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

Welcome to the world of Jupiter 11
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
SonicScot wrote:
Seeing as there appears to be multiple versions of this lens, which one (if any) stands out as the best?
I understand that this could be down to personal preference, that's fine, but if I'm going to buy one I'd like the one which most people favour.

Would a Jupiter 11 best my Zeiss 135/3.5 Sonnar? I'm only talking about IQ, I know the Sonnar mechanics are iffy Wink


I've only used 2 different versions, a 53 and a 58.
The 53 is sharper but is a turd to use, it does look nice tho.
The 58 is also very sharp.
both flare like a bastard so get yee a hood.



i've not had a go of the fatboy but would like to.

Last edited by BeardsAreBest on Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:08 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 small


PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Really need to get my 55 J11 out and shoot with it some more.
My old thread from when I bought it.
Like to try it on a better camera.

http://forum.mflenses.com/1955-jupiter-11-13-5cm-f4-red-p-t48343,highlight,%2Bjupiter.html


PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have both the LTM and the M39/Zenit versions in silver (somewhere). Maybe I should search for them for one of my next dog walks....

Certainly a remarkable lens.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've got a Kiev-Contax version of Jupiter-11, produced in 1961, with red "P". I gave it a try in its native environment or almost, in Moscow.

My observations:

a. With normal settings (Sony NEX) colours may be kind of faded. But sharpness and 3D effect are really there.
b. Surprisingly, the lens is not very much prone to flare. At times the contrast may fall considerably under the sun and it may happen in a part of the frame. But no visible light spots repeating the shape of the aperture.
c. What I especially appreciate is that for many shots it is enough to make auto colour correction, and the colours shine back. With all that, some vintage touch is kept.

Here are some samples:

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
my 1937 CZJ is so beat up it may have spent some time on the eastern front


Zeiss 135/4 by unoh7, on Flickr


Whitehouse by unoh7, on Flickr


Oil Change by unoh7, on Flickr


L1045283 by unoh7, on Flickr

Since the lens is identical to early J11s not surprising it will also flare easy. This was "the" 135 untill:

Nikkors by unoh7, on Flickr

LIFE switched to Nikon lenses partly because of this 135, and it was the last sonnar produced by nikon, longest running single formula in the line and made in 5 mounts! This one is in Contax mount, so they were going right on the Contax bodies. Smile

The Zeiss design is incredible in the central frame as can be seen in the many examples from J11, but a close look at distant objects reveals softening at the edges, even at small apertures. The Nikkor and Canon RF 135/3.5s are able to carry the zeiss/jupiter sharpness right to the edge, or at least more so Smile


L1014496 by unoh7, Canon LTM 135/3.5

I have a litte RF 135 collection:

135s by unoh7, on Flickr

Funny, the Nikkor is the lightest, but it's adapter is heavy for use with the Leica. But I have a direct Contax-Sony adapter which is about the same as the M-to-FE adapters.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2021 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
SonicScot wrote:
Seeing as there appears to be multiple versions of this lens, which one (if any) stands out as the best?
I understand that this could be down to personal preference, that's fine, but if I'm going to buy one I'd like the one which most people favour.

Would a Jupiter 11 best my Zeiss 135/3.5 Sonnar? I'm only talking about IQ, I know the Sonnar mechanics are iffy Wink


Jupiter 11:
bike lane kitty by The lens profile, on Flickr

CZJ Sonnar:
Wonky by The lens profile, on Flickr


PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2021 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
SonicScot wrote:
Seeing as there appears to be multiple versions of this lens, which one (if any) stands out as the best?
I understand that this could be down to personal preference, that's fine, but if I'm going to buy one I'd like the one which most people favour.

Would a Jupiter 11 best my Zeiss 135/3.5 Sonnar? I'm only talking about IQ, I know the Sonnar mechanics are iffy Wink


Jupiter 11:
bike lane kitty by The lens profile, on Flickr

CZJ Sonnar:
Wonky by The lens profile, on Flickr


Very nice images.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2021 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote






1937 CZJ 13.5cm F4 converted to LTM, on the Leica M9.

Better than the J-11?



I'll have to do a side-by-side. I just picked up a 1952 KMZ J-11 with Zeiss optics in it. Different coating from the 1954 and 1957 KMZ.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2021 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
SonicScot wrote:
Seeing as there appears to be multiple versions of this lens, which one (if any) stands out as the best?
I understand that this could be down to personal preference, that's fine, but if I'm going to buy one I'd like the one which most people favour.

Would a Jupiter 11 best my Zeiss 135/3.5 Sonnar? I'm only talking about IQ, I know the Sonnar mechanics are iffy Wink


Jupiter 11:
bike lane kitty by The lens profile, on Flickr

CZJ Sonnar:
Wonky by The lens profile, on Flickr


For me, the Jupiter 11 is the winner. Both are sharp enough, but the bokeh / shadow on the car from the CZJ looks messy. I shall have to get my Jupiters and Sonnars out and have a play, I like them all.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
SonicScot wrote:
Seeing as there appears to be multiple versions of this lens, which one (if any) stands out as the best?
I understand that this could be down to personal preference, that's fine, but if I'm going to buy one I'd like the one which most people favour.

Would a Jupiter 11 best my Zeiss 135/3.5 Sonnar? I'm only talking about IQ, I know the Sonnar mechanics are iffy Wink


Jupiter 11:
bike lane kitty by The lens profile, on Flickr

CZJ Sonnar:
Wonky by The lens profile, on Flickr


To me there is no loser here. Both images are sharp and fantastic! Just to muddy the waters here I'll ask about the Jupiter 37A as it's supposedly an upgrade to the Jupiter 11. Is this not the case?


PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mr_tibbs2004 wrote:


To me there is no loser here. Both images are sharp and fantastic! Just to muddy the waters here I'll ask about the Jupiter 37A as it's supposedly an upgrade to the Jupiter 11. Is this not the case?


The 37a is sharper and more modern coating probably. I don't have it. On full frame sharpness isn't really an issue with most glass. m43 is a different story.
I'll put out a fishing line for a 37a to see if I can score a deal on one.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:


For me, the Jupiter 11 is the winner. Both are sharp enough, but the bokeh / shadow on the car from the CZJ looks messy. I shall have to get my Jupiters and Sonnars out and have a play, I like them all.


Bokeh is extremely susceptible to lighting and background. IRL there isn't much if any difference. Both Sonnar 4/3. If anything the CZJ is a bit smoother because of the wide aperture. Also it can focus up to 1m whereas the Jupiter goes to 1.4m
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2