MC Jupiter-9 2/85 (LZOS). Review from the reader Radozhiva

Overview MC Jupiter-9 2/85 (LZOS) specifically for Radozhiva prepared Rodion Eshmakov.

MC Jupiter-9 2/85

MC Jupiter-9 2/85

There are a lot of different models of lenses Jupiter-9, like 44 Helios.

Below shown list of major versions of JUPITER / JUPITER-9:

  1. JUPITER-9 2/85 AUTOMATIC. In the case for the Kiev-10/15 cameras, the Arsenal plant (Kiev), the Kiev-Avtomat mount
  2. JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm. In a white case, Krasnogorsk, mount Contact-Kiev
  3. JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm P. In the white building, Arsenal building (Kiev), Contact-Kiev bayonet mount
  4. Jupiter-9 1: 2 F = 8,5cm P... In a white case, KMZ, M39 for Zenit cameras
  5. JUPITER-9 2/85. In a white case, Lytkarinsky, M39 for Zenit cameras
  6. In the black case of the old type, Lytkarinsky, M42 (no review yet)
  7. JUPITER-9 2 / 85. In a black case of a new type, Lytkarinsky, M42
  8. MC JUPITER-9 2/85. In a black case of a new type, Lytkarinsky, with 'MS', M42

This lens is "the last of the Mohicans" - the latest version of Jupiter-9, produced at LZOS until 2008. A specific copy was released in 2000, as evidenced by the information in the lens passport and its number. This little brochure also contains some technical information and a user manual.

Lens specifications can be found in the data sheet and user manual, a scan of which is available at this link.

Structurally, this modification is no different from JUPITER-9 2 / 85 LZOS production in a new type of housing.

Front differences from ordinary Jupiter and can not be found. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

Front differences from ordinary Jupiter and can not be found. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

This is the same compact and perfectly assembled lens with a large front lens and a chic diaphragm of 15 petals, all with the same “aroma” of the Lytkarino “solidol”.

And on the side - especially not to distinguish with the non-MS version. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

And from the side - all the more not to distinguish with the non-MC version. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

The only difference from the versions of LZOS of the 80s that was widespread on the secondary market was the presence of a multilayer antireflective coating for optics, as the abbreviation "MS" in the name indicates.

The presence of MS shows a green reflection of the rear lens. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

The presence of MS shows a green reflection of the rear lens. MC Jupiter-9 2/85

Although bad rumors go about Lytkarinsky “Jupiters” (and rightly so), this lens should be the most perfect from a technical point of view. So who is cooler: a lion or a tiger? 50s version from Krasnogorsk JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm or Lytkarinets from the 21st century?

JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm and MC Jupiter-9 2/85

JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm and MC Jupiter-9 2/85

Optical properties. Comparison with the production version of KMZ (1959)

Despite the multilayer enlightenment, the lens can hardly cope with side or backlight: even by covering it with the palm of the setting sun, you can get an increase in image contrast noticeable with the naked eye:

MC Jupiter-9 2/85. Without a hood, photo on F / 2

MC Jupiter-9 2/85. No hood

MC Jupiter-9 2/85. Covered from the light, photo on F / 2

MC Jupiter-9 2/85. Sheltered from the light

It is terrible to imagine what to expect from the Lytkarinsky lens, devoid of multilayer enlightenment ...
When comparing with the KMZ production lens, one can notice great sharpness and contrast of the latter. Yes - the latest version is inferior to one of the oldest “in everything and at once”!

Photos go in pairs:

The lenses have a different bokeh in character: the new version is more lumpy and loaded than the old one due to the higher level of spherical aberrations.

Backlit good old white JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm behaves better: less affected by glare and veil. Most likely, the blame for the poor blackening of the new version of Jupiter-9.

Brilliant diaphragm LZOS MC Jupiter-9 2/85 in comparison with the blackened JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm

Brilliant diaphragm LZOS MC Jupiter-9 2/85 in comparison with the blackened JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm

Brilliant diaphragm LZOS MC Jupiter-9 2/85 in comparison with the blackened JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm

Brilliant diaphragm LZOS MC Jupiter-9 2/85 in comparison with the blackened JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm

The enlightenment used in MC Jupiter-9 2/85 has a big minus: it strongly and not obvious, at first glance, affects the color rendering. Firstly, most likely, the bleaching is bilayer and reflects parts of the spectrum in the yellow-green and green-blue regions, which in total will give the observed cold green lens flare. Such a transmission spectrum strongly affects photographs taken on a green background: it is felt that, for example, the color of the grass is very poorly transmitted in the shade, which becomes earthy. And in the sun, grass sometimes acquires an unnatural poisonous shade. Oil is added to the fire by the fact that modern digital cameras with a Bayer filter have the most green subpixels, because poor transmission of exactly green color strongly affects the visible result. The image of the old Jupiter-9 is much more predictable: its color rendition, like many old lenses, is simply shifted to the warm region and the maximum transmittance falls precisely on the yellow-green color.

Despite all the shortcomings, it is difficult to disagree with the fact that the MC Jupiter-9 forms a nice-looking image on F / 2, which is particularly soft and attracts with its bokeh. Multilayer enlightenment allows for natural color reproduction and tolerable contrast under normal shooting conditions.

conclusions

Even the latest version of Jupiter-9 is inferior to the “white” from KMZ in all respects: it is sharpness, contrast, and even color. MS Jupiter-9 has some zest in the picture and is essentially a different lens (compared to the “white” KMZ), in which the bokeh features and strong software of the black version are complemented by better color reproduction and higher contrast.

Thank you for your attention, Eshmakov Rodion.

You will find more reviews from readers of Radozhiva here.

UPDATE from Arcadia

It so happened that at the same time in the review Arkady had exactly the same lens, only of a different year of production, with serial number 8910104.

Photos from Sony Alpha NEX-3N, as well as photos with a view of the lens itself from Arcadia:

Jpeg source photos download from this link (87 files, 566 MB).

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 44, on the topic: MC Jupiter-9 2/85 (LZOS). Review from the reader Radozhiva

  • Arkady Shapoval

    Let me remind you that in Radozhiv we collect Rodion for the best technique for more interesting his reviews. Details here.

    • NEO

      Rodion does not sleep, sin does not chip in

  • Alexander

    “” MC Jupiter-9 forms a pleasant to the eye image at F / 2, distinguished by a special softness and attractive with its bokeh ”” - how is it pleasant ...? There is simply no sharpness and it causes discomfort when viewing such a photo ... The softness of the image is completely different and it was on large-format studio cameras, which were shot on photographic plates ... There, yes, soft and pleasing to the eye ... But here there is simply no sharpness and look at it unpleasant ...

    • Rodion

      To be honest, subjectively I like the picture from him, but only in cloudy weather, if we are talking about a portrait. In a slightly harsher light, soap actually gets on the F / 2, especially on my crop camera.

    • anonym

      review of ordinary unnecessary crap. it would be better if they could overlook the tin can.

      • Arkady Shapoval

        Today you do not recognize. Forgot to mention twice the crop and even Olympus with Panasonic

        • Paul

          "Anonymous
          11.06.2019/18/07 at XNUMX:XNUMX Reply
          review of ordinary unnecessary crap. it would be better if they could overlook the tin can.
          Arkady Shapoval
          11.06.2019/19/02 at XNUMX:XNUMX Reply
          Today you do not recognize. Forgot to mention twice the crop and even Olympus with Panasonic. ”

          Arkady, it is better not to react at all to a yard dog barking at you: if he barks, he will lag behind))
          About Jupiter. I have repeatedly cited this link in my posts about the soapiness of Lytkara lenses: http://www.deep-life.ru/jupiter-9/
          I was convinced of the validity of what was stated in it from my own experience. I had 3 copies of the MC Jupiter-9: 1987, 1989 and 1995 of release, the last one I rent now.
          I can say that in comparison with Krasnogorsk Jupiter, the correct Lytkarinsky Jupiter is NOT WORSE. Yes, he shoots a little differently, but the picture he made with the aperture open is as mesmerizing as the picture taken by the Red Mountain man. The magic of imperfection, or something ...
          And at diaphragms 5,6-8, both one and the other lose their individuality and turn into regular sharp faceless 85s, which are legion.

          • Alexander

            /////////// Yes, he shoots a little differently, but the picture he took with the aperture open is as mesmerizing as the picture taken by the Red Mountain man. The magic of imperfection, or something ... //////////// I disagree. tried several copies and gave it up. A lens for beginners or color blind. He not only does not give magic, but also just a decent artistic picture.

        • Pokemon

          "Wonderful. Amazing. Brilliant! Look, I don't recognize you in makeup! Who are you? Sergey Bondarchuk? hmm ... no. Yury Nikulin? Ooh, no, no, no. "
          What kind of a Panasonic? What is Olympus? Micra is not a system - they themselves stated on the video! The number is not a system! Only film, only hardcore! And if not a film, then only a mirrorless Fuji X Trans!

      • anonym

        Well, what if the diamond was lying around ... Behold the bank for a long time!

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Personally, I was wondering that the MC version is actually 'NOT-real-MC' and my hope for a “better” Ju-9 was scattered :(

        • anonym

          Can I also stay anonymous? Bank badly! Give one more review of another can! Anyway, the quality will be better! :)

          • Arkady Shapoval

            It is possible, but this was the last time.

  • Michael

    “The lenses have a different bokeh character:” somewhat tongue-tied, striking. Better than this: lenses differ in the nature of the bokeh. Thanks for your review!

  • Novel

    Someone with photographic equipment as with space exploration. Even what they stole from the Germans and generously stamped for decades, they could not really save. And while the whole world improved the quality of the old and invented the new, the industry was degrading until the launch of the Lake under the Zenith brand for crazy money. Well, at least not the other way around, and that’s good.

    • Rodion

      LZOS simply does not like the number “9”: they have that Jupiter-9 is unsuccessful, that the makrick Wave-9 is extremely dubious. Although this is a joke more, because they had a lot more punctures.

      • Novel

        That which is dead cannot die.

        • Stas

          only in this case it does not revive and does not become stronger)

      • anonym

        "Volna-9" EXCELLENT lens. I had two. One well-worn and none. The second is zero and chic. For this, I do not agree with your characteristics for the Volna-9 lens. The picture from him is very COOL.

    • Alexey

      Novel, about space. Would you fly to the ISS at the FAU-2? For space, normal lenses were made, not this consumer goods.

  • Paul

    Black Lytkarians of the release before 1989 soft (or soap - as you like) for this reason (read under the NB tag): http://www.deep-life.ru/jupiter-9/
    I compared 2 copies of the MC Jupiter-9 1987 and 1989 onwards. and I can confirm everything said in the link.
    Comparing 2 lenses from different manufacturers, released in different years - decades, in my opinion, is not correct. It's like comparing Mir-1V and Mir-1A.
    White and black Jupiters are really different, but their difference is at the level of aesthetic perception of the picture they create.

    • Rodion

      Checked - Sergei is a special case. His experience is not reproduced by the wire, I tried it with ordinary black.

  • Sergei

    Dmitry Evtifeev on his website did not find much difference between the MC and the usual version of this lens. And no wonder - 3 optical components (6 surfaces).
    And the resolution of both versions was the same.
    Yes, and Rodion showed a good difference in the blackening of the diaphragm in the 50s and 90s.
    There is one opinion, popular among photographers, that portrait lenses were not designed for infinity, but for the optimal portrait distance (1-2 meters).
    Therefore, the best quality is shown there, and not when shooting flowers on MDF or landscape.
    For a normal portrait, aperture of 2,8 is most suitable.
    A complete rejection only for the portrait of the ladies deep behind the Balzac bar.

    • Rodion

      Yevtifeyev, as far as I remember, but the difference in color rendering of the usual LZOS and the MS of LZOS of Jupiter was shown quite well. In favor of MS, of course. By resolution, of course, the difference is not fundamental.
      And so, on the deuce I liked them to shoot completely unbleached ladies) The main thing is that there should be a soft light.

  • Paul

    I also got the impression that the Yu-9 (any) is a lens for open aperture and cloudy weather.
    In addition, the maximum deepest lens hood is absolutely shown to this lens for shooting (I use a threaded M55 with a depth of 45 mm through an adapter, which adds 4 mm to the design).
    Under these conditions, as well as if you have a light source (sun, lamp, flash, etc.) at the back-side of the camera, the lens starts on an open aperture, if not wonders work, then very close to this))
    With aperture up to 2,8, the soft becomes almost invisible, with aperture of 4, the lens becomes quite sharp in the center, preserving the plasticity of the image due to a slight drop in sharpness to the edges, and starting from aperture 5,6 it produces a standard sharp faceless picture, which “suffer ”Almost all modern 85s.
    It should be compared, of course, only with “classmates” that have the word “Soft” in their name, for example, with Kenko Soft 85 / 2,5 and SMC Pentax Soft 85 / 2,2 and 2,8 (two Pentax lenses) ...

  • anonym

    It seems that the girl is cut out of paper and glued.

    • B. R. P.

      So Rodion also has time to glue the girls!

      • anonym

        From paper? Maybe in time, xs.
        Ask him.

  • Photobooster

    Quite weak glass, even with MS, even without it ...
    Heavy, soapy, with very unstable enlightenment and with a very problematic lubricant prone to malachitization ...
    Definitely not worth the money for which it is now being sold.
    There is something new without MS, but no pleasure from it.

  • anonym

    Here I read the comments - “Review of the usual unnecessary crap. It would be better to review the tin can. Pretty weak glass. That money is definitely not worth it. " Why write that? How can you make a conclusion from some NOT successful specimen? Especially if in one review there are three lenses and two from which to make beautiful photos. The obktiv is good and let everyone draw a conclusion for themselves!
    P.S. For some reason there is no link to satyu in the Jupiter section.

  • Artem

    And Jupiter-9 has round bokeh of the correct form if there are lights or garlands in the blur zone.

    • Rodion

      In fact, it is very convenient - you can really close the diaphragm with a clear conscience. On the conventional Ju-9 Automatic, the choice between smooth bokeh and sharpness would have been more painful.

  • anonym

    Maybe someone has a black version of the old model? I tried two black ones, one with MS, the other without ms, both quiet horror in open and in color

    • Rodion

      The old is no better.

  • Kirill Yankovsky

    I have in my collection a new BLACK with a unique serial number !!! 9012109 !!!

    and I'm in a puppy's delight with its airy, magical picture and bokeh on the D800 and even with a lens adapter (to compare a dofig with which, and my hands do not grow out of there ...). What am I doing wrong? Do I also need to spit from Jupiter-Nine? I like his drawing more than all Helios 44 put together and in some cases Helios-40, Zenitars, Petsvali, etc.

    maybe Mr. Eshmakov is pathologically unlucky for high-quality, non-soap optics?

    • anonym

      And why is this number unique?

      • B. R. P.

        A sequence of numbers, apparently.

      • Novel

        I guarantee that there is no other lens Jupiter-9 with the number 9012109.

  • Alex

    Good review and very correct comparison. Feels the approach of a techie). My black Ju-9 is the same, it is very soft on the open and does not tolerate counter, but nevertheless the lens is very nice, the software becomes acceptable with half a stop cover (for female portraits this is the case), at 2.8 everything is fine. By the way, there is no soap, namely software, i.e. some softness of the image and glow of the edges. I had the soap on the vaunted Vivitar 1 Series 70-210 2.8-4.0 3rd version of Komine production (like, the most successful version). There, yes, it was the soap that was observed, and there was no hurry to leave even with a cover of 1,5 - 2 stops.

    • Michael

      “Some softness of the image and glow of the edges” - this thing is spherical aberrations, unfortunately, this affects the resolution. Many Canon lenses suffer from the same. Jupiter is generally a very nice portrait, but I liked the "white" more)

      • Alex

        It is clear that aberration, but it is much better than the soapiness of the picture. I encountered an explicit soap on Mira-1v, I couldn’t even focus on the film mirror, the micro-raster constantly rippled, the normal sharpness only appeared at 5.6.

  • Sergei

    There is a more advanced modern version of Jupiter-9 from KMZ for the Lomographic Society.
    On the M39 thread for rangefinders, with MS enlightenment.
    The circulation is small, I know the instance with the number 90.
    The price at the level of other KMZ lenses for lomographs, such as New Jupiter-3
    https://ibb.co/CWDwF29

    • Alex

      This lens is not for shooting, but for show-off, because it costs 50-70 thousand, and is better than the original Jupiter by only a couple of percent. They also have Jupiter-8 for 75t.r. and other "resurrected" glasses.

  • Valentine

    Arkady thanks for UPDATE. Just great shots, especially realizing that these glasses are very weak.

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2019/06/mc-jupiter-9-2-85-lzos-black/