dexdog
Veteran
I recently bought a CZJ 50/1.5 Sonnar in LTM on eBay for the staggering sum of $98 
. The lens is in an aluminum alloy mount, and after a cosmetic cleaning and partial disassembly to remove solidified grease, it appears to be in pretty good shape.
Anyway, I was wondering if anyone had access to the book of Zeiss lens data from author Hartmut Thiele, and would be willing to look up the lens number for me. I am guessing that this lens in wartime production based on the serial number of 2858xxx.
Thanks!
. The lens is in an aluminum alloy mount, and after a cosmetic cleaning and partial disassembly to remove solidified grease, it appears to be in pretty good shape. Anyway, I was wondering if anyone had access to the book of Zeiss lens data from author Hartmut Thiele, and would be willing to look up the lens number for me. I am guessing that this lens in wartime production based on the serial number of 2858xxx.
Thanks!
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
just bumping this post
jmkelly
rangefinder user
Dex - good buy on the lens (even if it turns out to be, <ahem>... inauthentic). You might consider joining the Zeiss Ikon Collector Group and posting the question there. Marc James Small, and sometimes Charlie Barringer, can help you with information.
One question that will come up is whether there is a matching serial number stamped into the rear retaining ring of the optical module. You can check this by screwing the module CCW out of the focus mount.
One question that will come up is whether there is a matching serial number stamped into the rear retaining ring of the optical module. You can check this by screwing the module CCW out of the focus mount.
raid
Dad Photographer
Good luck, Mark. I hope that you got an authentic one here.
Marc Small and Charles Barringer are very helpful.
Marc Small and Charles Barringer are very helpful.
dexdog
Veteran
Ya know, I have looked at this lens carefully, and don't think that it is a J-3 in disguise. It has several indicators of a Zeiss lens, including small "m" on the distance scale, small red triangle, and small numbers. Plus, the "T" coating is an amber-purple color on the front lens element, and not the typical purplish-blue of a J-3. Lastly, the rear element appears to be uncoated- only white reflections from this lens surface.
I might post on ZICG, to see if anyone responds.
Last edited:
jmkelly
rangefinder user
Dex - IIRC Marc and Stephan Van den Zegel (who I believe is also an RFF member) have lenses with similar serial numbers that appear to be authentic. The lenses with the serial number stamped on the optical module - and where the module is brass rather than alloy - are probably no-argument authentic. Stephan has at least one lens that has an alloy optical module, where the machining looks to have been done by hand. I have an LTM 50/1.5 Sonnar with these characteristics also, though the engraving on the front ring of my lens is different from Stephan's, and the serial number on mine does not match a Sonnar production card.
Following some rather nebulous threads about these lenses with apparently hand-made alloy optical modules, there is a hypothesis that they may be "transitional" units built up from some combination of authentic Zeiss Jena parts and handmde bits that predate the earliest Jupiters.
I question how accurate wartime records of this sort of handmade lenses might, would and could be. I don't have a copy of Thiele and my reading German is very rusty, but I am thinking of buying one and then meeting up with Roland to buy him beer until he has read me the parts that are of interest.
Following some rather nebulous threads about these lenses with apparently hand-made alloy optical modules, there is a hypothesis that they may be "transitional" units built up from some combination of authentic Zeiss Jena parts and handmde bits that predate the earliest Jupiters.
I question how accurate wartime records of this sort of handmade lenses might, would and could be. I don't have a copy of Thiele and my reading German is very rusty, but I am thinking of buying one and then meeting up with Roland to buy him beer until he has read me the parts that are of interest.
dexdog
Veteran
jmkelly, thanks for the information. This lens look very much, but not exactly, like the 50/1.5 R-Sonnar that I acquired from Roland. Looking at these two lenses side by side makes me think that they were built by the same factory. The R-Sonnar was supposed to have been built from a 1942 lens originally constructed in Contax mount, according to Thiele.
I have posted a note at the ZICG.
I have posted a note at the ZICG.
raid
Dad Photographer
Such lens project discussions are very enjoyful to follow.
I have a 5cm/2 LTM, and this is enough for me.
I have a 5cm/2 LTM, and this is enough for me.
Highway 61
Revisited
Mark : I once had the very same lens as yours and after I had it expertized it revealed itself not to be a genuine Zeiss Sonnar.
The small red triangle, the small "m" and the (relatively) small engravings on the DOF scale are not enough.
What you have is (I'm sure 99%) a very early "ZK" Jupiter-3 which was afterwards fitted with a namering and an aperture ring removed from a CZJ 50/1.5 Sonnar in Contax RF mount so that it could sell more easily.
None of the rare genuine CZJ Sonnars made in LTM mount had those "ears" at their aperture rings, its now something well confirmed.
Please unscrew the lens module from the main barrel and inspect it carefully. To be a genuine Sonnar, the inner barrel has to be fully made of heavy brass. If it's made of alloy your lens is not a Sonnar. Also I'm pretty certain that you will find some engraving on the rear inner barrel that will be similar to the one I had on my lens ad which was told to me to be present on all those "ZK" lenses now wearing the namering and aperture command ring taken off a CZJ 50/1.5 Sonnar in Contax RF mount. I don't write down what it is yet not to foul the guessing exercise...
Anyway, for $98 it's not a bad deal, and those Sonnar-disguised "ZK" lenses were excellent performers.
Mine was completely off re. the collimation so what I can advise you to do is to re-collimate it very carefully.
dexdog
Veteran
Interesting. I don't have any idea how to unscrew the lens barrel, so if you have any instructions, I would appreciate them.
Hey, even if it is a ZK, that's still pretty cool. ZKs are relatively rare, and are often excellent lenses.
The R-Sonnar that I have has ears just like this lens, and was originally produced in Contax mount, and remounted after WW2 in LTM.
I have just loaded a Canon L1 with some film for a lens test, so I guess I will find out if the lens needs collimation or not.
Thanks.
Hey, even if it is a ZK, that's still pretty cool. ZKs are relatively rare, and are often excellent lenses.
The R-Sonnar that I have has ears just like this lens, and was originally produced in Contax mount, and remounted after WW2 in LTM.
I have just loaded a Canon L1 with some film for a lens test, so I guess I will find out if the lens needs collimation or not.
Thanks.
Highway 61
Revisited
It's easy. There is a set screw that goes through the outer barrel near the rear of the lens. Remove it (be careful, they often can break). Then grasp the front part of the lens with your right hand, secure the rear part of the lens with your left hand, and just unscrew the whole front part of the lens from the main barrel.
Use your third hand if necessary.
According to the nasty gap I can see on your pic between the aperture ring and the focusing ring, I'd bid for the collimation to be waaaaaaaaaaaay off and wouldn't waste film with that ZK-Sonnar before it has been collimated.
The engraving I referred to in my previous post is on the lens rear group inner barrel. Which will turn out to be made of grey alloy I'm pretty sure.
dexdog
Veteran
Thanks for the instructions. I also wondered about that gap- my R-Sonnar doesn't show this.
Also, a little searching turned up Brian Sweeney's illustrated instructions on the J-3. T am looking forward to playing detective after work.
Also, a little searching turned up Brian Sweeney's illustrated instructions on the J-3. T am looking forward to playing detective after work.
dexdog
Veteran
Well, I was able to unscrew the lens assembly before leaving for work, and as predicted by Highway 61, the metal inside is a gray alloy of some sort. Also,there is a cryptic notation (possibly Cyrillic letters) scratched onto the end of the barrel. Lastly, unlike the lens shown in Brian's illustrated example, there are no shims in this lens whatsoever.
Perhaps Brian would be willing to perform his magic on this lens- I don't have the skill to collimate the lens, and even broke the head off one of the small grub screws putting the lens back together.
Thanks for your help everyone.
Perhaps Brian would be willing to perform his magic on this lens- I don't have the skill to collimate the lens, and even broke the head off one of the small grub screws putting the lens back together.
Thanks for your help everyone.
furcafe
Veteran
This has been an informative thread. I believe I have the same type of faked LTM Sonnar/Jupiter-3, w/the serial # in the 2857*** range, bought 4 years ago for $150.
I had it CLAed & collimated by DAG & it's been a fine performer. In retrospect, I should have asked him to take some notes/photos while it was disassembled to confirm the provenance. Oh well, you win some & you lose some!
I had it CLAed & collimated by DAG & it's been a fine performer. In retrospect, I should have asked him to take some notes/photos while it was disassembled to confirm the provenance. Oh well, you win some & you lose some!
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
Well, I thought that it was worth a chance at the price of $98.
raid
Dad Photographer
Mark,
It was worth the money. I spent $200 for a similar 50/2 lens [not 1.5], and they are even rarer than the 1.5 lenses. I accepted it as a fake since most comments online told me it was a fake.
It was worth the money. I spent $200 for a similar 50/2 lens [not 1.5], and they are even rarer than the 1.5 lenses. I accepted it as a fake since most comments online told me it was a fake.
dexdog
Veteran
OK, I unscrewed the lens, and now I am very confused. This lens does not look very much like the one displayed on Brian Sweeney's illustrated J-3 tutorial. The lens has the number 1663 engraved in two different places , as seen in the attached photos. Someone even took the time to fill in the numbers with white paint.
Any ideas, Highway 61 or any one else?
By the way, the color seen in the photos is very true to the actual color of the lens innards.
Any ideas, Highway 61 or any one else?
By the way, the color seen in the photos is very true to the actual color of the lens innards.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
Hi Mark,
I recommend to wait for Charlie to get back to you with your ZICG posting.
I think H61 is right, I have both 50 and 85 ZK lenses, as well as a 1951 Jupiter 9
that looks identical to the ZK lens, and like in your lens, the inside barrel is completely
differently built.
The serial nr. that you see inside is a Zeiss serial nr. If not completely original,
this lens was definitely assembled from original Zeiss pieces. The number of
original/new pieces varried from lens to lens, between 1945 and 1951. Also,
some ZK lenses did have a small "m" on the focusing scale.
Another indication of Zeiss pieces used, you can get by looking at the coating
inside the lens. If the coating is original to Zeiss, around war end, it will only
have been applied to the center of the lens, and you can see the coating "halo".
Like here:
Charlie is specialized on this stuff and also knows (and collects) ZK lenses. If it is a ZK lens,
it still has more value than you paid, BTW And it will perform beautifully, if clean.
Best,
Roland.
PS: John, Sorry, don't have a copy of Thiele but beer is always good
I recommend to wait for Charlie to get back to you with your ZICG posting.
I think H61 is right, I have both 50 and 85 ZK lenses, as well as a 1951 Jupiter 9
that looks identical to the ZK lens, and like in your lens, the inside barrel is completely
differently built.
The serial nr. that you see inside is a Zeiss serial nr. If not completely original,
this lens was definitely assembled from original Zeiss pieces. The number of
original/new pieces varried from lens to lens, between 1945 and 1951. Also,
some ZK lenses did have a small "m" on the focusing scale.
Another indication of Zeiss pieces used, you can get by looking at the coating
inside the lens. If the coating is original to Zeiss, around war end, it will only
have been applied to the center of the lens, and you can see the coating "halo".
Like here:
Charlie is specialized on this stuff and also knows (and collects) ZK lenses. If it is a ZK lens,
it still has more value than you paid, BTW
And it will perform beautifully, if clean.Best,
Roland.
PS: John, Sorry, don't have a copy of Thiele but beer is always good
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
Roland, thanks for the information. Yep, my lens does exhibit the halo as shown in your picture.
OK, now I am interested enough to send this lens out to be cleaned and collimated. Any recommendations?
BTW, I used to have a 1951 vintage J-9 in Contax/Kiev mount, and I could not distinguish images it made from the images from my Zeiss-Opton 85mm Sonnar. I kept the Sonnar and sold the J-9 because the fit and operation of the Zeiss lens was so superior. Both lenses produced excellent images, however. I sold the J-9 to Physiognomy, IIRC
OK, now I am interested enough to send this lens out to be cleaned and collimated. Any recommendations?
BTW, I used to have a 1951 vintage J-9 in Contax/Kiev mount, and I could not distinguish images it made from the images from my Zeiss-Opton 85mm Sonnar. I kept the Sonnar and sold the J-9 because the fit and operation of the Zeiss lens was so superior. Both lenses produced excellent images, however. I sold the J-9 to Physiognomy, IIRC
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
Best person for this type of lens, Mark, IMHO, is John at Focalpoint.
I think about it like this:
In 1945, Zeiss was disassembled and in parts with personel, machines and pre-fabricated lens stock components "relocated" to the USSR. Over the next five years, lenses got built from various, in the majority existing components, first with the original beauty ring on the lens, later with ZK rings, and finally, around 1951/52 renamed Jupiters with some design changes. Most likely, if not completely original, your lens was assembled by Zeiss personel from Zeiss pieces.
I mentioned the 1951 J9 above, since it has identical construction to my ZK 85/2, which is quite different from later J9s. Among others, the optical barrel is of a different material, and the minimum focus is 1.8m instead of the later 1.1m ! Which shows that the design changes came after the name change to Jupiter.
Roland.
PS: my grand-father returned from Siberia in 1949.
I think about it like this:
In 1945, Zeiss was disassembled and in parts with personel, machines and pre-fabricated lens stock components "relocated" to the USSR. Over the next five years, lenses got built from various, in the majority existing components, first with the original beauty ring on the lens, later with ZK rings, and finally, around 1951/52 renamed Jupiters with some design changes. Most likely, if not completely original, your lens was assembled by Zeiss personel from Zeiss pieces.
I mentioned the 1951 J9 above, since it has identical construction to my ZK 85/2, which is quite different from later J9s. Among others, the optical barrel is of a different material, and the minimum focus is 1.8m instead of the later 1.1m ! Which shows that the design changes came after the name change to Jupiter.
Roland.
PS: my grand-father returned from Siberia in 1949.
Last edited: