or so, leyend and in the detail of the tawer. If you neutralize the yellowish of the jupiter, the image is appropiate and transmit adequately all the elements and details that turn the place in the paradise that we can see. May be the canon is better than the jupiter, but I think that are in the same place. Of course that in F/5,6. In F/2 and 2,8 well.......jupiter is only for softs portraits

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

I agree with estudleon in the assessment of the jupiter vs canon - it's a pretty close race. Obviously the Zeiss wins hands down, but then - it is priced well beyond the others. Still it does appear as though there is a price/quality relationship

patrickh

Wormhandler · Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden

Image quality overall, I agree with the list posted above with quality rankings. The canon beats the jupiter center and medium, but I must say that on my screen it looks like the canon is the worst in the extreme borders as seen in the last example. Look at the pile og bricks and the details of the air condition units. It seems like image quality drops heavily at the borders while the jupiter is more even.

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

hi Wormhandler
Maybe my copy of the canon have this problem.
I used this lens for portrait and never remark any anomalies
Based on various test the border should be excellent.
But it is also common to read about copy variation and quality control problem for canon lens

Wormhandler · Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden

Hi Poilu,
They are all portait lenses, except the zoom. And as you say, the extreme border is of no concern for portraits. Maybe even a bonus sometimes.
Name a company which hasn't sample variations, except maybe zeiss and cosina-voigtl�nder. Smile

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

It's true that all lenses have come copy variation, but in the case of Canon and other companies of today, Sigma to just make one name, the amount and seriousness of copy variations is so huge to cause big floods of complaint and a lot of returned exemplars.
Manual Focus lenses are not immune but of course the type of quality control that companies like Zeiss or Leica use at the end of their production lines is totally unknown to today's big mass-production lens companies.
Therefore to invest in an old lens made by those quality companies makes sense still today, because with the same money you literally don't know what you are going to buy from a today's AF mass market company.
For a very good Zeiss lens you spend in average from 150-200 Euros to 400-600 Euros depending on the models.
With the lower end figure you can only buy a kit lens or a 50mm lens from Canon. With the higher figure you can buy a macro lens or a superwide lens like the Sigma 10-20, which is notorious for it's crappy quality variations.
For the same money that I spent for the Sigma (which I have sold last year), I have purchased a Planar 2/100.
Or, if you prefer, a Distagon 4/18 plus a Planar 1.7/50.
In any case, a totally no brainer better purchase.
Then of course with 800 or 1000 or 1500 Euros you can buy some L lenses, that will stand (in most cases, not always) the comparison with used Zeiss and used Leica... but spending 3-4 times as much.

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

Orio, in my country, Argentina, one particular camera seller told my, the last year, that in the 2008 could come in lens with leica name, but with differents problems like Misaligned lens??????.
This is relationed with your commentary.