Carl Zeiss Jena Prototypes, Experimental, and Transition Lenses,

wlewisiii said:
To answer your questions, as I would to Brian (who would already know this from far too many previous times 😉 )

Affordable is first. Durable next. Then ease of use.

Authentic is very low priority to me. I care about the image, not so much about the lens.

My gut answer to myself? A Canon 50/1.5 if I can find a clean one.
Click to expand...

Maybe I can give an answer for that question.
  1. Canon (Serenar) 50/1,5: they are quite cheap on Ebay but very solid build, optically comparable with the post-war Zeiss-Opton Sonnars and sport a LTM mount. I'm not sure if you need to adjust it for use on a Leica M but this can be answered by other experts here. I bought one some month ago and it was a winner.
  2. Zeiss-Opton Sonnar 50mm f/1,5: you can find cheap ones without a Contax on Ebay but try to keep away from lenses with separation. The build quality is very good for those ones and most of the time the condition is very good too. Optically they belong to the best of the old Sonanrs. There is a little bit of variation optically but it is more about condition than bad build. Sonnars labeled Carl Zeiss (instead Zeiss-Opton) seem to be unpopular and go mostly for a lower price. Optically they belong to the better ones. My best Oberkochen Sonnars all have the Carl Zeiss engraving. 😉 Unfortunately you need an adapter to use those lenses on a Leica. So you need to factor this in in the costs.
The C Sonnar 1,5/50 is a great lens with plenty of sharpness and contrast but it is not a Sonnar technical speaking. It has a little bit of the Sonnar character but the sharpness transition is that of a modern lens.

The Nikkor 1,4/50 is cheap too but I had bad luck with mine and it is way softer than any of the mentioned alternatives.

Pre-war and wartime Sonnars can be as good and sharp as the 1954 Sonnars from Zeiss Oberkochen. But it is a lottery. The Chrome Sonnars tend to be good optically but even then there is no guaranty that you end up with a solid lens. I could name some lenses with very good optical quality but they are rare and finding one in good condition might take some month or even years. The issue is the age and the history of every lens. A lot of them have suffered a lot and it shows. And even a CLA can not get rid of the scratches, broken coating or even bad grinding. The same is true for the post-war Sonnars from Zeiss Jena. There are excellent ones but you have to play the Sonnar lottery to find them.

I have not much experience with the Jupiter lottery but I've got an excellent Contax Jupiter from 1963 and a very cheap and bad LTM Jupiter from 1960. So take your leason from this.
 
i have had good luck with KMZ J-3 lenses. Most have needed to be shimmed but very good otherwise provided the glass surfaces have not been abused. Unfortunately, getting scarce on eBay, and no longer $150 or less. I may have even more of these than Sonnar B😀
 
@wlewisiii
Questions asked after my Bed Time- and read before I have coffee.

"The Perfect Sonnar", the one to have if having only one.

All great answers.
Canon 50/1.5: finding one that has clean glass is difficult. Especially these days. Probably Half are damaged from some caustic lube that Canon used. Good ones- somebody serviced them. They go cheap because of the damaged glass ones. SO- patience and return priv.

Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.4: great build quality, glass, coatings, sharp- very over-corrected for spherical aberration. DDD preferred the 5cm F1.5. Nikon revised for formula throughout the production. I just picked up a first-batch lens in LTM, and will compare the F1.5 and F1.4.

Jupiter-3: KMZ v1, Schott glass. Often needs to be shimmed. Expect to pay more for a really good one that has been adjusted for Leica than a Canon.

Pre-War, uncoated Sonnars: Every one is a bit different rendering. Big change in formula at around 166xxxx- from v2 to v3. I prefer the Version Two. Either use an adapter or convert to LTM.

Wartime Sonnars: "Been through the War!" most are worn, coatings damaged, etc. Expect to pay a lot. LTM- rare, so use with an adapter.

Post War Sonnars: LTM versions tend to be after-market, varying quality. Cannot use a J-3 to convert. Use an adapter.

"For me" the Amedeo Dedicated internal mount adapter with the indexed cam is the best by a long shot. Add another $250+ to the price of the lens.

SO: My advice, keep an eye on the For Sale ads here in case another member puts up a steal of a deal like an LTM Nikkor 5cm F1.4 for $225. Grab any of these lenses based on condition and price. I gave people an 8-hour head-start! What happened????

