Collectors value

[Muggins]

I can certainly imagine a few ways that a Kriegsmarine Contax might end up ashore when the sub sailed for the last time, though I can't imagine one floating after the sub was sunk!

I have to say, though, that that "KIREGSMARINE" looks dodgy AF to me. I'd be very careful.

 

[splitimageview]

I need another cup of coffee.

 

[Mark240590]

You know, "Kireg", as in the guy that invented the Coffee Maker... He has his own fleet of Submarines now.

There must be a local cottage industry cranking out these fakes. A number of camera shops in the UK and Japan, and others- have been taken in. I wonder how long ago these were made, picked up by individuals long ago- or how many are importing them now. Probably a mix of both. I would not buy any "rare/collectible" former USSR product at a premium. The 1950 J-3 I picked up was $50, with shipping. It is authentic. This other stuff- is crap.

For instance….

Early Arsenal Kiev II 1951 Rangefinder Camera 3k Zorki KMZ 5cm f2 Marked 1951 | eBay UK

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Early Arsenal Kiev II 1951 Rangefinder Camera 3k Zorki KMZ 5cm f2 Marked 1951 at the best online prices at eBay UK! Free delivery for many products!

www.ebay.co.uk

For those less versed. The lens is a shocking fake. By 1951 they were a Jupiter lens by then. Had they made it ZK ZORKI maybe they’d of gotten more interest from those thinking it maybe was a very rare 1 off.

I run all my soviet purchases by my friend now who’s been doing it a very long time longer than me if I’m unsure 🤣

 

[Sonnar Brian]

For instance….

Early Arsenal Kiev II 1951 Rangefinder Camera 3k Zorki KMZ 5cm f2 Marked 1951 | eBay UK

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Early Arsenal Kiev II 1951 Rangefinder Camera 3k Zorki KMZ 5cm f2 Marked 1951 at the best online prices at eBay UK! Free delivery for many products!

www.ebay.co.uk

For those less versed. The lens is a shocking fake. By 1951 they were a Jupiter lens by then. Had they made it ZK ZORKI maybe they’d of gotten more interest from those thinking it maybe was a very rare 1 off.

I run all my soviet purchases by my friend now who’s been doing it a very long time longer than me if I’m unsure 🤣

Old 1951 Jupiter 8 with older name ring but newer housing.

1951 Contax with J8 The Jupiter 8 on this similarly aged Contax looks unusual to me in that it has the old first style name ring, but a later housing, type PT 3030 with no ears. Most in that housung have the newer Jupiter name ring. I'm no expert on these. Does this look original, or is it...

www.rangefinderforum.com

That one got its own thread.
Really Bad Fake- a Jupiter-8M. Could not have the decency to use a Jupiter-8.

 

[Mark240590]

Old 1951 Jupiter 8 with older name ring but newer housing.

1951 Contax with J8 The Jupiter 8 on this similarly aged Contax looks unusual to me in that it has the old first style name ring, but a later housing, type PT 3030 with no ears. Most in that housung have the newer Jupiter name ring. I'm no expert on these. Does this look original, or is it...

www.rangefinderforum.com

That one got its own thread.
Really Bad Fake- a Jupiter-8M. Could not have the decency to use a Jupiter-8.

I just replied to that topic. I seen all his stock landing a good few weeks ago. The No name he said was questionable too. Like literally the most esteemed collectors hadn’t ever seen one.

 

[boojum]

Talk about cottage industries, just sorting out Contax and CZJ would keep a lot of cottages busy. Indeed, it does keep a lot of cottages busy. If Contax and CZJ hadn't made such beautiful products we would not have to worry about this. And if they both were not war spoils we would not have to worry about this. And if a bullfrog had wings he wouldn't bump his butt on the ground. If. ;o)

 

[Muggins]

Deep, man, deep!

 

[xatnoc]

.....to quote Räuber: "Another Kriegsmarine Contax III with number MF 0638. U 638 was sunk by a British corvette. Quite funny to see this Contax sold by someone from the UK."

Regarding this statement and the subsequent discussion threads, I would like to respond as follows:

I wrote an article about the MF numbers in one of the recent ZHS journals, where I listed numerous MF numbers. Based on the research I conducted at the time, there was no evidence to suggest that MF numbers were assigned specifically to ships—for example, MF 0638 to U 638. A more plausible explanation is that MF 0638 was part of a photographic system, and independent of U 638.

 

[wlewisiii]

Oh, I expect that to be true and I don't mind the MF # but the Kir vs Kri spelling just makes me giggle.

 

[Räuber]

Sorry but you are right. This one is fake. I totally missed the wrong writing of Krieg. Zeiss would not have made such an error. The other fail that marks this as fake is that there are not MF engravings on the bottom of the camera. My bad. I should stay away from cameras. 😉

 

[Muggins]

We all have off days, don't worry too much about it!

