Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: size and weight of the Noctilux
From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 19:02:33 -0500

At 05:49 PM 3/15/2000 -0500, Javier wrote:
>
>
>How does the Jupiter compare optically to a Summarit?

I believe Erwin dissents, but I would rate it 10,995% better.  The Summarit
is quite low-contrast, where the Sonnar on which the Jupiter is based is,
even in its uncoated original form, rather high-contrast.  

Several caveats:  the best Jupiter-3's are those made in the past 12 years,
with the matte-black finish.  These are jewels and are multi-coated, to boot.

And the Summarit was a hand-assembled lens, and there are variations from
example to example.  The Jupiter-3 is also hand-assembled.  A good Summarit
will pound a bad Jupiter-3 to death, and vice versa.  However, on average,
and even given, the, well, to be charitable, uneven quality-control of SPS
manufactures, enough good Jupiter-3's to make the risk well worth it.

A solid Jupiter-3 is a stunningly fine lens.

Marc

msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!