@dexdog - 16 Jupiter-3 in LTM, and 12 5cm F1.5 Sonnars in or converted to LTM. Favorites? Yes, yes they are.. Especially the v2 Sonnar converted to LTM.
It is the Best Sonnar. If probes are sent to distant Galaxies to discover other Sonnar lenses, I might be proven wrong someday. I think that was a Star Trek Episode. Time for Coffee.


sonnar_1607_4.jpgRIMG0388.jpgPB170241.jpgPB170248.jpgPB170251.jpgfocus_ring_new_taps.jpgfocus_ring_ready_for_drilling.jpgHelical_in_deeper_to_mount.jpg

valdai_on_M9.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian, I just counted 21 KMZ J-3s in LTM, one in Kiev mount . A total of 15 LTM 5cm Sonnars, including 2 that you converted for me years ago. Currently eight 1951 J-3s, I was buying them once upon a time to try to get an idea of where the serial number cut-off was for lenses with CZJ serials on rear group. I have been thinking about thinning the herd recently. I used to have two more 1951 lenses, but gave them away.
 
dexdog said:
Sonnar Brian, I just counted 21 KMZ J-3s in LTM, one in Kiev mount . A total of 15 LTM 5cm Sonnars, including 2 that you converted for me years ago. Currently eight 1951 J-3s, I was buying them once upon a time to try to get an idea of where the serial number cut-off was for lenses with CZJ serials on rear group. I have been thinking about thinning the herd recently. I used to have two more 1951 lenses, but gave them away.
Click to expand...
We have a Winner!!!

And @wlewisiii - be ready to pounce when some of these get thinned....
 
The 1.66mil Sonnars are indeed nice - I believe I have two? They do indeed have a interesting rendition. Not yet as bitingly sharp as the later, especially wartime ones. But at the same time they also do not seem to have any major vices. Very calm even keeled rendition - very flattering of skin tones imo.

Anyway one in Contax mount (post coated by someone) and and another uncoated one that some skilled machinist Elmar-ified. At least that's what I call this style of conversion. Basically - it's the simplest way to make a focusing lens on LTM - Elmar style. A bit rare is the fact that it's scaled in feet and only goes down to about 4'.

IMG_1579.jpgIMG_1580.jpg
 
TenEleven said:
The 1.66mil Sonnars are indeed nice - I believe I have two? They do indeed have a interesting rendition. Not yet as bitingly sharp as the later, especially wartime ones. But at the same time they also do not seem to have any major vices. Very calm even keeled rendition - very flattering of skin tones imo.

Anyway one in Contax mount (post coated by someone) and and another uncoated one that some skilled machinist Elmar-ified. At least that's what I call this style of conversion. Basically - it's the simplest way to make a focusing lens on LTM - Elmar style. A bit rare is the fact that it's scaled in feet and only goes down to about 4'.

View attachment 4856058View attachment 4856059
Click to expand...
@TenEleven - are your 1.66mil Sonnars v2 with the small rear triplet, or v3- with the larger rear triplet and fixture?

1661251 is a v3 Sonnar, despite what the Zeiss production cards states. I believe that the switch-over occurred in this batch. A "Specifications Subject to Change Without Notice" type of change.

Sonnar_1661x_isV3.jpgSonnar_1661x_isV3_2.jpgSonnar175xV3_145xV2_a.jpgV2_Sonnars_two_types.jpg
 
Last edited:
let me check.... let's see the one I just showed the glass from the rear (a bit of it is obscured by the retainer) is 24.26mm
The other one (digs in dry box)... is a 1660938 but it's finished black and nickel and chrome - the rear diameter is 24.24mm.

Also brian have you noticed that these have a weird striped pattern on their aperture? That seems unique to this (very short lived) series, too.

I also measured my 1754325 and the rear diameter is indeed a bit smaller at a measured 23.91mm.
 
Brian, my 166 series f1.5 Sonnar. Diameter of visible part of the forward-most lens element of rear group (exclusive of metal mount), is about 21.1mm. Edited because I am an idiot. Rear-facing lens element of rear group is 24.2mm

 
Last edited:
21mm? You mean from the back that faces the film plane?
And you measured the visible extent of the rear glass, right? That's so odd.
 
TenEleven said:
21mm? You mean from the back that faces the film plane?
And you measured the visible extent of the rear glass, right? That's so od
Click to expand...
I got mixed up, tried to make a correction. The 21mm element of the rear group is the one that faces the front of the lens. The lens element of the rear group that is closest to the film plane is 24.2
 
Last edited:
@dexdog @TenEleven
Measure the Length of the fixture for the rear triplet, front rim to back rim.
The V3 in my 166x lens is 15.4mm;
The V2 in my 1607 lens is 13.2mm.

