Uncommon, Rare, and Collector's Delights.


Well, for $68 I bought this NKT 5cm F1.4 Nikkor-SC, "for parts" lens. The Nikkor-SC with SN up to ~ 330xxx uses a different optical prescription from the later lenses. I can use my Radius Gage to measure the differences. I know the diameter of the front element is ~1mm less than the later version.
 
The $68 Nikkor arrived. Light coating marks, no fungus, cleaned a spot off the edge.

With the $60 cheap Chinese LTM adapter that I polished the RF cam down before.
M2405807.jpgM2405808.jpgM2405811.jpgM2405822.jpgM2405823.jpg
 
I know this is a con job, but it might be good to know in case you should stumble across one of these. The Industar 26M was never produced in Contax mount, but there is a small number of these floating around outside the former USSR. It's very nicely done, hard to see that it is hacked. The serial number is quite early, around 1957-59. The 26M is nothing special, but it produces quite nice images.

I-26M-1.jpg

I-26M-4.jpg

I-26M-3.jpg


CONTAXII0152.jpg
 
I know this is a con job, but it might be good to know in case you should stumble across one of these. The Industar 26M was never produced in Contax mount, but there is a small number of these floating around outside the former USSR. It's very nicely done, hard to see that it is hacked. The serial number is quite early, around 1957-59. The 26M is nothing special, but it produces quite nice images.

View attachment 4842853

View attachment 4842855

View attachment 4842854


View attachment 4842856

And the very rare I-61L/D in Collapsible Contax Mount, shimmed for Nikon.

industar_s3.jpgindustar_s3_collapsed.jpg
 

Would someone here be willing to purchase this lens, in the name of science, and report their findings and results here? It's an uncommon lens with a Sonnar formula, I believe, and I'm not quite intrigued enough to give it a go myself.
 
I converted one for Raid a long time ago to Leica Thread Mount using a J-3 focus mount. The lens is a Sonnar. The original mount is not for Leica.
 

Would someone here be willing to purchase this lens, in the name of science, and report their findings and results here? It's an uncommon lens with a Sonnar formula, I believe, and I'm not quite intrigued enough to give it a go myself.
I have one. Repaired it and shot a couple of rolls of film through mine. The mechanical construction is deeply strange. The entire lens rotates to focus but the name ring and only the name ring does not - it has its own secondary helical for ... reasons. There is no "translating RF helical" meaning the lens focal length is 51.6mm actual. Internal construction is aluminum which makes the helical vulnerable to chips and dents. Focus feel is OK.

Speaking of that, the quinon has a close focus mechanism akin to the Nikkor 50/2 including the bump as a warning when rangefinder coupling disengages.
The coatings are very soft and in terrible shape on a lot of copies - they are still good on mine.

It's rendering is pretty much what you'd expect from a f2 Sonnar lens, there is more emphasis put on on central sharpness from wide open. Color rendering is on the cold side and muted. It looks more pre war than post war in that respect.

Strangely, there is almost no spherical aberration common to Sonnars at full aperture. However to pull this off, they apparently paid the price in distortion. It's the only Sonnar lens I have ever seen with visible barrel distortion. And the only German made Sonnar that I have seen with any visible distortion at all. It seems to vary with focal distance, but I'm not 100% sure on that, yet.

Edit: I'd attach some pictures but I am currently at work, alas.
 
I have one. Repaired it and shot a couple of rolls of film through mine. The mechanical construction is deeply strange. The entire lens rotates to focus but the name ring and only the name ring does not - it has its own secondary helical for ... reasons. There is no "translating RF helical" meaning the lens focal length is 51.6mm actual. Internal construction is aluminum which makes the helical vulnerable to chips and dents. Focus feel is OK.

Speaking of that, the quinon has a close focus mechanism akin to the Nikkor 50/2 including the bump as a warning when rangefinder coupling disengages.
The coatings are very soft and in terrible shape on a lot of copies - they are still good on mine.

It's rendering is pretty much what you'd expect from a f2 Sonnar lens, there is more emphasis put on on central sharpness from wide open. Color rendering is on the cold side and muted. It looks more pre war than post war in that respect.

Strangely, there is almost no spherical aberration common to Sonnars at full aperture. However to pull this off, they apparently paid the price in distortion. It's the only Sonnar lens I have ever seen with visible barrel distortion. And the only German made Sonnar that I have seen with any visible distortion at all. It seems to vary with focal distance, but I'm not 100% sure on that, yet.

Edit: I'd attach some pictures but I am currently at work, alas.
I have been lusting after a Steinheil Quinon 50mm f1.9 in Exacta mount (which seems to be the most common variant though I am agnostic as to mount as I would use it adapted for mirrorless) for a while now, but when they come up their pricing seems to be similar to the one posted above. I have a Steinheil Quinaron 35mm f2.8 which I like - which is why I got interested in them. I have not researched the optical designs but imagine the Exacta SLR one with f1.9 maximum aperture would be the same as the Leica mount one given Steinheil's naming conventions.

In any event it looks like a very nice performer. See this link.

 
I also have the M39 mount version of this lens, I believe designed for Paxette. I have never used it but always thought about one day trying to have it converted to LTM. I would assume the same optical formula but just a different mount?
 
I have been lusting after a Steinheil Quinon 50mm f1.9 in Exacta mount (which seems to be the most common variant though I am agnostic as to mount as I would use it adapted for mirrorless) for a while now, but when they come up their pricing seems to be similar to the one posted above. I have a Steinheil Quinaron 35mm f2.8 which I like - which is why I got interested in them. I have not researched the optical designs but imagine the Exacta SLR one with f1.9 maximum aperture would be the same as the Leica mount one given Steinheil's naming conventions.

In any event it looks like a very nice performer. See this link.

The 1.9 Quinon is a standard double gauss formula as one would expect for a lens that has to have enough back focus to clear a swinging mirror. From what I have seen it's a very capable performer.

Even more puzzlingly, the Paxette version is also a double gauss lens. You can in fact see this for yourself in the pictures linked above. If you look at the out-of-focus highlights you can see the typical "cats eye" pattern that you get with double gauss lenses. (Sonnar lenses produce more of a rounded half-moon shape that is also not closed but open.)

Here's a Japanese repairer corroborating this: (In Japanese but google translate works, they are very reliable for this kind of info.)

Sadly Steinheil chose to call a bunch of lenses (there's also a 55/1.9 macro afaik) "Quinon" and it has caused all sorts of confusions.
 
Last edited:
The 1.9 Quinon is a standard double gauss formula as one would expect for a lens that has to have enough back focus to clear a swinging mirror. From what I have seen it's a very capable performer.

Even more puzzlingly, the Paxette version is also a double gauss lens. You can in fact see this for yourself in the pictures linked above. If you look at the out-of-focus highlights you can see the typical "cats eye" pattern that you get with double gauss lenses. (Sonnar lenses produce more of a rounded half-moon shape that is also not closed but open.)

Here's a Japanese repairer corroborating this: (In Japanese but google translate works, they are very reliable for this kind of info.)

Sadly Steinheil chose to call a bunch of lenses (there's also a 55/1.9 macro afaik) "Quinon" and it has caused all sorts of confusions.
Wow.... how totally interesting. Never would have suspected the difference.
 
I also have a beautiful 55/1.9 "Quinon" in a Praktina Mt. I also learned it's design in a double gauss formula was not intended to be as "sharp", as a for instance, a Schneider Xenon, CZJ Flexon or later Pancolor. It's pleasing effect was more of a well rounded image but balanced. Being a novice in reading about lens design, it is truly amazing the "esoterica" some can deliver on optical performance, but I guess that is the beauty of different designs and formulas. Who are the optical design giants of today.... got to be AI.
 
Back
Top Bottom