Jupiter 8 vs Helios 103

Does any of you have experience of using both Jupiter 8M and a

Helios 103 in a Kiev camera?

Which is better in your opinion?

I appreciate your help and time.

Yes, I have used several examples of both.

 

They are variable in quality. At their best, they are better lenses than most of us are photographers. They are both copies of original Zeiss designs. A good Jupiter will beat a bad Helios and vice versa. They are both so incredibly cheap that it is worth the effort to find a good one and start shooting.

Hello Moises,

the Helios 103 is a modifizied Jupiter lens, and so a own soviet invented lens. Jupiter 8 is like the Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1:2/50mm 6 lenses in 3 groups. The invented from soviet to Jupiter 8 only is the Jupiter 8 M have a diaphragm click stop = M engraved. The Helios 103 have included the click stop without a letter engraving.

The Helios 103 is sharper like the Jupiter lenses, and special in the edge from pictures, but sensitiv from reflection without lenshood and open apperature.

However I liked this lenses.

 

peter

I have several Jupiter 8 for FED-2, Zorki-4 in Leica screw mount and

a Jupiter 8M in Kiev 4A and Helios 103 for my two Kiev 4AM's. I like both lenses a lot. Guess I got lucky all were in top condition.

I'm showing an example of a Jupiter 8M and Helios 103.

 

The boating scene was taken with FED-2 with Jupiter 8M, the tree with flag was taken today with Helios 103 on Kiev 4AM. The latter is not a political statement, just a study of textures. It was taken next to baseball diamond of middle school across the street from my house.<div></div>

Here is today's shot with Helios 103<div></div>

The image quality improves when I wheel back from my laptop's monitor.

Hope the scans transmit well.

I believe this scan is closer to what I saw in school yard, yesterday. I walk by that area very often, but never saw a flag on that tree before. I use that tree trunk as a standard for testing new cameras and lenses for its shaggy texture. Some individual, not the town, stapled small flags to every telephone pole on our short street on Flag Day. Most have been taken down; the one on the tree is the same size flag.<div></div>

Perhaps misinformation that someone can correct but I thought that the Helios 103 was a Gauss design, completely different from a Sonnar.

Mike,

 

I,too, have read that the Jupiter 8 and Helios 103 are different forlumas. If I remember correctly, I thought someone wrote in an earlier post that the Helios 103 was a copy of Leitz f2/50 Summitar--a lens I loved dearly. I can't find my chart with drawings of every popular old lens, but Gauss seems to imply a symmetrical design. If I recall the Summitar is not at all symmetrical. Others will certainly supply the knowledgeable details and give us the straight poop.

Mike,

Found my lens list, but have no idea who published it. The title is "600 Lenses with their secrets laid bare" that is 20-30 years old.

It lists lenses by maufacturers and name of lens. The design categories are depicted by elements groups:

 

1a Normal for large cameras

1b Wide angle for large cameras

II Lenses for 2/14 x 2 1/4 and larger

III Normal for 35mm

IVa Wide-Angle for 35mm

IVb Tele for 35mm

V Tele for 35mm and larger

VI Process Lenses

VII Zoom lenses

VIII Mirror Lenses (which can't be read om my copy)

 

This is FYI and a great resource for classic lenses. Maybe this is published elsewhere and known by many people on this list

Helios 103 is a Gauss design, not a Sonnar, unlike the J-8. It's resolution numbers claimed by the Soviets are a believable double from the J-8. Not to say the J-8 isn't a good lens, it is.

Thanks to everyone for sharring your wisdom and knowledge.

Regards from Mexico

<p>Later -- I encountered this in a search<br>

So far as I know, the Helios-103 is based on the Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58mm f/2 lens. I do not believe that it is a Soviet modification of the Jupiter (Sonnar) design.</p>

<p>Since the above I have been shooting with the Jupiter-8 (transmogrified) and the Helios 103 on Kievs and Contax IIa. Both are superb lenses by any standard whatsoever, not just "for Soviet lenses" or other qualifications.<br /> I'd put the overall image quality of the Helios a bit ahead, but there's not much real difference.</p>

<p>I have a fairly large number of ex-Soviet lenses in various mounts and I have to say that either the meme about "variable quality" is a myth or I have been extraordinarily lucky. </p>

<p>As soon as I get a Jupiter-8 that hasn't been turned into a "Sonnar" I am going to compare the "Sonnar 5cm f/2", the Jupiter and the Helios on some resolution charts, but real world images taken with them are fantastic.</p>