How did we miss such a big difference in all these years?

No striping on the Blades of mine.
 
Last edited:
@Sonnar Brian
It is easy to miss those small differences. When I compared the rear triplet of the Sonnar f2 lenses they looked equal compared side by side. But the caliper showed small differences of 1mm or 2mm in difference. An excel with a lot of measurements show such kind of differences pretty good. 😉

Sometimes I wonder how those craftsmen at Zeiss made those tiny lenses, aperture blades or even screws and only being off by some micrometers. It was 90 years ago!

@dexdog
Is your Sonnar a Nickel Sonnar with black band? Or is it the later Chrome variation? The rear triplet tells us it is v3.

@TenEleven
Both 1.6M enses have v3 optics. Interestingly even your Sonnar Nickel with black Band has the never v3 optics inside. Mine from batch 23 might be a mix of v2 and v3. Front element has the same diameter like v3 but rear element has a diameter of v2 Sonnars. Without disassembling and comparing I can only speculate. Optically it has the v2 Sonnar character.

I have 43 Sonnar 5cm f/1,5: 2x RSBK, 3x KEF, 8x LTM / M39, 1x Leica M and a lot of Contax range finder ones. 2x Sonnar 5,8cm f/1,5. 44x Sonnar 5cm f/2: 3x KEF, 2x M27, 3x 551702, 1x Robot, 1 LTM and a lot Contax rangefinder ones. No Contaflex and Arriflex Sonnars. 🥲 I hope I can let them all go someday.
 
I suddenly feel much better about the number of Sonnars that I own. I've converted "about" 60 pre-war/wartime Sonnars to LTM using J-3 focus mounts, shot with all of them.
 
wlewisiii said:
Stupid question time. If I were to look for ONE 5cm or 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar formula lens...

Any maker. Any time. Etc.

I just want the _best_ 1.5 for my M240. What should I try to find, Brian?

I'll admit, I'd prefer something I can afford and find but still what would you realistically suggest?
Click to expand...
I agree with what has been said before, the Canon (Serenar) 50mm 1.5 LTM is a nice little lens with a very solid build. Price is very competitive on these. If you get one with no haze this lens should be the safest bet to work out of the box. I have modified mine with some high quality diamond files and a lot of elbow grease to focus down to 0.8m (2.6ft).

If you want the "original", go with a Zeiss-Opton post war lens. No worries about separation (the later Carl-Zeiss labeled ones are very prone due to changes in the optical cement). Get an Amedeo adapter, preferably the dedicated 50mm one (internal mount only). It is of great quality. The main argument for the Opton Sonnars apart from the reliable optical cement and decent coatings is the variable stand off ring that makes calibrating the lens very easy compared to the pre-war lenses. When an early Sonnar is off (and many are when first acquired), you might be in a world of pain. They can be fixed, but you may have to fabricate shims, which I personally hate to do. Also, when you shim the lens, the aperture index will be off, so you then may have to tap new holes to correct it. The Opton Sonnar does away with this, just unscrew or tighten the stand off ring until the lens hits focus.

The LTM Zeiss lenses are not of the best build quality, the helical can be worn and is a bit flimsy. Jupiter 3 lenses may not focus accurately out of the box (see shimming constraints above). If you want a native LTM lens get the Canon.
 
Last edited:
lukx said:
The main argument for the Opton Sonnars apart from the reliable optical cement and decent coatings is the variable stand off ring that makes calibrating the lens very easy compared to the pre-war lenses.
Click to expand...
Where exactly is this variable stand-off ring? I have a post-war Opton/Oberkochen 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar that's front focused quite severely since I first got it, so it's sat on a shelf until I had chance to look at it. I didn't realise it was that easy!
 
Coldkennels said:
Where exactly is this variable stand-off ring? I have a post-war Opton/Oberkochen 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar that's front focused quite severely since I first got it, so it's sat on a shelf until I had chance to look at it. I didn't realise it was that easy!
Click to expand...
Take off the Mount, one screw. Watch out for the guide pin falling out.
The variable stand-off ring is now exposted, and not locked into place. Figure 0.5mm per full turn. Mark positions, some trial and error.
 
page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp

希少品 カールツァイス Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar... - Yahoo!オークション

商品 詳細 ご覧いただきありがとうございます(*^^*) ★大特価★ カールツァイス Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar T 5cm 50mm F1.5 Lマウント ‐付属する商品 ■写真に写っている物のみとなります。 【コンディション】 ◆外観 スレやキズがございますが、比較的綺麗です。 手に取った
page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp

Very neat barrel design on this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom