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

M39 silver jupiter11(135/4)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:16 am    Post subject: M39 silver jupiter11(135/4) Reply with quote
First try this lens your opinions please
Camera:samsung nx3000










PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:46 am    Post subject: Re: M39 silver jupiter11(135/4) Reply with quote
dr.volkan wrote:
First try this lens your opinions please
Camera:samsung nx3000




Beautiful colours of course, but I am quite taken by the 3D rendering in the seagulls image.
Very well taken.
Jupiter 11 is a reliable and excellent lens
Tom


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Like 1 surprisingly good!


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice and sharp pictures.

The Jupiter-11 is still one of the best 135mm lenses money can buy. There are certainly a lot of faster ones available but barely any better ones. In direct comparison with e.g. the so much praised Rollei Carl Zeiss Tele Tessar HFT 135/4 it is by far the better lens in every respect. When I did a comparison of 10 different 135mm lenses last year it was only slightly beaten by the Leitz Elmar 135/4 lens.

However, it's prone to flare for which reason I strongly recommend to use a proper lens shade for maximum contrast.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, the photo with the seagulls is fantastic! This lens is a real beauty. Like 1 small


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
When I did a comparison of 10 different 135mm lenses last year it was only slightly beaten by the Leitz Elmar 135/4 lens.


Can we see this comparison ?


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Nice samples and lens.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sergun wrote:
tb_a wrote:
When I did a comparison of 10 different 135mm lenses last year it was only slightly beaten by the Leitz Elmar 135/4 lens.


Can we see this comparison ?


I'm getting lazy to publish such rather extensive tests as it involves a huge amount of work.

However, I've uploaded the full size pictures converted to JPG taken at F4 at least from the 3 mentioned lenses (Elmar, Tele-Tessar and Jupiter-11):

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1IHHZ13xg1pgDw-xcelnPtfVbZxJbnCAs?usp=sharing

From the file name everything should be clear.

BTW, the comparison was done with my Ricoh GXR-M APS-C camera.

Please let me know if that worked for you. Thanks for understanding.

Cheers,


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ä° did not use lens shade this m39 is very contrasty


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
dr.volkan wrote:
Ä° did not use lens shade this m39 is very contrasty


It certainly depends on the overall light situation and I only stated that it's prone to flare. In many situations the lens shade doesn't change anything; e.g. if the light comes from the back. If the light comes from the front side or if you're shooting even against the light then the situation may be totally different.
However, I always use lens shades anyway on every lens as they also protect the lens and I don't use any protecting filters at all.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice.
SLR or RF version?


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
dr.volkan wrote:
Ä° did not use lens shade this m39 is very contrasty


It certainly depends on the overall light situation and I only stated that it's prone to flare. In many situations the lens shade doesn't change anything; e.g. if the light comes from the back. If the light comes from the front side or if you're shooting even against the light then the situation may be totally different.
However, I always use lens shades anyway on every lens as they also protect the lens and I don't use any protecting filters at all.

Ä°f i can find i will buy lens shade for this gem the weather was cloudy when i use this gem


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lightshow wrote:
Very nice.
SLR or RF version?

Rangefinder version


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The J11 isn't prone to flare unless you have the sun in the frame.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dr.volkan wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
Very nice.
SLR or RF version?

Rangefinder version


They are optically identical anyway. Wink

I have both versions, the RF M39/LTM and the SLR M39/Zenit. There is also the Jupiter-11A in M42 which should perform equal.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ä° used the m42 version also but this silver one is gorgeus lens..


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You handle this lens really well! Nice pictures!

As for the flaring, I also only experienced it with the sun in or very near the image frame (M39 later sixties SLR version; I never really tested the much newer Kiev Automat version I have, as the mount is more awkward in use)


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I tried mine with a hood today and unless the sun is in the frame flare isn't any worse than other lenses of it's age / coatings. The hood slightly improves contrast, but so does Photoshop.

It's a superb lens, one of the best 135's.

This is straight out of the camera, no sharpening or processing. Shot wide open without the hood in bright sunlight to the side.



Home made hood - filter with glass removed and a plastic container with the bottom cut off glued in.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="tb_a"][quote="dr.volkan"]
Lightshow wrote:
Very nice.

They are optically identical anyway. Wink
.


I have owned nearly 5 or even 8 of the different J-11 (including the black one for M42)/ Yearly all were so-so. And only one – the silver for M39 (for the mirror Zenits) had been completely exceptional.

The sample (however not very well scanned):



Anyway, for my opinion, the J-37 MC is much better as a performer. It competed, in my tests, completely similarly to Takumar 135/3.2 SMS


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've never owned a J37, but I do own several J11s - two in Kiev/Contax, two in M39, a 'fat' M42 black one, a J11A in M42.

I also own the lens it is a copy of - the pre-war Zeiss Sonnar 4/135 for Contax, I also have the postwar Zeiss Opton Sonnar 4/135 for Contax and a 1950s Schneider Tele-Xenar 4/135 for Diax that is a copy of the Sonnar.

IMHO, the J11 is very close indeed in performance to the Zeiss Sonnars, the Schneider is every bit the equal of the Sonnars.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1