Russian lenses on Leica M camera

[macgreg]

Has anyone used any russian lenses, like a Jupiter 8 or 12 , in a leica M body ?

I am thinking of getting an M and those lenses seem pretty good for a start. Of course I had read various stuff about the focusing problems and I wonder if anyone here has had any experience on that.

 

[JLP]

The two jupiter lenses can work well on an M body but the j-8 needs to be shimmed for Leica. The j-12 have enogh dof to mask the focus issue on Leica bodies.
The j-8 can be a great lens if you find a good sample, i have and use an early 52 which presumably have Zeiss glass and it is very nice even wide open.

 

[gone]

I have, and never experienced any focusing issues. Never bought the expensive Leica or Voigtlander adapters either, the cheap Chinese ones worked just fine. Yes, I understand that some people have had close focusing issues on SOME cameras w/ SOME lenses, but I never did. My J-8 lenses, both the early chrome ones and the later black ones worked well w/o any adjustments whatsoever. Of course, when dealing w/ old Russian equipment, my experiences may not be yours. The J-8 is a really good lens for the money, although I prefer the collapsible Industar 22 lenses for their small size and great IQ. Filters and hoods are simple series adapters that cost very little. Even the site below suggests adjusting the Russian lenses. I always just screwed them in and shot away.

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page444.htm

 

[Fotoguy20d]

I've used the J8 and the J12, as well as the I-22. Never had any issues.

Dan

 

[darkosaric]

Jupier 12 and Industar-22 collapsible (copy of elmar) - no problems on M3 and on M6.

 

[250swb]

The J12 is a pretty good lens, no focusing problems even with a cheap adapter, but the aperture ring is a pain to use especially if you want to use filters.

Steve

 

[IloveTLRs]

I have shot with a FED 53/2.8 on an M3 and it was excellent. No focus issues at all. It flares when shot straight into the sun, but otherwise an excellent lens that cost me around $40.

 

[mdarnton]

If the guys who are so willing to tell you to spend your own money and it will work are willing to guarantee their statements by buying any lens you get that doesn't focus right, I say go for it.

There is a definite technical reason it shouldn't work unless fixed, though, so otherwise, no, don't do it.

On the RF forum there are a couple of guys who always pipe up to say it will be fine. . . .The same people find it acceptable in their portfolios if the ears in their portraits are in sharp focus when they probably focused on the eyes. . . . If you're one of these, you'll like the lenses, but I notice that since they fit on digital cameras with adapters and focus through the lens there, the prices have really gone up from when I bought the ones I had, so they're not the deal they used to be.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Has anyone used any russian lenses, like a Jupiter 8 or 12 , in a leica M body ?

I am thinking of getting an M and those lenses seem pretty good for a start. Of course I had read various stuff about the focusing problems and I wonder if anyone here has had any experience on that.

You should have less problems with meterless M and huge bottom J-12. At 35mm you are not going to miss it dramatically even at 2.8.
50mm is different story. Even with 50 3.5 it isn't going to be as sharp as on FSU LTM. And for J-8 here is huge difference between properly shimmed or as is.
Get ready to have shimmed 50mm FSU, which is only accurate for RF focusing or scale focusing, but very rare to be the same at both focusing methods.

J8 at M4-2. Shimmed, only accurate with RF focusing.







FSU RF lenses are very sharp, if they are aligned to RF body. Even J-3 is sharp enough. But once it is aligned to M body, the focusing scale is off for most of the FSU lenses. You would also have to shift aperture ring as well. And screws/threads to work with are almost single use only...

To be honest, LTM CV or at least Canon LTM are less hassle to start with M with slightly more money to pay for...

But... I find J-3 and J-8 to be lovely in prints...

 

[bdial]

I use a J-12 and find that it works quite nicely. I've used it on both analog and digi M's with no problems. Haven't done any close work wide open, so it's hard to say if there are any focus inaccuracies. Just don't lose the rear cap.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Jupiter 8 and 12, and industar 22, 50 and 61 all work fine on my M2 and MP with Leica, Voigtlander and Chinese adapters. Sharp lenses too:


Albany, University Village Garden MP Industar-22 Acros D-76 1-1 9min 22C 06-2006 22 by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr


Ben at Dr Ng MP Industar61 T400CN VS 06-2005 04 by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr

 

[macgreg]

Thank you all for the answers. Although I am interested more into street photography and so , due to the apertures used the problem wouldn't be obvious , I would definitely take portraits too. And that sounds risky !

Any "cheap" alternatives for 35mm and 50mm ? Apart from the russian lenses I mean.

 

[Xmas]

Yes there are cheaper.

Cosina Voightlander (CV) did modern LTM and M lenses which are on a par with Leicas best.

Zeiss 'badge engineered' the modern ZM series...

There are also other 3rd party German and Japan LTM lenses. e.g. LTM Nikkors (Sonnar clones).

It is best to buy lenses after inspection or from a dealer with return if not satisfactory...

If you have a CL or M5, and get a J12 you will need the M to LTM (or LTM to M) adapter milled or you will damage both the camera and lens. The meter on CLE & M6 and later wont work too well afterwards, either as it is masked, the same problem can occur on SA 21mm and type I Elmart 28mm BTW, check before you mount, not all will have been milled, that you might buy, they will also mask the semi spot meter on the shutter curtain.

