Leica Jupiter-3 Plus Compared with Three Rare Sonnar lenses

asiafish

All-Pro
Location
Bakersfield, CA
Real Name
Andrew
We've veered a bit from comparing the J-3+ with three rare Sonnars, BUT- this seems to be a good place to put in the Jupiter-8 shots from a lower-cost Sonnar.

This one is now in the hands of a Leicaplace member... It is Specially Modified for 0.65m close-focus, and is in focus across the range.

17920415424_ab11a13e29_o.jpg
L1016243
by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

18355418040_fd07ebef97_o.jpg
L1016254
by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Both at F2.

And F2 on the M Monochrom with a Yellow filter.

19063008152_3d8623a4e4_b.jpg
G1005267
by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

18882443299_2d6f743323_b.jpg
G1005240
by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Processed using my Custom FORTRAN code for applying a Gamma curve and converting to 16-bit pixel values.

This lens took a lot of work, ie shortening the focal length and modifying the mount. I bought another Jupiter-8, cannot modify it for close-focus, but it is made in 1957. Like me.
That looks like my Jupiter 8!
 

k fahlman

Regular
Location
Vancouver, BC
Real Name
Ken
The j8 was adjusted by Brian at f2. ....close focus to infinity. I know the rf has no idea of the aperture...but I do. He is telling me that stopping down will produce back focus. I could figure out on a live view m....but on analog need to guess and practice the amount to nudge the focus compensation.

I don't think it would be nearly as noticeable shooting film, it seems to be more profound on digital.
My 50 ZM Sonnar was fine on my analog M's, but shift was certainly noticeable on my M240/246.
I had to either adjust the focus slightly, or lean in about an inch, which I found easier.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hap

Top Veteran
That's possible. If you read Dante Stella's review of the ms optical 50 1.1 Sonnetar ( my lens too) he discusses in detail with suggestions to use lens align to quantify on digital and semi quantify on analog. But Sonnetar has coma adjustment which has the added effect of changing focal length, partly what the adjustment is about..

In reality this done automatically on floating element modern lenses. Miyazaki leaves the effect and degree up to photog. Aberrations on demand.
 

Hap

Top Veteran
On my j9.....focus with rf through distance range towards back focus. I turn thr focus ring 1-2mm shorter to compensate. Shimming too difficult I am told. More complicated than j8 or3
 
Film is thinner than the digital stack, but is not as flat. Manufacturers have to make assumptions on how film sits in the chamber of the camera to adjust lenses. I had to use one layer of copper tape on the RF cams of the 35/1.2 V1 Nokton and the 50/1.1 Nokton to have them focus perfectly on my M9.

Sonnar formula lenses have a great amount of spherical aberration at F1.5 which spreads out the DOF. Imagine the light from the center of the lens being at a different plane than the light from the edges. More light from the edges- hence the best point of focus is at that plane. But- the plane produced at the center and every point along the radius of the lens is falling into a different plane.
 
http://corephotonics.com/products/low-profile-camera/

They seem to be using two cameras in one: a high-res camera and a low-res camera with big pixels that are sensitive in low-light. Use the high-res, noisy image to extrapolate resolution from the low-noise image. This is well suited for small modules. BSI technology is also best for small sensors, more efficiency. In the 80s I did a lot with computer-generated synthetic imagery using Fractals. I had to convince some viewers that the scenes were not real. Fun stuff, will never replace a Sonnar formula lens on the M9 and M Monochrom for me. Ot the 1952 J-3 on the M8.
 
ZEISS 50MM F/1.5 ZM C SONNAR T* LENS BLACK USA NEW!

Popflash documents the issue with optimizing focus for film vs digital quite well, except "1997" should be "2007". Someone lost 10 years. It agrees with what I find- if I set a lens to focus perfectly on the M9 and (other people's) M240- it will back-focus on the M Monochrom, and even more on the M8. Film cameras- just does not make as much difference, so it is fine on the M3. The C-Sonnar that I bought from Popflash is perfect at F1.5 on my M8, and perfect at F1.5 on my M Monochrom used with an Orange filter- which shifts focus back. On the M9- best used at F2~F2.8. It is clear that my Lomography J3+ is set for the M9/M240, as are most of the lenses that I've adjusted. But I have a lot of lenses- some optimized for the M Monochrom and M8.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hap

Top Veteran
Wasn't there a product on the market I saw a few years back that was a fractal based image interpolator for upscaling resolution?

