Jupiter-9 2/85mm lens. Review with samples(all 5 versions)

[@RetroFotoHouse]

type 1 from 1967 with pristine body, original varnish preserved: www.ebay.com/itm/225795437427 type 2 from 1971 with varnished body www.ebay.com/itm/325846071093 type 3 tuned for filmmakers www.ebay.com/itm/225733852157 type 3 tuned for filmmakers with anamoprphic bokeh mod www.ebay.com/itm/325846071093

[@Wh33lsofFortune]

The silver aluminum one is absolutely beautiful

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yep, hard to find in such condition. It was sold for $220 on eBay within few hours.

[@Wh33lsofFortune]

@@RetroFotoHouse damn

[@villemononen5303]

Stunningly beautiful lens!

[@bebopganymede]

It's definitely my favorite one. The coating on that particular one looks nice too.

[@PaoloServadei]

I agree, the "silver" lenses from the fifties/early sixties are a beauty, and are often better, in my humble opinion, than later versions, despite the inferior coating. Two things that maybe you can't find in other comments: Not all "silver" lenses are made the same way. Some are have an aluminum barrel (not always a great alloy, I'd say) and some are made of coated brass. The second solution screams quality, I have an Helios 40 in M39 Zenit mount that weights like crazy but is one of the most beautiful soviet lenses ever. Another thing, those silver Zenit M39 mount lenses can be mounted to any camera/adapter that sccepts M42 lenses using the simple small adapter shown in the video... but if the tolerances are the way they should be... you miss infinity! The solution is to either tinker am M42 adapter for your mirrorless of choice, or shave roughly a third of a millimeter from the internal washer that often sits under the optical block. Some lenses sold by professional vendors from the former socialist block, that come with the M39>M42 adapter already included, are often pre-adjusted. My Helios 40 already came that way. I have adjusted a couple of silver Helios 44 lenses by myself, it's simple. I just used sandpaper with rotatory movements until the infinity was ok. I prefer this solution because I also use the lenses on a DSLR (Pentax K-1). Question for the reviewer: I just saw a strange LZOS version in M42 mount, made in 1962, that looks like none of the shown examples. It's slim, mostly black, but with two areas that are not painted black. The rings have the finely knurled shape, like those found on some rangefinder versions. Could be original or the work of some repairman?

[@goldein7777]

Thank you so much for this. I was confused about the J9 models and was about to buy a type 4 model (1988 production), lucky to stumble to your video and see the major differences between them i decided and found a type 2 (1969 production) in a great condition which I have just ordered. Really appreciate your time and effort creating this full video ! Thx

[@SpaghettiPaparazzi]

Thank you so much for this video. There is a lot of confusion about this lens online. Your video on the SLR version really helped me. I was lucky to acquire an outstanding copy of the type 2 purple coated m39 version produced in 1960 (way before the transition period). It is very sharp! I feel fortunate to have the knowledge of bidding on the one I really wanted after watching your video.

[@Lancan11]

Wspaniały przegląd Jupiterów. Dzięki za ten film!

[@stupedrandomname]

Thank you so much for this video I appreciate it. So helpful to have this explained so well and with no B.S. How refreshing!

[@jonlouis2582]

Excellent video. The wonderful Jupiter 9 you sold me will have to be pried from my cold dead hands. I just used it today.

[@yeer31]

Thank you very much for an excellent and comprehensive review. I'm an owner of a 1964 type 1 in almost mint condition. The only minus point being that the clear lacquer which protects the aluminum body which has started to peel off. Your review made me feel better about having spent USD100 just to overhaul the lens. The Soviet grease was completely removed, and the entire focusing system was re-greased with modern lubricants. The aperture blades were removed, cleaned and a layer of graphite lubricant applied. I decided to spend the money on the lens, even though I don't do much portraiture, because I really love the rendering of this non MC lens. I'm glad to find a channel devoted to Russian lenses, could you do a review of the Mir 24 family? It's my other favorite form the Russian lenses I have tried and I think it's a hidden gem.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi Raymond! Thank you for your input. Mir-24 series will come definitely in the future

[@breal6910]

Who do you recommend for cleaning this lense? I'm in tx

[@plexus1066]

Great work Roman. I really appreciate all the hard work you do in studies like this. All the best in 2019!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you Chris!

