Jupiter 3 LTM vs Leitz 5cm 1.5 summarit M

[peekpt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was about to purchase a Leitz 5cm 1.5 summarit M from a local photo store, but when I tested on my camera I noticed very, very low contrast, I was able to fix it on LightRoom later . I loved the bokeh, it's very good and creamy so you can push sharp to maximum and the bokeh remains untouched. I ended up not purchasing it, because it was in mint- condition with some cleaning marks and the owner was asking a lot of money for it.

 

I put my bid on a J-3 from e**y (and an adapter), the lens photos look cosmetically good, I think it's a better cheaper solution since the Leitz wasn't sharp on 1.5. Still waiting for them.

 

I know I probably will have to shim the J-3 to set up focus.

Questions

-Which is "better"?

-Would you please put some photos of both ?

-And what year is the better glass fabrication for J3 lenses? Mine is '64.

 

Regards

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Ecar]

I have both.

There's no "better" lens. From a purely technical perspective, both have serious flaws by today's standards. Of course, that's part of their character.

The J3 (at least my copy) shows colors that are sometimes funky, particularly in high-contrast light. The Summarit's bokeh is harsher, less creamy than that of the J3. The Summarit's definition and sharpness are higher.

Again, this is comparing two individual lenses (1956 Summarit and 1971 J3) wide open or thereabout, so YMMV. The J3 in particular is known for large sample variations.

The J3 was made in numerous versions by various soviet factories. Generally speaking, the earlier the year, the better. Those made in the mid to late 50's are said to be better built. In any case, you will indeed need to adjust it for proper focussing at your preferred range.

Unfortunately, I'm on the road and can't post pictures for comparison. The one below was taken with M9 + J3 (wide open). You may click on it for a larger view.

Ecar | Everywhere Else

Enjoy your new lens.

And make sure you get a hood for it, else the lens is pretty useless in bright light (same applies to the Summarit btw). I use a 40.5mm Heavystar metal hood.

[andym911]

only have the Summarit and no experience of the Jupiter..

 

I love the summarit not only for the look it gives but the nadling is super smooth and the mechanics of the lens are superb.

 

Here a shot from last week on M8

 

Andy

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[peekpt]

Thank you for the information.

Seller says that is Zahorsky Optical Mechanical Factory, ZOMZ , is that good?

[Ecar]

No idea.

In any case, these lenses were often a mix of components from various plants. To make it more confusing, many sellers actually dismantle several lenses and use the bits and pieces to re-build fully functional ones. The chances that you get an original lens as it came out of the factory are therefore low. Then again, you are not buying a Leica lens, are you?

[peekpt]

No, I wish but no, I have an Leitz Elmar 50/2.8 which is very good on day light, but because of the ultra high quality of iso 2500 images of my M8 <irony> I can't shoot in low light. Other reason of purchasing an alternative is that I shoot a lot of street pictures and sometimes I need more separation from the object <drama>

[Ecar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, the J3 will allow you to get pictures in low light, but bear in mind that the IQ will also be lower than that of the Elmar (even the first version, which is what I assume you have) - although arguably with more *character* (or optical aberrations), particularly if you convert your images to BW.

Achieving F/1.5 at the time was no small feat, even for Leitz, but this came at the cost of versatility and/or IQ. Something's gotta give...