 

[dexdog]

I should stay away from cameras. 😉

Yeah, I keep trying but have not got here yet! 😀
At least I am largely pursuing lenses that I can use on my various Sony and Nikon mirrorless!
I was also amused by the lack of MFing engraving on the bottom of the camera.😏

 

[Räuber]

.....to quote Räuber: "Another Kriegsmarine Contax III with number MF 0638. U 638 was sunk by a British corvette. Quite funny to see this Contax sold by someone from the UK."

Regarding this statement and the subsequent discussion threads, I would like to respond as follows:

I wrote an article about the MF numbers in one of the recent ZHS journals, where I listed numerous MF numbers. Based on the research I conducted at the time, there was no evidence to suggest that MF numbers were assigned specifically to ships—for example, MF 0638 to U 638. A more plausible explanation is that MF 0638 was part of a photographic system, and independent of U 638.

What issue of the ZHS? Do you still collect MF numbers? I could provide 2 or 3.

Since you state that the MF numbering is independent from any German war boats have you found out what MF stands for? I find the idea of Stefan Baumgartner pretty convincing that it stands for Marine Foto. But maybe if we don't talk about vehicles maybe it stands for people. MF = Marine Fotograf?

 

[Räuber]

Another Monday another added Sonnars. 😉

Objektiv Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1:2 f= 50mm T – Contax Anschluss | eBay

Frontdeckel dabei – front cover included.

www.ebay.de

This one is one of the last Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 50mm f2 for Contax. The special about it is that it already states the focal length in mm instead cm. The amount of those CZJ Sonnar 2/50 is limited and this is the one with the highest serial number I have seen so far. The good news is that this copy looks nice and the seller does not mention fungus (a menace on those old Sonnars).

Contax III. Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1:2 f 50 mm T. | eBay

Used, but good condition. Overall good working condition. The accuracy of the machine has not been checked. The shutter works and sounds accurate. The lens is a bit dusty, there are small micro scratches on the lens.

www.ebay.de

This is another Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm f2 for Contax. But this one was made shortly after the war, is single coated and collapsible. It is made from aluminum so it is very light. They are rare and finding a good copy might be a long quest. There is only one other copy on Ebay worldwide but that one is dirty as a stone.

Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm F1.5 Full Frame Prime Contax RF Lens | eBay

Dents : There is a minor crack to the filter ring, this is common and doesn't affect use at all, filters still mount correctly. General Condition : Very Good. Haze : None. Internal Dust : Minimal.

www.ebay.de

This Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 is a classic Chrome Sonnar for Contax. Usually those Chrome Sonnars can be found in large numbers online. But this one comes with an interesting accessory. It is a small metal ring attached at the rear of the lens. Most people might overlook this detail. I have seen this kind of ring only one time. On a Nickel and black Sonnar 5cm f/1,5.



The purpose of those additional mount rings is unclear for me. Maybe someone else here has an explanation why they put this ring to some lenses but left it on most.

 

[TenEleven]

Another Monday another added Sonnars. 😉

[...]

This Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 is a classic Chrome Sonnar for Contax. Usually those Chrome Sonnars can be found in large numbers online. But this one comes with an interesting accessory. It is a small metal ring attached at the rear of the lens. Most people might overlook this detail. I have seen this kind of ring only one time. On a Nickel and black Sonnar 5cm f/1,5.

View attachment 4854229

The purpose of those additional mount rings is unclear for me. Maybe someone else here has an explanation why they put this ring to some lenses but left it on most.

Warning - theory alert!

I believe that this ring is an evolution or replacement of the previous method of fixing the lens into the mount. Since the mount portion of these first generation (externally speaking) Sonnars is very thin there was no way to have a horizontal grub screw in there.

The previous method, as I am sure you are aware, was to drill directly down towards the lens and then put a grub screw in there to prevent it from rotating.
This has a couple of undesirable side effects:

• If anyone with even moderate force tries to rotate the lens in its mount the grub screw will get destroyed and pasted into the thread making the lens borderline salvageable (I speak from painful experience here...)
• Assembly of the lens is slightly more troublesome, since unlike the conically tapped horizontal fixing grub-screws these vertical ones will not self locate and you will have to rotate the lens back and forth fractions of a degree until the screw finally screws in without force. On the later version with a horizontal screw the conical tap means that the screw will "pull" the lens into the correct place even if you are off by a fraction of a millimeter.
• Also during assembly, if you are off by even half a millimeter you drill into the lens glass - game over. Not much chance of that happening with a horizontal tap unless you drill really deeply.
• As you are drilling through (instead of alongside) the threads, if you are not careful there is a good chance that you will ruin the threads your coworker painstakingly machined into the mount....
• Lastly, if the assembly (or repair) technician makes a mistake in setting the correct register distance he will then have to tap another hole into the lens which is unsightly Zeiss went out of their way to make these look quite sleek and clean with visible screws and holes kept to a minimum.
  I have a war-time 2.8cm f/8 Tessar which has three such taps. I can understand that a f/8 2.8cm lens is probably hard to sight infinity for though.

All of the above explains why with the chromed re-design they went for the (much more sensible) horizontal grub screw design. There is infinitely less chance of things going very wrong during either assembly or repair. The one above is a sort of stop gap solution at achieves the same thing for v1 lenses.

 

[Räuber]

Thank you @TenEleven. That sounds plausible. I would add another speculation.

Since this ring is very rarely seen on existing lenses I suspect that it was meant as a repair measure. I went through all pictures of Nickel and black Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 I have on my HD and could not find a single one that has this ring. Usually this ring is missing on Nickel and Chrome Sonnar 5cm. So it was not introduced to improve assembly of Sonnar lenses but to fix single lenses. Probably. 🙂

 

[TenEleven]

Yes that makes sense.

It's then also plausible that it came in for repair after they had already rolled out the silver version and might not have had spare rear mounts to make the repair look clean. Again just speculation ...

 

[xatnoc]

What issue of the ZHS? Do you still collect MF numbers? I could provide 2 or 3.

Since you state that the MF numbering is independent from any German war boats have you found out what MF stands for? I find the idea of Stefan Baumgartner pretty convincing that it stands for Marine Foto. But maybe if we don't talk about vehicles maybe it stands for people. MF = Marine Fotograf?

by the way: xatnoc = Stefan Baumgartner

No, I stopped collecting. The issue with the MF article was in Spring 2015

 

[Räuber]

闲鱼 - 闲不住？上闲鱼！

闲鱼，中国领先的闲置二手交易平台，趣味生活社区，从最初的C2C交易，到用户在这里分享技能、兴趣与经验，从物品到服务、从交易到交流，如今闲鱼累计用户数超5亿，日均交易额已突破10亿，每天都有400万件闲置物品在平台上发布。同时，闲鱼以闲置交易为起点，还发展出一键转卖、极速回收、验货宝、闲鱼小法庭等服务；并在2024年闲鱼成立十周年之际推出了闲鱼简历功能，通过闲置时间、技能来赚钱，让你的人生另起一行。

www.goofish.com

One Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 in the Contax Nickel and black paint f9+ variation. Beware, this is not the legendary f8 first edition. Although the aperture ring only shows and moves to f8 the used optical block is the later second version. Nevertheless and interesting collectors item and a bit of a mystery lens.

 

[Räuber]

闲鱼 - 闲不住？上闲鱼！

闲鱼，中国领先的闲置二手交易平台，趣味生活社区，从最初的C2C交易，到用户在这里分享技能、兴趣与经验，从物品到服务、从交易到交流，如今闲鱼累计用户数超5亿，日均交易额已突破10亿，每天都有400万件闲置物品在平台上发布。同时，闲鱼以闲置交易为起点，还发展出一键转卖、极速回收、验货宝、闲鱼小法庭等服务；并在2024年闲鱼成立十周年之际推出了闲鱼简历功能，通过闲置时间、技能来赚钱，让你的人生另起一行。

www.goofish.com

One Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 in the Contax Nickel and black paint f9+ variation. Beware, this is not the legendary f8 first edition. Although the aperture ring only shows and moves to f8 the used optical block is the later second version. Nevertheless and interesting collectors item and a bit of a mystery lens.

I copied the wrong link. That is the f9+ Sonnar

闲鱼 - 闲不住？上闲鱼！

闲鱼，中国领先的闲置二手交易平台，趣味生活社区，从最初的C2C交易，到用户在这里分享技能、兴趣与经验，从物品到服务、从交易到交流，如今闲鱼累计用户数超5亿，日均交易额已突破10亿，每天都有400万件闲置物品在平台上发布。同时，闲鱼以闲置交易为起点，还发展出一键转卖、极速回收、验货宝、闲鱼小法庭等服务；并在2024年闲鱼成立十周年之际推出了闲鱼简历功能，通过闲置时间、技能来赚钱，让你的人生另起一行。

www.goofish.com

And this Nickel and black Sonnar 8,5cm f/2 is the 3rd 85mm Sonnar (by serial). No wonder it looks a bit beaten up.

闲鱼 - 闲不住？上闲鱼！

闲鱼，中国领先的闲置二手交易平台，趣味生活社区，从最初的C2C交易，到用户在这里分享技能、兴趣与经验，从物品到服务、从交易到交流，如今闲鱼累计用户数超5亿，日均交易额已突破10亿，每天都有400万件闲置物品在平台上发布。同时，闲鱼以闲置交易为起点，还发展出一键转卖、极速回收、验货宝、闲鱼小法庭等服务；并在2024年闲鱼成立十周年之际推出了闲鱼简历功能，通过闲置时间、技能来赚钱，让你的人生另起一行。

www.goofish.com