As far as modern sonnar based lenses......this sonnetar baffles me. Miyazaki claims (I do not speak Japanese but Bellamy sort of interprets) that he laments the perfect clinical lenses from mainstream companies and is nostalgic for lenses that not only have aberrations but substantially modifiable aberrations using simple techniques....expanding the possibilities of photographic vision. However, the rear element moving Sonnetar may have too many moving parts since coma and other aberrations are altered in the same operation that changes focal length. Instructions vary to minimal movement of elements (by practice and eating through film) closely around a 4m optimimum. However, with digital you can vary from 1m to infinity focus... I guess he is betraying his design towards the flexibility of digital and live view with instant image feedback. You can't play that game with film cameras. Even Dante, as sharp and as good a writer as he is, clearly seemed befuddled but on the right track in his fine review. At the end it seemed he loved the lens because it was challenging to use and appeared to have maximum flexibility. It's kind of maddening but not a killer that you have to know your shooting requirements in advance because the adjustment requires removing the lens, changing the coma adjustment, and remounting for a new set of possibilities.

It is a very very fast lens...apparently designed to shot wide open....with exotic glass and fully modern multicoatings.
 
If you didn't like the Israeli minitiarized prototype, well, how about the new offering from DXO? This looks like a happening little camera and smartphone combo.....much better than the original DXO One.
DxO ONE | Professional Quality Connected Camera for iPhone | www.dxo.com

Now I remember the PS plugin....Genuine Fractals. Brian....have you tried this?

It's not that I do not like the Israeli device, or Genuine Fractals- I just like doing things my way, whether with a lens optimized to be used wide-open with an Orange filter or run through my own FORTRAN code to convert to 16-bit pixels using a Gamma curve. It's my outlet on a number of planes. I prefer CCD's as the image capture is as close to RAW as you can get, CMOS adds on-chip processing. I prefer lenses designed without computers, told that to the optical engineer that worked for me. He had designed optics since the early 60s and told me that computers really did make his job easier.
 

Hap

Top Veteran
No offense intended.....hopefully none taken . It seems that applied computational imaging opens up a lot of possibilities for human progress and even expression. In my spare time it's definitely my preference to pick up a fine mechanical camera and vintage lens, walk about, record what catches my eye and maybe get surprised. If I were to go to the moon tomorrow I'd probably want to take a hasselblad and sonnar.
 
No offence taken at all- I think the technique is really cool. But for me- it's the optics of the classic lenses that gets my interest, like the Jupiter-3+. No way to make it work on a cell phone, the sensor is too tiny.
 

Hap

Top Veteran
For me ....that's why I was attracted to Miyazaki. He's more like the old designers but looking at the old designs...and then adding a little in new ideas and manual craftsman ship, as befits a lens designer for toy telescopes. Japanese minimalism. What you get is something interesting... Like 70 plus gram lenses, tiny, triplets etc. then contrast with the Sony master g or the Zeiss Otis.....great lenses , complex presumably close to supercomputer with few preconceptions.....very large and expensive.

Neither appropriate for smartphone sensors......for that I foresee very novel solutions in optics , computing, capture beyond me.

I am holding in my hand a collapsible elmar 50....2.8. To me it's beautiful. The j8 is always on camera or close by.
 

asiafish

All-Pro
Location
Bakersfield, CA
Real Name
Andrew
For me ....that's why I was attracted to Miyazaki. He's more like the old designers but looking at the old designs...and then adding a little in new ideas and manual craftsman ship, as befits a lens designer for toy telescopes. Japanese minimalism. What you get is something interesting... Like 70 plus gram lenses, tiny, triplets etc. then contrast with the Sony master g or the Zeiss Otis.....great lenses , complex presumably close to supercomputer with few preconceptions.....very large and expensive.

Neither appropriate for smartphone sensors......for that I foresee very novel solutions in optics , computing, capture beyond me.

I am holding in my hand a collapsible elmar 50....2.8. To me it's beautiful. The j8 is always on camera or close by.


It is fun to compare the old and the new. I'm currently traveling, but when I get back I plan to take my Leica M-E out with the 1937 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm f/1.5 Sonnar side-by-side with my Canon 6D and Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Distagon ZE. Those two lenses have almost nothing in common except the company name and the fact that they are both great examples of the state-of-the-art in fast standard lenses of their respective eras. Another thing they have in common is incredible image quality, though for very different reasons.
 

Hap

Top Veteran
I sawa the Otus in a glass case at OC Camera. Looked like nuclear device. I have Zeiss binos and this lens had the same sorts of curves and shapes of design.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom