This review presents a JUPITER-9 2/85 lens manufactured by LZOS (Lytkarinsky Optical Glass Plant, Lytkarino) with M42 mounting thread and serial number 8510041, most likely manufactured in 1985.
Below shown list of major versions of JUPITER / JUPITER-9:
- JUPITER-9 2/85 AUTOMATIC. In the case for the Kiev-10/15 cameras, the Arsenal plant (Kiev), the Kiev-Avtomat mount
- JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm. In a white case, Krasnogorsk, mount Contact-Kiev
- JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm P. In the white building, Arsenal building (Kiev), Contact-Kiev bayonet mount
- Jupiter-9 1: 2 F = 8,5cm P... In a white case, KMZ, M39 for Zenit cameras
- JUPITER-9 2/85. In a white case, Lytkarinsky, M39 for Zenit cameras
- In the black case of the old type, Lytkarinsky, M42 (no review yet)
- JUPITER-9 2 / 85. In a black case of a new type, Lytkarinsky, M42
- MC JUPITER-9 2/85. In a black case of a new type, Lytkarinsky, with 'MS', M42
Before the release of 'black' lenses, such as the one shown in this review, Lytkarino released white model Jupiter-9 2/85.
The optical layout of the JUPITER-9 2/85 was copied from Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 2/85. Of course, Zonnar himself has much better optical performance than his twin brother.
JUPITER-9 2/85 is soundly assembled - all made of metal and glass. The focus ring rotates smoothly. During focusing, the front lens does not rotate, and the frame of the body moves forward. The focus ring rotates 270 degrees (!). During focusing, the entire lens unit moves. The minimum focusing distance is 80 cm. The maximum ratio for macro photography is 1: 7.3. The lens can use standard 49mm filters.
The lens has an installation ring and aperture preset ring. The setting ring can take one of the following fixed values: F / 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16. The preset ring rotates smoothly and with this you can set any value of the number F. There is also a DOF scale for the same values of the number F as on the aperture setting ring. It is very nice that the diaphragm consists of as many as 15 petals. And it is a pity that the petals are metallic, reflecting light.
The native cover simply fits snugly to the frame of the case and can easily be lost.
On the open aperture, the lens does not have any sharpness and contrast, which can be skillfully used to create portraits. But still, for ordinary purposes, the sharpness of the lens is clearly not enough. Even closing the aperture to F 2.8, the expected sharpness does not come. In fact, loss of contrast and strong software between the f / 2.0-2.8 apertures, mostly black Lytkarin lenses, such as in this review, suffer. White brothers from the Krasnogorsk plant can be used with the F / 2.0 aperture.
It is quite difficult to focus on the JUPITER-9 2/85 on a fully open aperture, and at first the soft effect was taken by me for misses when focusing.
At f / 5.6, the JUPITER-9 2/85 delivers normal sharpness. The lens 'greens' the picture a little.
How to use with modern cameras?
Lenses with mounting thread M42 (M42 X 1 / 45.5), such as the lens from this review, are very easy to use on almost any modern digital camera (both SLR and mirrorless), for this it is enough to choose the right adapter (adapter). You do not need to carry out any additional steps to modify the lens.
The cheapest adapters can be found at Aliexpress.com... There are adapters (adapters) with a chip that provide more convenience during shooting, usually chips are used to confirm focus and / or metering exposure, and form the correct EXIF. The chip does not affect the image quality in any way.
For some SLR cameras (for example, with the Nikon F-mount), you need to use adapters with a corrective lens, which allows you to focus correctly at all focusing distances. For any mirrorless cameras, such a lens is not needed, and the adapter is a simple decorated hollow metal tube with an appropriate mount.
For SLR cameras
- Canon: For cameras Canon EOS with bayonet mount EF / EF-S need an M42-Canon EOS adapter, such an adapter with a chip can be found herewithout chip here.
- NIKON: For cameras Nikon DX / FXas well as for cameras Fujifilm и Kodak with a Nikon F mount, you need an M42-Nikon F adapter, you can buy such an adapter without a lens and a chip here, with a lens without a chip herewith chip without lens here, with lens and chip here. Why a lens? Why chip?
- PENTAX: For Pentax cameras with K mount, you need an M42-Pentax K adapter, you can buy such an adapter here.
- SONY/MINOLTA: For cameras with a Sony / Minolta A mount, you need the M42-Sony A adapter, you can find such an adapter without a chip at this linkwith a chip at this link.
- OLYMPUS/PANASONIC/LEICA: For cameras with a 4/3 bayonet mount (not to be confused with Micro 4/3!) You need an M42-4 / 3 adapter, you can buy such an adapter here.
For mirrorless cameras
- SONY: For cameras with 'E'/'FE' mount series SonyNEX и Sony Alpha you need an adapter M42-Sony E (aka M42-Sony Nex), you can find it at this link. An autofocus adapter is also available for these cameras. Techart PRO Leica M - Sony E Autofocus Adapterwhich can be found at this link.
- OLYMPUS / PANASONIC / KODAK / XIAOMI: For cameras with a bayonet mount Micro 4/3 (Micro 4:3) you need an adapter M42-Micro 4/3, you can find it at this link.
- CANON M: For cameras with Canon EF-M mount need adapter M42-Canon M, it can be found at this link.
- CANON R and RF-S: For cameras with Canon RF mount need adapter M42-Canon R, it can be found at this link.
- Nikon 1: For cameras Nikon 1 Series need adapter M42-Nikon 1, you can find it at this link.
- Nikon Z: For cameras Nikon Z series (FX/DX) need an adapter M42-Nikon Z, it can be found at this link.
- FUJIFILM X: For cameras with mount X need an M42-Fuji X adapter, you can find it at this link.
- FUJIFILM GFX: For medium format cameras G-mount need M42-Fuji GFX adapter, you can find it at this link.
- SAMSUNG: For cameras with NX mount, you need an M42-Samsung NX adapter, you can find it at this link. There are no adapters for the NX mini camera yet.
- PENTAX: For Q-mount cameras, you need an M42-Pentax Q adapter, you can find it at this link.
- SIGMA / PANASONIC / LEICA: For cameras with L mount you need an M42-Leica L adapter, you can find it at this link.
- LEICA: For cameras with a bayonet mount Leica M need adapter M42-L / M, you can find it at this link.
If you have any questions on compatibility and adapters - ask in the comments (comments do not require any registration at all).
Important lens parameters for Jupiter 9
- Large maximum aperture F / 2.0 and a focal length of 85 mm make it easy to control the depth of the sharply imaged space.
- The lens is quite heavy.
- The diaphragm consists of 15 petals and ideal for portraits, gives smooth bokeh. Also, an excellent zonnar scheme for 7 elements in 3 groups helps to create excellent bokeh.
- The lens suffers strong spherical aberration on the open aperture.
- Compactness - the lens is small, several times smaller than a modern similar autofocus lens Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm 1: 1.8G IF SWM.
- The lens uses a simple single-layer enlightenment and is very afraid of flare (it feels like there is no enlightenment at all).
Below are photos taken on Nikon D90. In different galleries, photographs are taken with different aperture values. No processing (except resize). To remember the aperture value, you have to do tricks. At 2.0 shoot in RAW, at 2.8 shoot at JPEG L size, at 5.6 JPEG M size.
Aperture Examples 2.0
Aperture Examples 2.8
Aperture Examples 5.6
Full frame examples:
Source files can download from this link (55 photos in the '.ARW' format, 1.280 Mb). The gallery shows 'camera JPEG'. On camera Sony a7 I used the lens with the M42-NEX adapter without any problems.
Catalog modern brand lenses 'Zenitar' и 'Helios' can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.
Final World:
The JUPITER-9 2/85 is a fun lens with strong soft effect at full aperture. From an aperture of f / 2.8, the lens noticeably increases its sharpness. Can serve as an interesting creative lens, in particular for portraits :).
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval.
a successful specimen is apparently a rarity. people write this on specialized forums that one is amazed. and they put a fishing line under the front lens, and file something, but still remain unhappy. I was lucky - I grabbed a black, Lytkarinsky, 87th year. and it's sharp from 2,0! the hood is a must, of course. the subsequent wrapping of contrast in raw - too. but otherwise the lens is fabulous. in conjunction with canon 5d gives the notorious "film" picture and "cinematic" air. I consider it pointless to use it on a crop.
test different instances, look for yours. it's worth it.
Why do Jupiters software?
The answer here: http://www.deep-life.ru/jupiter-9/index.htm under the tag NB.
I fully agree with the author of the article. Over 2 years, 3 specimens of black Lytkarino MC Jupiter-9 (sic!) 1987, 1989 and 1995 passed through my hands.
The most successful is the last, already Russian (not Soviet) assembly.
At Ø2 it has a beautiful (subjectively) software, keeping the passport sharpness. At Ø2,8 the software becomes much smaller, and at Ø4 it disappears completely and the lens becomes “one of the many 85s”, losing its individuality.
I have a dual attitude to this lens.
On the one hand, it is morally and technically outdated, and its ergonomics are extremely inconvenient.
On the other hand, imperfection (or better - a feature) of the optical design gives the picture taken with this lens a unique charm. As a photographer, I just get a kick out of shooting with him!
The body would be good for him and the diaphragm ring is normal, without pre-installation - he would not have had a price!
The link is dead. What's interesting?
lens jupiter 9 lzos black with a long working length. what was it made for? not homemade!
Receive this object as a gift, almost new, not a single scratch in the factory packaging.
Quite heavy. As for the optical qualities, a more or less sharp picture appears after 4-5.6 apertures. In my subjective opinion, when compared with helios 44M5, then Jupiter is noticeably inferior in almost everything. Maybe I didn’t use it on a hollow coil ...
What do you need to
I have a version of Lytkarino, black, but the case is like that of whites. 1976 year. I look forward to being able to compare with a white and later black fellow
Here, I also have an LZOS for M39 rangefinder with a body very similar to white, only infinity on the right.
I did not notice the described problems with 2.0.
And for how much it can sell Jupiter 9 in white light
Now this lens should be taken only if you want to purchase this particular picture characteristic of it. I think the lens is greatly overestimated in the secondary. In other cases, it is better to take the 85th Samyang, you can find them for 10K, but the difference in the picture is just cosmic.
I bought this lens for 3500 rubles from a person who makes and repairs lenses (he himself is a photographer), so he put it in the helios body and an adapter for Nikon and made it so that it is very sharp on F2 (with straight hands of course ) -the picture-clean-does not yellow not green.Today I spent the first shooting-everything on the open f2-I am delighted! The lens sees the VOLUME! The picture is magical.I uploaded the photo immediately without processing to my social networks with a post-that I shot on manual optics (by the way, for the first time without having the experience to twist the trick), the networks exploded with likes! Damn, I fell in love with this glass!
Proofs about sharpness will be?)
Alexey Fot, show me, give me a reference !?
Jupiter in Helios Corps? Oh well )))
maybe in the case of the fortieth helios ... But you need to look and compare the optical circuits, while it looks like a fairy tale.
No, he will fit in 44m)))
Goodbye. Tell me which one is better to take the lens Jupiter-9 or ms world-24? thanks
Frying pan or pan?)
Both must be taken so that there is no mistake)
Maybe someone will come in handy: in practice, I found out for myself that the main reason for the marriage in Yu-9 is a violation of the alignment of lens groups. The attached file shows the result of the fix.
Great, how did they fix it?
This happens if the lens is not pressed in. The solution is obvious - disassembly and assembly of the lens unit. But this is not the main reason. The main one is the misalignment of the helicoid with the frame.
Come on, about the helicoid and the frame - he's not in business at all. There would then be a displacement of a sharp center spot or a blockage of the focal plane.
I have three Yu-9s and only one is normally centered, while others, when focusing in the center of the sharpness table with a picking focus, run from one edge to the other. I unscrew the lens unit and put it on a working one - everything is fine, focuses in the center. Yes, another had a lens rattling, I had to disassemble and tighten the ring.
And further. I have a Varexon, it washes the left side, but there you can visually see the skew of the lens block from the shank. Regarding the centering of the lenses by twisting - do not be ridiculous, how will you twist them if the block is of a bulk type?
Do you have any other options?
Rodion, do you need it if you reject the misalignment of the lens unit with the frame from the start?
You will explain how the frame, i.e. the focusing mechanism, should affect the sharpness of the lens, for which the lens unit is responsible? Even if the focuser is crooked, sharpness will still be there, even with a skewed focal plane or an off-axis axis.
What do your observations have to do with the sharpness in the center of the frame in LZOS U-9, which is usually not there?
Are you seriously? On the screen, reproduce the sharpness table and aim at it with an open aperture of 2,0 by the LZOS Yu-9 lens with focus-picking on on your Sony a7s camera from a distance of one and a half meters.
I am very serious. Of the many Jupiter-9 LZOS that I had, all were extremely mediocre at f / 2 in the center of the frame, they cannot be compared with the CMZ Yu-9.
There are several reviews of LZOS Yu-9 on the site, which clearly demonstrate the mediocre optical quality of this lens in comparison with KMZ / Arsenal Yu-9. None of the lenses rattled lenses, it looks like they all look crisp - like new.
I have 2 LZOS Ju-9 lenses from the same batch of 93, heavily used, one normal with centering, and the other in which the lens rattled without centering. When the lens was tucked in, the centering was not restored, and when it was thrown over to a working one, everything was fine. It's the same with the third lens “new” in '91. It turns out that the lens blocks are in order and everything rests against the frame.
Read the review and test of the Ju-9 and his (the author's) opinions on quality and sharpness in the first comment. https://www.deep-life.ru/jupiter-9/
We have already seen this, the author generally put something under the front lens. And he threw the lenses between the lens blocks. Which unequivocally hints at problems in the lens unit. Also, the replacement of the lens block in the LZOS U9 by the CMZ U9 did not damage the quality of the latter.
Everything is correct. He also identified the reason for the software, and then came to the following conclusion: “Recently, I have come to the conclusion that it is the soft Jupiter-9 that is the“ correct ”portrait. According to technical specifications, the resolution of the lens is 30/18 line pairs per mm. My sharp white in the center clearly has more, about 42-45. Because of this, the Gaussian of sharpness has a sharp-peak characteristic. It is very difficult to shoot with the lens. We have to do several takes so that the finest depth of field is in the right place. On less sharp lenses, the Gaussian of sharpness is uniformly stretched. For a portrait photographer, the characteristics of the white copy are flawed.
And with the ability to "tweak" the picture, the softness of black Jupiters-9 is not so negative. "
Eeeemmm whatoooo ??? Now it would be better to justify the assembly and thousands of screwed-up lenses with words from the era of 6 megapixel crops ... I recommend that you believe your eyes more, and not juggle with numbers.
By the way, Senor Limberg somehow adjusted it to razor sharpness (as he claims). And of course, I sawed in autofocus. Somewhere here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/252399328785950/search/?q=%D1%8E%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80-9
Those. was open software, but it became abrupt? Very interesting! I would not mind ridding my copy of this birth sore.
As far as I understand, the main sore is the deviation of the lens groups from the optical axis. It seems that the mechanics of the lens unit were done crookedly. Therefore, the correction method, perhaps, is an attempt by rotating the objective lenses to find such a position so that the aberrations on the axis disappear.
I would also like to know the correction method.
A lens with a hood from Jupiter 37A through an adapter ring gives a stunning image on a Canon 5D at all apertures from 2 to 8. It is better not to use the lens without a hood. Probably the best portrait lens for the 85mm focal length.
As far as I know. A hood from 37 does not get on it, because the landing is like that of Helios 44-2. (2mm less)
I have three of them. Regarding the sharpness at aperture 2: it is, but its depth is a couple of millimeters in portrait photography - if the sharpness is in front of the eyes, then the nose is already blurred.
Well, show us the sharpness of the LZOS Jupiter-9 in the open, we will see)
They write that it is similar to Nikkor 85 f2. As for me, Jupiter has a disgusting design with a blockage of shadows in dirty tones and an unpleasant blur zone. Totally disappointed!
Try the option with a KMZ or Arsenal lens block. Be surprised.
mediocre bokeh. the variation in quality is due to the complexity of the scheme and its implementation at that time. Without laser quality control devices and precision turning equipment, the axle was produced, roughly speaking, by accident. two gluings of 3! lenses are crap. there is more glue than glass and it unevenly fills the joints of imperfectly fitted lenses ground on different machines with varying degrees of accuracy and wear. all this is inserted into a helicoid with a crookedly cut thread and the result is u-9.
looking for a good copy is a waste of time. this applies to a huge number of lenses from the film era, both Soviet and Japanese. the situation is usually worse the more lenses and groups in the circuit.
Triple gluing is really tough, LZOS clearly couldn’t assemble such precision, because KMZ and Arsenal made excellent sharp Yu9s, not inferior to the German original (designed in the 30s).
The funny thing is that in the USSR there was a patent by M.D. Maltsev to a “Jupiter” type lens, in which at least the front triplet was replaced with a doublet with an air gap (in fact, Bertele wanted to do this, but he struggled for contrast in an era without cleared optics), which improves both quality and manufacturability, but in the end there was only a non-serial Jupite-17 50/2 according to this scheme and a number of military lenses for IR, and the civilian sector remained “as usual”.
Vivid examples of Sonnar lenses without a front triplet are the Sonnar 50/1.5 ZM (it retains the rear triplet) and the Sonnar 40/2.3 Rollei XF35.
The first examples of pictures are absolutely terrible, and then there are simply excellent ones. what does it depend on? flare or aperture?
Almost all Jupiter-9 produced by LZOS (one could say that just all of them) are assembled in violation of technology and tolerances and, apparently, have decentering of the optical elements - removable (de-centering of gluing and a single lens as a whole) or not (de-centering of lenses inside the gluing ). This leads to a sharp increase in aberrations, including in the center of the frame, especially at an open aperture.
From the photos shown at aperture 2.0, the asymmetry of the back-focal disks is clearly visible, which confirms the hypothesis of the presence of assembly errors. Moral - buy Jupiter-9 produced by KMZ or Arsenal.