More thoughts and images from the Lomography Jupiter 3+ Lens

More thoughts and images from the Lomography Jupiter 3+ Lens


Been messing around with the lovely Jupiter 3+ from Lomography more and more and I have come to the conclusion that if you are one of those who like the character of the Jupiter 3, then you will NOT find a better copy of the lens than this one. Made of brass for a solid build/feel, super smooth focusing, and the full Jupiter 3 character but without worries of issues. This is the sharpest (in the very center) Jupiter I have ever used. The best made/built, and the best looking. It’s a gorgeous lens in a great little package and while not cheap at a somewhat far fetched $649, if you love the Jupiter 3, and want one without issues and one with a warranty while offering the best IQ of any Jupiter 3 out there, this is the one 😉

If you missed it, here is my 1st look video on the Lomo Jupiter 3+

Below are a few snaps from the past few days using the Jupiter 3+, all on a Sony A7RII. Yes, the lens is made for Leica M mount (well, screw mount but comes with adapter for M) but at this time I do not have a Leica M, so using it on mirrorless seems like a no brainer. It works well. 😉

jupiter_3_fuijifilm_x-mount jupiter_3_sony_a7_nex jupiter_3_m_mount

The only issue with the Jupiter 3+ is the fact that it is not an every day or all the time kind of lens. It is a character lens, much like THIS ONE but it is tiny and offers this “artsy” look whenever you want it.


You can order the Lomo Jupiter 3+ where mine came from, CAMERAQUEST.COM  – Right here. 






















  1. I have a 1966 Jupiter 3 in mint state, IMO it’s a great lens with a very good bokeh and stepped down can be used for everyday use, here there are some samples taken using my Canon L1 and Tmax 100, non metered:




    I would be attracted to have the newer version if the minimum focusing distance is 0.7 mt, however it appears it’s expensive (probably a better price would have been in the $500 area, after all the Sonnetar and the Zeiss Sonnar are more expensive, but they offer more) and for that price they could also given a hood like the Nokton.

    Also, are there click in the aperture?

    Thanks, Alex.

  2. I recently picked one up and have been having great fun with paired to a Leica T. You certainly can get some crazy effects. I know some people of complained about if, but frankly I don’t get their complaints the lens is simply fun. One question, though have you or anyone else created a lens profile to deal with corrections for Lightroom?

  3. I always found the Jupiter 8 to be more use-able on a regular basis, even though it is slower or maybe because it is slower it produces a more clean image with less “character”. Correctly focused and stopped to f4.0 it makes a great portrait lens on MFT

    • I’ve made direct comparisons between the J-3+ and two perfect-glass KMZ Jupiter-3’s, one from 1950 with Zeiss glass and one from 1956. Both J-3’s adjusted for the Leica standard, ie focal length changed by re-arranging the optics then shimmed for my Leica M9. That took a LOT of work! The single-coated optics give a warmer color-cast, the J-3+ is neutral: matches my uncoated Sonnar 5cm f1.5 in Leica mount. Almost like using a Skylight 1A filter. Less flare with the J-3+. Better flatness-of-field with the J-3+. Pixel-Peeping Sharpness- very close, but the J-3+ looked sharper in the center. Next test- I have a 1949 Nikkor 5cm F1.5 in LTM and a 1949 ZK Sonnar 5cm F1.5 in the bag.

  4. I paid $70 for my Summicron collapsible, $70 for a Canon 50/1.5, $95 for a Nikkor 5cm F1.4 in Leica mount, $90 for a Zeiss 5cm F1.5 in Leica mount, $100 for a rigid Summicron 50/2. People pay more than that now. I’ve seen 5cm F1.4 LTM Nikkors go for the same as the J3+, and the 5cm F1.5 Sonnar in LTM go for even more.$650 for a new Sonnar formula lens, made in brass, 50/1.5 in Leica mount- new-in-the-box with a 2-year warranty. That’s a lot less than a Summicron 50, and it’s only F2.

  5. It’s not without it’s charms. But in that price range, you have lots of other charming options as well. I use Lomo cameras, but they are absurdly overpriced, and you are doubtlessly paying for a certain beatnik cachet. (I’m deliberately using the word ‘hipster’ less and it’s very use has become as much a cliché as actually being a hipster.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.