Igor Burshteyn , Mar 28, 2005; 12:12 p.m.
I came across well beaten Kiev 4 with clean silver click stopped
Jupiter 8 - both dated 71. After a few films through I love this
camera. I realy love how Jupiter 8 renders image - very smooth OOF
area, dreamy effect. Focus is dead on at f4-f5.6 and combo yields
very good sharp pictures. At f2-f2.8 I seem to miss focus when
shooting at close distances. What should I expect when shooting wide
open at f2 with regard to image quality? Picture samples are welcome.
How can I check whether rangefinder is out of adjustment?
Exmple of a good one @f4
Igor Burshteyn , Mar 28, 2005; 12:14 p.m.
Another good one @f5.6(?)
Igor Burshteyn , Mar 28, 2005; 12:18 p.m.
Response to Kiev 4/Jupiter 8 - performance wide open.
shot @2.8(?) - shrapness is gone
Mike Connealy , Mar 28, 2005; 12:41 p.m.
Nice shots. That last one doesn't look all that bad to me for a wide open lens. It does seem to show a bit of flare or light leak at the bottom which could be affecting apparent sharpness.
peter 4711 , Mar 28, 2005; 12:53 p.m.
Hello Igor,
a check the rangefinder is out of adjustment is very easy.
The KIEV rangefinder cameras included a very presice prism rangefinder.
For check taked two needels with colored head in a littel distance
behind. When the rangefinder in smallest distance operation can resolution the two needelhead is the rangefinder ok.
The rangefinder window in the viewer don't included a vertical or horizontal adjustment that deteminated a shock on the rangefinder and needed a repair.
peter
Mike Connealy , Mar 28, 2005; 01:07 p.m.
Another thing to bear in mind is that your depth of focus is very shallow in a 1-meter closeup at f/2. Even with a good rangefinder, it can make a difference whether you are focused on the eyes or the tip of the nose. I suppose a useful test would be to shoot a tabletop with a number of objects at graduated distances.
I have a Kiev IIa with a Jupiter 8 that has produced some sharp results for me, though I never shoot it wide open. The lens does better indoors or outdoors with a shade as it has a few cleaning marks and not much of a coating. This shot was probably at around f/5.6:
Nicolas Douez , Mar 28, 2005; 04:43 p.m.
Mike C. : WOW. What a good picture. Exactly what I like.
BTW how did you digitize it ? Very impressive rendition on my screen.
Again, congratulations.
Mike Connealy , Mar 28, 2005; 05:38 p.m.
I believe I scanned the diner shot on my Dimage Scan Dual IV. The film was Kodak B&W (C41).
Igor Burshteyn , Mar 29, 2005; 02:48 a.m.
Thanks all for contribution. I indeed will follow advice to "shot tabletop with a number of objects at graduated distances". Another issue with Jupiter 8 is flare - good hood should help. Otherwise I more than happy with camera.
Eugene Zaikonnikov , Mar 29, 2005; 03:58 a.m.
My J8 sample is softish at wider apertures too, and it isn't a focusing problem: at few meters distance the DOF is deep enough to compensate for marginal errors. It takes a huge drop from f/4 to f/2.8; still usable in good lighting, but too low-contrast in dim light (e.g. subways and night street).
Hence I've purchased a Helios-103 1.8/53 from rafcamera.com (1982 vintage, 'new' as in never used before) a few weeks ago and couldn't be happier. At f/2.8 it is as sharp as the J8 at f/4-f/5.6, and wide open it is noticeably better than the J8 at f/2.8. It also has better contrast at all apertures and more natural color rendition, but the J8's bokeh looks smoother.
One of the better results with the Jupiter-8M at f/2.8