Very expensive mistake.

(There are similar (but different) compatibility problems with Canon LTM (like the P) cameras.)

None of my FSU lenses have problems that are not attributable to kitchen table maintenance, so beware, but the nice condition ones perform as good as their Zeiss originals.

The focus registration and focus shift is a real problem with M8, and M9, and has been annoying with film M since '79 when Leitz introduced the high volume Noctilux /1.0, & Solm's charge eye watering prices to address.

The FSU and CV lenses are sometimes available in MC (Multi) or SC (single) and some people prefer the SC signature, in Mono, or colour or with digital.

When you are buying Leica lenses the haptics may be critical cause they are so small. If you have big hands this is/can be a real problem.

 

[darkosaric]

Best cheap alternative to Leitz lenses is ... older Leitz lens , and even cheaper alternative is ... Leitz lens with cleaning marks. from 50 to 100 euros you can get excellent performer that looks bad. I got Elmar LTM mount for 100 euros (and sold it for same price when I got M mount version), Hektor I found for 50 euros, many 90mm elmars are 50-70 euros ... Ugly = good. If it is used so hard that it is ugly - that means it is a user lens, better than one that is sitting on the shelf.

Example: lets say you have 5 nikkor lenses 50mm (so cheap lenses), and you use only one and after 20 years that lens is ugly, and other 4 lenses are in mint condition. I would like to get that lens - because it is better than those that are sitting there - for sure that lens has "something" that is better than those other 4. That is why I love ugly lenses.

 

[cliveh]

Has anyone used any russian lenses, like a Jupiter 8 or 12 , in a leica M body ?

What a terrible suggestion, you should use Leica lenses.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Thank you all for the answers. Although I am interested more into street photography and so , due to the apertures used the problem wouldn't be obvious , I would definitely take portraits too. And that sounds risky !

Any "cheap" alternatives for 35mm and 50mm ? Apart from the russian lenses I mean.

I would suggest Summaron 35 3.5 LTM.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

What a terrible suggestion, you should use Leica lenses.

Or both.

 

[macgreg]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

The Elmars and the Canons don't come cheap anymore. A good copy is about 200euros, which is a lot. In that case I would rather save up for a CV.

On the other hand, a russian lenses might by "risky" but I don't think they are that bad if they work well, from what I ve seen.

 

[mgb74]

You should have less problems with meterless M and huge bottom J-12. At 35mm you are not going to miss it dramatically even at 2.8.
50mm is different story. Even with 50 3.5 it isn't going to be as sharp as on FSU LTM. And for J-8 here is huge difference between properly shimmed or as is.
Get ready to have shimmed 50mm FSU, which is only accurate for RF focusing or scale focusing, but very rare to be the same at both focusing methods.

J8 at M4-2. Shimmed, only accurate with RF focusing.







FSU RF lenses are very sharp, if they are aligned to RF body. Even J-3 is sharp enough. But once it is aligned to M body, the focusing scale is off for most of the FSU lenses. You would also have to shift aperture ring as well. And screws/threads to work with are almost single use only...

To be honest, LTM CV or at least Canon LTM are less hassle to start with M with slightly more money to pay for...

But... I find J-3 and J-8 to be lovely in prints...

I have looked and cannot find a clear description of what's involved in shimming the J-8. Or who might offer the service at a reasonable cost.

 

[noyart]

I also want to know. I have a Jupiter 8 that may need shimming and some focus alignment fix

 

[tessar]

I've never had focus trouble with Jupiter lenses, but then I used them on an LTM Leica and I don't often shoot at close distances with a rangefinder camera or use wide apertures. A fellow named Brian Sweeney, who appears to be an expert at shimming Soviet lenses, has an illustrated post on shimming a wide-aperture Jupiter 3:
http://www.pentax-manuals.com/repairs/j3service.pdf
Does not look easy.

 

[BrianDS]

I just received a Jupiter 12, but the rear element hits the shutter on my M9. Has anyone been able to use this lens on an M9? My summaron 35mm with eyes went missing along with a 90mm and a 50mm

 

[darkosaric]

Hi Brian, welcome to the forum .
On digital Leica many older lenses will not work, for example DR Summicron is also one of them. All lenses that are deep in the body will generally have problems on digital Leica, either touching the shutter, or having color fringe. I never had digital M body, this is from what I have heard from other M users.

 

[BrianDS]

Darkosaric, thanks for your reply. I’m going to gret a Voigtländer 35mm with M mount and return the Jupiter. It was an interesting experiment.

As a curiousity, I wonder if the smallest extension ring between the camera and lens would “work” or whether it wouldn’t focus correctly.

I’ve tried to find an article on how the rangefinder overlay image for focusing works with the focusing ring.

In other words: If the images line up in the RF viewfinder, is it in-focus or does the extra extension make it appear in-focus in the viewfinder, but it’s actually out of focus?

What I wrote probably doesn’t make sense.

 

[darkosaric]

I think that extra extension ring will bring all outside of focus. Once I got Orion lens with 39mm mount, and use it on M3 with adapter. But it was some strange version or the lens, not for Zorki/Leica, and even when my M3 showed focus was ok - all was wrong. Sold the lens as defect.