[Leica] Jupiter 85 - Pt 1 [was Flare + Jupiter]

[Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com>]

Johnny noted:

>> Uh, that's an understatement.  I probably got a dog -- returned it -- but *I
>> have never seen flare even close to what I achieved with this lens.*
>> Hilarious flare.  The Mother of All Flare.
>
>:-)
>Yes, you probably had a dog..
>Mine is black, made in 1975, all air-glass surfaces are coated
>(disassembled and checked). I had some flare, but not an excessive
>one.
>As for test photos, I indeed have a one sample: sun was in the lens
>and there is horrible bright diaphragm image at the center. But it
>is a worst example I ever had...
>                     (Stanislaw B.A. Stawowy)


Were you Jupiter flare guys using a lens hood, or were you just out there,
aiming that naked lens at the chariot of Pheobus and firing away like there
was no tomorrow? I ask because...

I just bought a Jupiter 85. My sample dates from 1960 (my birth year,
coincidentally). It is in pretty clean condition: imaculate glass - no
scratches, fog, fungus, or separation (tho there are traces of oil on the
blades); intense blue coating on the front element; focus ring tight but
not stiff, it turns smoothly; aperture ring smooth and solid, but slightly
loose around f/2; no dings, dents or scratches on the lens body, nary a
mark, in fact; nothing is coming apart, everything functions properly.

I've just shot my first roll and 1/2 with it, shooting both in doors and
out, wide open and at various apertures, stopping down at one point to
11/16. Some of the wide open, indoor, low light shots were reshot on the
following frame with a Summarit at the same aperture  (f/2) and then wider,
just to see how the two compare in those conditions. I'll get the processed
film back from the lab this afternoon and will report back on my findings.

Before buying the lens, I too went through the archives, and have followed
the various recent debates about this lens. In the end, I chose the Jupiter
for a couple of reasons: it is relatively fast, it was cheap, and I was
curious about Soviet lenses. I was also considering the new Cosina 90 but,
as this is a focal length I don't use that often, I didn't was to invest
$600-$700 for a moderate tele + VF. I hope I didn't get a dog (or should we
say "sobaka" in this case?), but we'll see...

Guy