It is a real shame there is no thread on this lens - so here is one: All pictures taken with LTM (M39 - silver version) and E-P1 1. {} 2. {} 3. {} 4. {} 5. {} 6. {} I have posted these pictures on other forums, but as I said, this fine lens theserve thread here.
That's cruel, I just sold mine Nice pictures, I like the lens but I just had too many around that same length. Stefan
m39 silver <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tokaplanet/7208878310/" title="test jupiter 9 m39 di stefano aria, su Flickr"> View attachment 208902 "500" height="375" alt="test jupiter 9 m39"></a> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tokaplanet/7208379130/" title="jupiter 9 85mm ƒ2 di stefano aria, su Flickr"> {} "500" height="410" alt="jupiter 9 85mm ƒ2"></a>
Trying out the Jupiter 9 85mm f2 These shots were all taken wide open, or nearly wide open, after a rain shower. I've got the lens on a trial basis. What do you think? Keep it or not? The shots are jpegs pretty much straight from the camera, with only a bit of sharpening. I'll post photos below.
No no! I just bought a 90. Don't make me buy an 85 as well! :smile: Great shots all of them but I especially love the one with the sun on the top edge of the frame
The risks of low contrast and flaring when shooting wide open I shot a few experimental photos with the Jupiter-9 85mm to see what people were talking about when they said you had to be careful shooting in bright conditions. This dreadful first shot shows what you can expect if you shoot wide open with the Jupiter-9 toward a bright light source. {} View image in gallery Stopping down about 1 1/2 stops (the lens doesn't have f stops that click), got me this much more pleasing rendering. {} View image in gallery So the Jupiter can get good results. You just have to think before you shoot and not assume it will handle extreme conditions like a modern, multi-coated lens would. In fact, I took plenty of washed out photos toward the sun in the mid-afternoon light. I'd have posted them, but have already thrown those failures away. Even under more forgiving lighting, I sometimes find that I want to perk up the image a bit with a little sharpening and by moving the black slider in a bit in post production. (I found a nice explanation of the issue, and a good review of the Jupiter-9 here: Jupiter 8 on Micro Four Thirds Review | NICO-FOTO).
It seems your white balance is quite off to the colder side. I have an impression my Helios is sharper and displays better contrast wide open than your copy of Jupiter lens. Here's what I'd do on second one: before: after: contrast cca 20% up, brightness cca 20% down, gamma correction to 0,90 + white balance to warm side. If you have an opportunity, I recommend you try Helios lens and see how it behaves I'd even boost contrast on your flower (YMMV): ->
Thanks for the suggested changes in post production. Is that in Lightroom? I've had occasional trouble with the WB with this lens. Changing one stop can make the color temperature dramatically cooler or warmer. Perhaps the Olympus' auto WB is having trouble interpreting the scene. Has anyone heard of this symptoms with other lenses or is this just my copy that does this? Also, can anyone suggest a better lens in the 75-90mm range for the money? This one cost $220. One nice thing about the Jupiter is the narrow DoF at f2 and thereabouts.
I love the jupiter 9 I am only experimenting, but I am thrilled: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric/6862451200/" title="P3203517 by amalric, on Flickr"> {} "640" height="480" alt="P3203517"></a> What I discovered is that it definitely needs a hood if only you are shooting close to the Sun. <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric/7008590943/" title="P3203619 by amalric, on Flickr"> {} "640" height="480" alt="P3203619"></a> Am. Flickr: amalric's Photostream
Lovely cars. I have the M42 version and love it to bits. Incredibly sharp once you've left the f2 portrait zone.
I was looking for an earlier rangerfinder version of this lens and finally got it a few days ago. Hopefully I will be able to do some shooting outside on the weekend, but for now I just compared it to Zuiko 45mm in my appartment. This is a human sized bear. Tried to have the same framing thus had to step back with Jupiter-9 (now it seems that I steped a bit too far with Jupiter-9). {} Jupiter-9 test 01 by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr No correction was done to the images. I am really surprised that Jupiter-9 renders colors almost in the same way Zuiko does. Most of the legacy primes I tried were low contrast muted colors compared to native lenses (escpecially wide open). Jupiter-9 sample has a higher iso though in order to have a faster shutter speed. As you can see Jupiter-9 is pretty sharp wide open and there is no soft effect at all. Bokeh is very similar, but the longer lens makes things larger on the background. This will be a great portait lens. This one is a bokeh test. I tried to have the same framing but unfortunatelly there was not enough room to step back with Jupiter-9. But still, I was very close. {} Jupiter-9 test 02 by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr Of course, for a telephoto lens Jupiter-9 will have much nicer background blur. And this is how it looks adapted on OM-D: {} Jupiter 9 + OM-D by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr I know some people think that Jupiter-9 is a hit and miss. I also have seen many Jupiter-9 lenses that were very soft wide open with a glowing soft effect. But those are mostly the latter versions. If you want a decent sample - get the one from the late 50-s early 60-s. Look for a silver rangefinder version from KMZ. Avoid LZOS factory.
I just got mine. I really like it! Man, it's pretty heavy, though. I'll take a walk with it tomorrow. The outside isn't as nice as Yevgen's, above, but it's very nice inside. Focus is smooth. The aperture contra is a little loose. Can I tighten it up? How? Here're some informal test shots, taken on an E-M5: \ f/2, 1/13 second, ISO 1600 <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/11002894305/" title="Test 1 by aweiss.sf, on Flickr"> {} "1000" height="753" alt="Test 1"></a> f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 1600 <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/11003055204/" title="Test 2 by aweiss.sf, on Flickr"> {} "1000" height="913" alt="Test 2"></a> f/2.8, 1/200, ISO 1600 <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/11003114143/" title="Test 3 by aweiss.sf, on Flickr"> {} "808" height="1000" alt="Test 3"></a> f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 1600 <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/11002895895/" title="Test 4 by aweiss.sf, on Flickr"> {} "671" height="1000" alt="Test 4"></a>
Congratulations, your lens is very good. In Ukraine there are workshops that can fix anything you want in your lens. For example, my lens is very tight in contrary as it had never been used and I am giving it to a workshop so that they lube it. I am sure they can tighten the aperture or anything else. Perhaps there are workshops like that near your place. Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 mobile app
I got a chance to do a few test shots with my Jupiter-9. Unfortunately the weather wasn't good and my wife didn't want to be in pictures. Anyway, I did a few tries. Don't judge me on aesthetics of the shots All pictures shot wide open. These are a few shots to show how bokeh looks like in portraiture: {} Two generations by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr If look at the bokeh circles you realize that they are very soft and creamy, not-busy, very similar to the ones that contemporary lenses produce. Latter versions of Jupiter-9 produce more busy bokeh with rigid circles. {} Jupiter-9 Portrait by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr View attachment 328595 Natasha & Dominique by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr Bokeh is very creamy. View attachment 328596 Jupiter-9 Bokeh by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr Full body portraits also look nice. Just look how shallow the DOF for the full body portraits. View attachment 328597 Jupiter-9 Full Body Portrait by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr {} Natasha by Yevgen Shatalov, on Flickr
