I own this lens for more than 40 years, but hardly used it because of the flare. However, being the only wide angle lens for many years, I was happy to own it. And used it mainly in cloudy weather
I bought a '51 out of Ukraine from a fellow I got a wonderful '57 J8 from. It has the red lens retaining ring, an indication it is a Zeiss. The good news also is that it is for a Pixii which is in the works. I expect it in a little more than a week. The camera is quite controversial. LUF hates it, RFF is mixed. I do not give a fig what any of them think. I like it. As always you are a good source for knowledgeable information and I appreciate that a lot.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Eh, if I were closer I'd swing by to let you try the Pixii. But it's about 7,000 miles so that won't be happening soon. Mattias Burling has one and has done an initial test. He likes it. The current release seems quite nice. Cheers
1951 J12 is a nice find, yes Zeiss glass on the earlier ones. As for the Jupiter 8, the very early 50's ones with the little tabs or "ears" sticking out on the aperture ring were also Zeiss glass. 👌
The J12 works just fine on all eosM...m2...m3...m5...m50...m6 bodies...probably m6II as well. Canon had the forsight to make a deep round opening that just happens to fit.
Interesting that the Jupiter 12 exhibits more contrast than the Voigtlander 35/2.5 Color Skopar in the images shown in your video. Not sure why but I would have thought it would be the other-way-round. My copy is the black made in 1975. For the price they typically go for it is a rather unique lens to have in one's collection. A note to anyone shopping for a Jupiter 12, make sure the one you buy comes with the rear lens cap. It is specific to the Jupiter 12 and a must to protect that huge rear element when not on the camera. BTW, that Canon range finder camera in this video looks like a mix of a Canon VI-L and VI-T but is missing the self-timer of the VI-L and the trigger winder of the VI-T? Either way it is very interesting and I look forward to finding out just what it is. Don
Thanks Don! Great point on rear cap, I should have covered that in the video. Many thanks. Good spot on the results vs the Skopar too. I’ll do a review on the camera hopefully later this month.
No, it has the two shutterspeed dials like a Barnack Leica, so it is a lever-wound V series Canon. The VI series (P, VI-L, VI-T) has the later single shutterspeed dial. Which V Canon? Matt has mentioned it previously, so I will leave that determination to you…
My copy is rather unique. It was manufactured in 1951 when there were still Zeiss components in inventory. There are Zeiss serial numbers stamped into some of the brass internal components and the elements are Schott glass (at least that is what the tech who CLAd it for me said). It does say Jupiter-12 on the beauty ring, not ZK. So who knows. The aperture ring fills the entire cavity so there are no threads available to attach a filter or hood.
The Jupiter-12 works flawlessly on a Ricoh GXR with M module. As you show it is fine with a V Series Canon, but I am not sure about VI Series. The large rear element may rub the light baffles. Since I currently have one of each (VI-L, P, VI-T)
Great video on one of my favourite lenses. I have both an older silver 60ish and a newer black 70ish. Both have different quality, go figure. I have used both on my Sony A7R2. the silver lens has more corner issues but great in the middle, the black version, very good all around. May have to check shims on the silver version. I am only able to use the black version on my Canon P, as the rear element does not hit the light baffles. Both lenses work great on my FED and Zorki4 film cameras, as you stated: great on film cameras. I am waiting on a Leica ME typ 240 to arrive, so that I can try these little gems. Thanks again for another great video.
And once again a very nice presentation of an interesting lens. I had two copies of the Jupiter 12, one for LTM and one for Contax mount (used on a Kiev 4am) but wasn't overly impressed with either. For me they have little going in favor of them. I generally like lenses with a bit of character but this one left me unimpressed as it is neither very sharp nor very pleasant. My results resembled your's very closely and both samples I had behaved identical (both black ones from the 70s). It works as a lens and can be made to work for many uses but in the end I didn't really miss it because to me there wasn't any real reason to keep it as there are lots of more interesting alternatives. It's price on the market reflects this adequately I think.
The Kiev-mount will NOT fit on a Contax (at least not my IIIA) - that rear element flares too much to clear narrow chamber in front of the shutter. So if you have an actual Contax you may not be able to use the Jupiter.
Hi James, sorry to hear. Get a cheap Kiev, it will fit. It's the same issue with Pre-War Zeiss Biogon 35mm f2.8. I'll do a video on that lens in the coming months and show the problem.
Just in case anyone is curious about camera compatibility, the Jupiter 12 will not work with the Voigtlander Bessa series of rangefinders. It does however work on the Canon P, VT, and 7 lines, and the Soviet rangefinders like the Feds and Zorkis. I wanted a 35mm lens for my Bessa R, but it won't work. Fortunately, I kept my Canon VT de luxe, so I can use this lens.
Just to clarify this comment. The J-12 will fit into and focus on a Bessa rangefinder body. The problem with it is that the rear element extending into the body interferes with the internal light sensor. If you decide to go Sunny 16, or use an external meter, you are good to go.
Nice review on the Jupiter Matt, I have one in mint condition and still in it's bakelite holder, I haven't used it in a few years but i just might take it out for a ramble soon.
I'm looking for a 35mm for my Bessa R2C. Someone told me that the Jupiter-12 doesn't mount on the Bessa R2C (though that the Zeiss Biogon will), but I can also find info saying the Zeiss Biogon won't mount a Contax IIa or IIIa. So I'm not sure what's true.
You need someone that's lived it and bought both (all 3*) trying! :) Yes and no. The pre-war Bigon wont fit, the post-war Biogon WILL fit. (Smaller rear element, more expensive), often called Opton Biogon. That's what I use.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom That all makes sense now, thanks. I guess the Jupiter 12 is a no buy for me and the R2C then. The other options for a 35mm on an R2C are out of my price range right now, so I'll think more on it. I had a chance to buy a 35mm SKOPAR for pretty cheap about a year ago, really wish I had gone for it now. Thanks again for the help.
Very cool and informative review! Some of the more creative light flare reminds me of when the phoenix sets aflame in Harry Potter 😊 would love to see a walk about video and the film shots with this lens! Thank you for another great video! Just got my hands on a 35 Color-Skopar after watching your video on it; excited to test it out!
Hey Hadley, thanks for stopping by! It’s nice to see a female visitor as the channel seems to attract mostly men. Yes I’ll try to start sharing more film and more walkabout vids so stay tuned and enjoy your Skopar :)
I'm pretty sure that it's specifically a non-retrofocus design, that's why the rear element sticks so far back into the camera. Retrofocus designs were needed for SLR's to bring the lens further away from the film plane. Retrofocus designs are more likely to suffer from softness in the corners, and non-retrofocus suffers from more vignetting.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Almost every wide angle is retrofocus, so it's usually pretty safe to assume it is. This and some large format lenses are some of the only ones that aren't retrofocus, though. It looks like a good lens, if it were used on film, but the lens flare is surprisingly bad considering the coatings and the built in hood.
Hi Matt!! I love your videos!! I have a cuestion (I don't know if someone ask this before in comments). Can I use this lens in a voigtlander bessa r??? Thanks!!
Muchas gracias. Mi padre tiene zuiko om analógicos y he comprado un adaptador para mi leica cl antes de comprar directamente algún voigtlander. De esta forma práctico con los zuiko y si veo que me gusta ya compraría el adaptador de leica m a l y alguna óptica voigtlander. Tu has probado zuiko om en tu cl?? Gracias
Hi Matt, I have a couple of general questions (not directly relating to this video). 1. When metering skin tones in backlighting do you still typically place (Caucasian) skin in zone 6, or do you make it a tad darker (zone 5, for example) to give the perception of shadow (I'll be using Porta 400). 2. For digital, do you ever use a polarizer for outdoor portraits, for example in woodland? I use a polarizer often for landscapes and the anti-glare and colour saturation benefits they bring to the environment are obvious, but I wondered if they may have detrimental effects on skin tones? To be more specific, I'll be doing one or two portrait shoots at my local bluebell woods at the end of April. Sorry my questions are not germaine to the video, but I just wanted to pick your brains
Hi, I always meter for the skin regardless as a portrait guy. You could style it darker for a more stylised look. No I don’t use CPL for portraits but you could experiment with it.
I used to bought this one but end up return it soon cause focus wasnt working at all with Leica body. if someone thinking about getting this one you better check its modifed for Leica body cause i dont think most of people try this one with zorki only lol
Thanks for the video, Matt. I have both the Contax and the L39 mount versions. Got some very sharp images on the Kiev using it. Your Canon looks exactly like my L2. I got the J12 specifically for it as it has the 35mm & 50mm rangefinder settings. All the best.
totally agree, each copy could varies. i got one with contax rf mount, but use it on nikon s2. it got several focussing issues, turned out after several adjustment, it could somehow work, but not fine, still. however, many people use it on nikon s mount as well could use it normally, and got great results. hope you could test the rf mount version as well, cheers
Would well imagine that the Ziess and Voightlander lenses would be much preferred to a 50 year old Soviet knock off that wouldn't cost anything near what the aforementioned two go for. The Jupiter was conceived without any foreknowledge of most of the camera's you've made mention of, and really couldn't expect anything nearing compatibility for one of your Leica Digitals. Hope you had a grand time in Poland.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom just found a 4A Kiev, purchased from a small dealer in the city of it's namesake. Probably still opt for a Jupiter, and try never to shoot it wide open to sharpen the image. The originality means something to me. Take care.
Fun lens no doubt :) I had something similar with highly praised Fuji 16mm f/1.4. Dumped it in the end, replacing with Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8 beauty. As I said, always go by the name :)
Thanks for another great review. I bought 2 of these lenses, one to use on my LTM Tower 45 (Nicca 5L) and one for my Nikon S2 (Contax RF mount). I had researched them for some time and feel that would be a good option for me for a walk around lens.
Thanks. So I assume it can be used without any risk to damage shutter or any other parts of my camera? Also why so many info in the internet says they are not suitable?
I think the price is too crazy for a Chinese lens. In this case I would prefer skopar 35 but it's hard to find a sample without haze/fog or fungus@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom
I don't think I've ever heard a good word about all of those rangefinder ex-soviet lenses. There are some portrait gems like the Helios 44 series, the 40 series, the legendary sharp Jupiter 37A and maybe the Jupiter 50/1.5 if you want funky bokeh, but otherwise almost always it was a no-go for the wide angle lenses.
Please stop using ads that don't allow turn off in 4 secs. Front ads that can't be turned of quickly make me never stay to watch the video. RU-vid is INFESTED with some awful drivel.
Okay, it's time to play Name That Canon! Speeds to 1/500 rules out the L1. L2 would have bulb sync only and L3 no sync at all, but I can't see the end of the camera where the sync outlet would be, so I'm stumped!
Horrible lens copy which I got a couple years ago. It was never getting sharp corners even when stopped down to f/11. Used it on film where it was mediocre at best, not usable on digital at all regarding quality. Severe color vignetting and color cast. It was my shortest lived lens in my ownership, sold it quickly again. I cannot recommend this lens at all even it is possible I had a bad decentered copy.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom My impression is that there are a lot of lemon lens copies out there from this lens. Especially since prices for rangefinder 35 mm lenses got so high, some resellers seem to reassemble this lens from different broken copies and sell it as new. If glass elements are not well aligned, the optical quality suffers.