[@mrzw]

Thank you for this comprehensive review. I just ordered a "Type 2" black M39 lens from 1969 (N6906034) on Ebay to use it with my Panasonic GH5 + Viltrox EF-M2 speedbooster. I was wondering how to recognise a "Type 2" lens, but it's pretty easy: Look out for one made in the years around 1970 (the first two digits of the serial number tell you in what year it was made) with a M39 mount and a black body. Hope this helps someone.

[@Ali.lensman]

I also got this type 2, made is 1969 black body with beautiful blue coating, but no Made in USSR on the body! Doesn't focus to infinity on my DSLR. I'll try it on my mirrorless but first need m42 adapter as mentioned in the video 😊 beautiful glass and characteristics this lens has.

[@TheGuigotz]

Hi Filip, does the barrow hits the viltrox glass?

[@Solertcore]

The review i've been waiting for. Thanks.

[@tomhsia4354]

I'm eyeing one made in 1981, hope it's not a lemon. I prefer the older barrel design, looks more stylish and practical (why did they choose to put the aperture values on the front of the lens? Also, I like the violet coating), but the newer one was cheaper and matched the style of my Jupiter-37a better. I also have an old worn-out Jupiter-11a which I really like. Surprisingly, the 11a out-performs my 37a and Zeiss Jena (my 37a came with its manual, which stated the centre sharpness to be 45.5lp/mm). In fact, my 11a is as sharp as my Jupiter-21m, which routinely blows me away. I've had nothing but good luck with Soviet lenses made in the 70s and 80s, I bought them just to use as cheap artistic lenses, only for them to become my main lenses. That includes the Helios 44-2. The only downside is that my Jupiter lenses are TOO sharp for portraiture. Not a complaint, though!

[@parker6634]

got a type 2 a few weeks with fluted middle ring and varnished..love it !!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yeah, it is a great lens!

[@bingohume7013]

I have the L39 aluminum silver colour made in the 1950’s. I believe made in 1957 because the serial # on my lens starts with #N57….. At F2 wide a wonderful combination of sharp and smooth looking and lovely smooth back ground blur too. I also have a M42 version too made in the late 1980’s. These are great portrait lenses especially when you don’t want absolute sterile sharpness.

[@ErebosGR]

My favourite vintage telephoto lens. Such a bargain.

[@tristan3665]

I just purchased your three kit of RED- P Jupiter 8-9 and 11, I can't wait for them to arrive. I bought from you because of the professional service reviews you have, and the fact that they looked like NOS lenses.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you very much for your purchase! Please be aware that because of actual situation shipping can take one month or so. Please also watch my video explaining how to mount jupter-9 and jupiter-11 kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHnTlIell5lgZ6M

[@ministryoflies1344]

Incredibly in-depth, well presented and informative video. Thank you for making this. I think I shall be going for the type 2. Your tests and photos are great.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you!

[@alasdairdougall7868]

Just found you videos and want to say ‘Hello’ and send a big thanks.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you for watching

[@johngskewes]

A wonderful review, thank you. I just received my 1965 Type1 - a beautiful lens, in every way.

[@kavi14in]

Hi Roman, Based on your confirmation, I bought the Type 2 1969. Truly brilliant and I am surprised by it's construction and pristine condition. Amazing optics. I have to sincerely thank you for guiding me to get the right lens,,👍👍👍👌👌👌🙏🙏🙏

[@RetroFotoHouse]

You're welcome!

[@davidgfisher]

Wonderful and thorough review. Very happy to see this today. Thank you. I was lucky to find a white one from 1964 that's in perfect condition, and is one of my very favourite lenses. Love your channel, which is responsible for my great interest in these lenses now. The lenses I've purchased from you have been fantastic. Thanks again.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you Dave for your kind words!

[@andrewchalmers3902]

Thankyou for your great review of the jupiter 9. Due to your very detailed review I waited for months for the right lens to come up on Ebay, and finaly it did. I bought one of the shiny transition period m39 lenses. After testing it today, I think you are right, it has multicoatings and handles stray light very well, it is sharp with wonderful bokeh.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Glad it was helpful!

[@svbui]

Love your J-9 reviews. I have a silver SN# 61XXXXX a few months back and enjoy using it. Your tutorials are excellent too. Been checking your store for a nice J-3. Thank you.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thanks!

[@noeggi]

Excellent review 👍🏻 thank you.

[@donmacqueen7701]

Brilliant. Thanks for going to such great effort.

[@djchips]

Great video, cool history too. I have a white aluminum rangefinder version ordered and on the way, year is 61 and it has the blue/purple coating on the optics. Thanks to you I knew to get an earlier version, I hope it's a good copy.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

As a rule, early rangefinder jupiters are awesome optically, but they can be adapted for mirroless systems only

[@ingowalkerling5141]

Very good explanation of the different types of the Jupiter-9. I have the third type you described with a serial number N82...., so it would be manufactured in 1982 and a little bit later than described.

[@92OnTV]

Наконец !!! Видео, которое я просил, спасибо :)

[@GeronimoJak]

Hey guys! Was looking at getting this lens. Do you know why there are so many versions of the lens? Is there a difference between the ones that are shorter and have the finger notches (like in the video) or the ones that are more barrel style? (like you have on your ebay listing right now.) What should we be looking out for in terms of quality of the silver lenses?

[@digimechanic]

Thank you so much for this video, just found a type 2 thanks to your very informative explanation, can't wait for it to arrive.

[@rolltrollroll]

I have from 1958 (serial number 58xxxxx) coated made by KMZ. Cyrylic and focal lenght in cm. Absolutely amazing sharp lens.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

You might have a rangefinder version. What is the mount there? what camera do you use it with? what kind of adapter you use?

[@rolltrollroll]

SLR exactly like the first one in your video. M39 that I use with m42 adapter and then Minolta SR adapter

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Good to know, i did not encounter SLR version earlier than 1960

[@nigelboon9212]

I also have a 1958 KMZ M39 cyrillic / 8.5cm version in spectacular condition - and the results are gorgeous! Thanks @Retro Foto House for this video which I watched before I bought!

[@amermeleitor]

Do you know about an 100mm f1.5 M42 mount KMZ made lens? I buyed one some weeks ago. It seems to be for night vision equipment, but I don't know. Do you have any video about the lens?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

i know nothing about that lens. I use and review photographic lenses only

[@evdl3101]

Zenit 100mm 1.5 lens in M42 mount comes with nightvision gogles T3C-2. It is compatible with any other M42 lens, but it has terrible sharpness.

[@PhotoArtBrussels]

Great review and feature test of the Jupiter-9. Thank you! Greetings from Belgium; have a great 2019!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you Dirk for your kind words!

[@JessyWilliamson]

What is the serial number on the 2nd one?

[@sean-huang]

I have serial number started with 88 and does not have MC letter on it. I do believe that this is single coated, but in year 1988.

[@MelmacAlienLifeForm]

Got a second version recently. Lytkarino made. Very soft and glowing strong wide open. A wire or a fishing line (better) mode inbetween front lens element and front lens block (0.14 - 0.2 mm) fixed the problem. Reasonably, sharp and contrasty wide open now. Glowing has gone as well.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

thank you very much for your input! Will defintely try to to that!

[@PabloDeBiasi]

Hi, my type 4 has very low contrast and glow wide open, can you please elaborate on how to do the modification? you mean increase distance between front lens and optical block? thanks

[@bazejpajda2205]

Fantastic review. Thank You!

[@maddercat]

I have another version, a leica mount one l39 but it does focus to infinity once you scratch the paint off the aperture setting around the rings, with a leica l39 adapter. It's from 1985. This is really fascinating.

[@Zejakov]

What do you mean scratch?

[@feddef]

I have the silver one, it’s beautiful

[@ahumanad706]

Thanks, you should have let us know how we can figure out how to figure out which lens it is; based on their markings, etc.

[@J-Sno]

You can figure out which type by the date it was manufactured as well as the style/color.

[@ChefAlexSocci]

Thanks again for an amazing video, LOVE your content. So which versions would you personally say are the best? I really want to purchase this lens. It seems to me type 1 and type 2 are best overall for sharpness, contrast, and color rendition. but also type 5 is very good as well in all 3 categories. would you agree? if you had to choose which would you pick for black and white, and which one for color photography? Thanks!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Well, for type 5 is more an odd game, because the quality of production of that lens was instable. Me personally i love type2, but type1 is also very good, if you're not disturbed by white lens onto your black nikon body....

[@ChefAlexSocci]

@@RetroFotoHouse Oh! I thought this was the l39 mount versions. Im planning to get an l39 mount J9 to use for my Leica m3 or Bessa R, does the same apply to these versions?

[@ChefAlexSocci]

Also I Have bought several items from your store in the past and I see you have a new contax/Kiev mount to ltm mount adapter. Do you reccomend I buy your adapter and get a c/k Jupiter 9, or try to find an original FED mount Jupiter 9?

[@anthonycongiano8890]

Thank you for this highly informative video! Could you please explain how to differentiate Type 2 from Type 3 as they appear to be nearly identical? Is it by serial number? 60 to 69 at the beginning of the serial number is the far better type 2? Thank you

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! type 2 has always a varnished body and sometimes zebra focus ring. This is a main thing to follow

[@alejandroaceytuno2881]

Awesome video, I am here after a miraculous find of a 1965 - Type 1 in pristine condition, do you have a video on how to take it apart? the focus grease is old, and the aperture grease is also old , sticky movement on both, but oohhh man ohh man ohh man what sharpness and light control through the lenses, just an amazing piece of art.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Glad you've found it! No i don't have a re-lubrication video, sorry.

[@bradl2636]

Nice summary 👍

[@GeorgiosKalaydjian]

Thank you for this informative video. What is your opinion for the 90s version MC (multi-coated), is it good?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

it is hit and miss experience, but chance to get a good copy is less than 50%

[@TSPDLmarketing]

Hi, Thanks for this wonderful and comprehensive video. After several version variations in this lens, I bought a Jupiter 9 in black with serial no. 700XXXX it is in 39 mount. Is it a typ 2 which you are refering to? it looks exactly like the one in your video ( black varnished with curved focus ring).

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, it is. Rare and awesome optically

[@resistenzainutile]

Awesome job! Brilliant indeed. I've got a "type 4" but the first two digits are 92. Isn't supposed to stand for the year '92?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yes, it is

[@resistenzainutile]

@@RetroFotoHouse Ok, i thought they ended the production in '91

[@resistenzainutile]

@@RetroFotoHouse Anyway my copy is waaaay too soft @ f2. It start to be useful @ f4. It's going to Ebay very soon :=)

[@parker6634]

alsome roman,,this is toddy from tennessee..juts picked up a 64 type 1..excited !!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Happy you love it, Toddy!

[@mariuszwalkowiak3902]

My specimen's serial number starts from 91 but still it doesn't feature the MC mark. Which type is it according to your classification ?

[@kerrystaite1683]

great video, I have a odd version, its 1959 given serial starts with 59, no second aperture ring, and a red "n" on front.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

you have a rangefinder version of this lens. My review is about SLR

[@kLiteRacing]

@@RetroFotoHouse ahh this makes sence now...it has been adapted to M42 thx again for the great videos!!

[@congliu7031]

Thank you so much for this video. I have a question. A J9 produced in 1972 has an interface of 39. Is this lens type2 or type3?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

you need to look at the barrel. If it is of a thin shape, than this is a rangefinder lens(not an object of this review) if it is of thick barrel shape, than it is type 2. Type 3 does not exist in m39 mount

[@globally123]

I just bought The silver original Jupiter 9 (1966 version),and I'm waiting for it to arrive .I'm looking forward to using it, thanks for another great video. P.S I bought a Helios 40 and I need a hood for it, but can't even find a step ring adapter, do you have any suggestions please? Thank you again

[@RetroFotoHouse]

For helios-40-no i don't, sorry

[@georgiosanthymosoglou3272]

Great video !!! Which version do you think its better for video in mirrorless cameras?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

I prefer type2, though it is difficult to find...

[@redlightchorzow]

I have a question. Is there a jupiter9 version with a replaceable mount that allows the installation of the KP/A-H adapter? I once read that there is such a version but I can't find it anywhere. This is very important to me because I have Nikon F-mount cameras and I want to focus at infinity.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

unfortunately not, those will need to have 'A' letter in name, like jupiter-37A for example

[@d.r8425]

I have an m42 version from 1986. It is MS Jupiter. What does MS stand for? Thanks, love your channel.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

it stands for MC, but written with error....

[@ChefAlexSocci]

Now that I realized this is for m42 Slr versions, PLEASE make a video for rangefinder versions, Thanks!!!!!!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

I will for sure, i just need to gather all modifications of rangefinder jup-9 and this is not an easy task...

[@ciel87]

Hi, can you please tell me if there is any difference between the White Version of the lens from KMZ and LZOS? You are showing the LZOS, but the KMZ looks a Bit different, in example it got a longer Tube. Is there also a difference with the sharpness? Or is the KMZ just like the LZOS in a different Design?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

KMZ is a bit better and harder to find. I did not find noticeable differencies in costruction however, maybe only in early prototype pieces

[@isnapit]

Can you recommend a place to have a Jupiter 85mm f2 CLAed? Do you offer this service?

[@MrMilanina]

I also saw there's a M39 to Leica L adapter, would it work on Panasonic S5 or I'd also need to convert it to M42? Or what you're saying is that there's M39 version for SLR camera and M39 version for Zorki camera and I'd need to somehow know which one is which?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

m39 version for zorki cameras is thinner, m39 for SLR is more thick. That's the truth of the life :) The point is that m39 standard can be of 28.8mm flange and of 45,2mm flange. This is russians who did this mess.....

[@junglisttt]

For video on a Sony camera, would you recomend the silver type 1 in your video, or the silver range finder version? Thank you!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

rangefinder version has too stiff focus for video work, even serviced

[@junglisttt]

@@RetroFotoHouse Thanks man👊

[@dr5chrome896]

Thanks for this video! I am needing a Jupiter-9, and I bought one blind, before I saw this review. I had trouble getting sharp anything wide open. I had to go the 5.6 to get any acceptable sharpness. Turns out I had bought a "4th" version with a ser# that says '88'. Since your chart seems to indicate that our lens was made in the 'MC' era, we were wondering why it doesn't say 'MC'? Our lens is as the #3 lens in the video, VERY poor sharpness wide open. We cant send it back to Russia, so we have to try to recoup by selling in the US. We still need a sharp J-9, so we bought another from another Russian seller. This one a silver one that boasts a '66' ser#. Should I have a sharper lens?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yes, in general rule silver one is sharper becuase of stricter quality control in 1960's

[@dr5chrome896]

@@RetroFotoHouse Thanks ! We have also noted in different sales that 'in the silver lenses for sale' and even in the same year '66', 2 versions exist. One with Russian text, one with latin text.. Are these the same? ..or is the Russian text lens better? thanks. dw

[@pascaldeshayes5459]

Hi, thanks for the video! My Jupiter has its iris blades jammed up. Is it realistic to service it myself, do you think? Thanks for your help.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! I'm afraid not, unless you have good lens repair skills

[@topolanszky87]

Fantastic video! Let me ask you this. If I want to match it with the Helios 44’s characteristics (bokeh), should I look for the coated version (Red П)? Also is the m39 mount better in this regard? Thank you so much! Ps: I hope the aggression ends soon! 🙏🏼💙💛

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hello! It will much in terms of colors with helios 44 series, but it won't match in terms of bokeh, as jupiter-9 does not produce swirls

[@topolanszky87]

@@RetroFotoHouse you mean, the colors of the Red П will match better with the Helios 44, right? Thank you

[@Penka-ju4li]

I have 1985 Jupiter. Unfortunately it is type 4...

[@hayashimushroom]

why the plastic gloves?

[@fermixx]

mine has a serial number starting with 89, but it looks like its single coated. Is it from 1989 then? Maybe the SC and MC where produced simultaneously during some time?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yes, during some time they were in production simultaneously

[@OccultDemonCassette]

Hello, my copy has the distance scale measured in Feet instead of meters. I'm having a hard time finding any other references with the distance scale measured in feet only, it looks more like the type 5, but it doesn't have any lettering around the rim other than "85/2". Do you know what version this would be?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

may i see a foto of your marvel?

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@RetroFotoHouse Sure thing, I'll take some pics of it here in a bit i.imgur.com/PKwOY06.jpg

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@RetroFotoHouse Here you go - i.imgur.com/PKwOY06.jpg

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@RetroFotoHouse Oh, it also has a Minolta MD mount. Forgot to mention that.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@RetroFotoHouse Did the linked image load for you?

[@kevinballing3375]

Hi. I have a M42 version, serial number "89". There are two silver rings inside the helicoid when it is unscrewed. What is the purpose of these? Thank You.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

those are spacer rings, to finely adjust infinity focus.

[@mockingbirdanalog]

Do you have someone that can coat lenses? I have asked around here (US) and people think I am crazy. Thanks for learning English, sharing this valuable information, showing how to mod, and being a very valuable asset for the rest of us. I had to sing some Russian in college, and it was difficult. In comparison, German and French was like riding a bicycle. I'm sure learning English is just as hard, maybe harder because we have a bastard language full of different "parent" languages.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! No ,unfortunately i do not know people who can coat lenses. Thank you very much for your kind words!

[@hajmanek]

Good test, thanks for video

[@PabloDeBiasi]

Hello, I just got a type 4 from 93 and there's a lot of back play in the helicoid so the whole image shifts when focusing, can it be fixed or it's just bad manufacturing tolerances? thanks

[@RetroFotoHouse]

bad manufacturing tolerances, unfortunately. How do you like image quality?

[@PabloDeBiasi]

@@RetroFotoHouse I like it very much! I regreased the helicoid with Helimax XP and seems to be better. It has that play because there's only one pin and slot keeping it centered, I contacted a local optics engineer to see if he can modify it and and another pin and slot on the opposite side.

[@8225189]

Hello! I Found a Jupiter 9 copy with a series number starting with 90... But it lacks the MC inscription... The owner states it is a MC version but I am kind of irritated... Do you think there is something wrong with it?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

if there is not MC inscription, it is not MC, everything is kinda simple.

[@Aviopic]

I have a Jupiter 9(silver) made by Lomz range finder with serial 602464 which makes me think that Lomz produced them from the start.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

no, they didn't. I'm pretty confident about that.

[@Aviopic]

@@RetroFotoHouse Not disputing your knowledge but I do have a Lomz silver Jupiter 9 with serial 602464, can send you a picture if you want.

[@parker6634]

Hi,Roman this is Toddy.Do you know anything about the KMZ 1960' slr J-9 ?..

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi Toddy! Nice to hear from you mate! KMZ jupiter is a type1 lens. Vey nice, but difficult to find in decent condition.

[@isnapit]

Also, will a Jupiter 85mm f2 with a M39 screw mount be able to mount to an M3 Leica and focus to infinity with the Leica M39 to M mount adapter? Thanks in advance for your insights to either of my questions.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

You need to find a rangefinder version of jupiter-9 with L39 mount. This might work

[@bmpcc4ktech852]

So whats the verdict? Simple breakdown of each type?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, so you can decide by yourself which one fits best your need. Me personally i love very much type2

[@bmpcc4ktech852]

@@RetroFotoHouse recommendations are always welcomed. How to distinguish type 2? I appreciate your work

[@Viennapal]

I saw a Type 3 lens that had a Nikon F adapter on it, a very thin ring one that looks as if it came with the lens, fixed with 3 screws. Is it possible to remove such an adapter and find the original M42 undamaged underneath? As obviously the lenses were always made to be M42 it must be an adapter.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

it is not original one, it was remade by someone. It is idiifuclt to say more without have seen a lens

[@Viennapal]

@@RetroFotoHouse I bought it for fun and should have it in a week or so. I could send you pictures but where? I will try to see if the adapter can be removed and if the lens still focuses correctly for M42 (I cannot believe it has been completely rebuilt it...) -if not I can use it with a new Nikon F adapter on my mirrorless but I was planning to use it with M42 both on my Zenit and the Eos M6.

[@unknown_907]

Hey Buddy, i was looking at this video but couldn’t find see the Contax version of the lens. Would you be able to give me some information on it?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

The review of contax version will come in the future for sure

[@jd5787]

Between a 1968 and a 1988 which one would you guys choose? The form factor looks different. I am not sure about coating of old vs new... Difficult to choose... Thanks !

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Well, me personally i prefer type2, though it is quite rare

[@stevocem]

I am reading that the early RF and M39 KMZ versions are the best in terms of sharpness wide open. What do you think?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yeah, that's true. Problem is that early RF jupiters can't be used onto DSLR

[@stevocem]

@@RetroFotoHouse Yes, good point.

[@Josh-dk1ex]

Do you know if the Jupiter-9 rangefinder and SLR share the same glass?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, i think so. Just RF jupiters were produced in numbers in 50thies 60thies, at that time quality control was better, so in generally one can find a quality RF jupiter-9 more easely

[@JoePastorgomez]

Do you have a current EBay Store

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes i do www.ebay.com/usr/kosbik84

[@ItisImarko]

First 2 numbers is year of production ...korekt?? Because my is 9203 ..... and it is not MC

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes,correct

[@tomghzel]

Very good informative video's!

[@thurthevintagelens]

You need an m59-m42 adapter?

[@stealthworx4371]

Hey are you familiar with the contax RF jupiter 9s?. Are they better or worse than these m39 slr lenses?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Yes, i am. Generally the rule is simple- earlier production is better.

[@stealthworx4371]

@@RetroFotoHouse cool hope my 1966 lzos copy turns out well. Great channel and keep up the great content :)

[@cubasehead]

I have this one Jupiter-9 Contax-Kiev lens mount...serial N7404482. Which type is this one? 1, 2, or 3?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

I'm talking in this review bout SLR versions of this lens, not rangefiner ones

[@MrSoloflite]

Hi! Im looking at my lens now. It is an aluminum body with sn N6308343. it is different from your silver copy there in that 1. it is noticably thinner but longer 2. the coating is a distinct baby blue 3. minimum focus is 1.15M 4. no preset. it is a simple aperture adapater with clear markings Thoughts?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

you have rangefinder version of jupiter-9. I talk in this review about SLR versions

[@MrSoloflite]

@@RetroFotoHouse ah makes sense. Thanks!

[@maxsmirnik9032]

Спасибо за отличное видео! Подскажите, пож-та, а на зеркалках есть возможность использовать? Если нет, но на новый canon r5 получится поставить?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Эти как раз для зеркалок.

[@roy5515]

Hi, I have a Jupiter 9 with smallest aperture of 22, which was not on any 5 types you have shown, serial number begins with 88, no MC written before the word jupiter. Should I assume that it was made in 1988 but with no multi coating?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Interesting! Please send me a few fotos of it to [e-mail]. I would be very grateful to you!

[@roy5515]

Sir, I sent you some photos, no work of art but I hope demonstrated Jupiter 9 prowess in character.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

@@roy5515 Roy! You have a rangefinder version of jupiter-9. This is completely different. My video is about _SLR_ versions of this lens. No one jupiter-9 for SLR has f/22 aprture stop

[@pietropozzali6089]

I’ve found a jupiter 9 product in 1981 (automatic) different from these five models, is it valid in your opinion?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

No, jupiter-9 automat is of low quality

[@ice9phil]

did they make a Leica thread version?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, they did

[@ringoschubert4966]

Strange... I have a version in black, with a new body, the serial number starts with 91, but it isn't a MC-Variant...

[@RetroFotoHouse]

it can happen, because in 1991 both MC and Singlecoated versions were in production

[@henryfu8511]

I have a silver version that has a different housing and a RF mount, and it seems to be the Kiev version? I can’t seem to find much information on it, anyone here knows the main differences between that and the ones mentioned in this video? Thanks

[@RetroFotoHouse]

the main difference is that your lens won't work on SLR/DSLR cameras becuase of short flange focal distance

[@GONZOFAM7]

Roman how about using this lens on a Canon model 7 rangefinder with M39 mount?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! These will not work onto rangefinder cameras You need a jupiter-9 RF version. Those ones are SLR's

[@roberteubank8240]

were any type one in m42? I bought a Type one but they say it was reflanged for nikon F mount.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

no, only in m39 mount. You need to put on it m39-m42 step up ring in order to be able to use it with m42 standard adapters

[@roberteubank8240]

@@RetroFotoHouse someone must have modded it because it had the nikor fmount on it.

[@borisbritva1665]

What if the title on the lens says "MS" instead of the normal "MC"? Is that a typo, a rare batch or something else?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

that's a typo, those are latest one porduced just before collapse of USSR, therefore poor quality

[@winwcy]

can i still find a copy of the shiny black m39 version?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, look up at ebay, but recently prices are increased considerably!

[@joshhugo323]

Do you have a contact information, storefront or eBay site to purchase from? Those pinned links do not work at the moment.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! here you have www.ebay.com/usr/kosbik84

[@princeharbinger]

I ordered a Jupiter 11 M39 and was told I needed a L39-NEX for my A6300. Do I have to buy the step ring for the Jupiter 11?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

No, you don't

[@princeharbinger]

@@RetroFotoHouse Darn I ordered a m39 to m42 ring on Amazon. I guess I'll save it for when I buy a Jupiter 9 off of you.