darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
Hello,
I currently own two early Jupiter-12 lenses in Kiev/Contax mount, both models chrome. One was produced by KMZ in 1957, the second one was produced by Zavod Arsenal in 1958.
What seems to me interesting is the way the rear element is shaped on both lenses, quite similar to the biogon (or should it be biotar/biometar?) design.
One thing struck me today as I looked to the slightly worn out KMZ J-12 : the coating wasn't purple as on the ARSENAL J-12, but light blue, exactly as the coating of my Carl Zeiss Jena 50/2 Sonnar (collapsible, prewar, coated but non T). Could there be the slightest possibility that those very early Jupiter-12, made in Kiev/Contax mount at KMZ use original "Zeiss glass" ?
At this point, I'm wondering if any of us can trace back the earliest production batches of the Jupiter-12. The earliest I've found is 1957, another member has contributed one to the lens database and also states 1957, produced at KMZ, light blue coating. I would be curious to know if there have been earlier batches. I've included here three photos of both lenses.
Cheers,
Max
I currently own two early Jupiter-12 lenses in Kiev/Contax mount, both models chrome. One was produced by KMZ in 1957, the second one was produced by Zavod Arsenal in 1958.
What seems to me interesting is the way the rear element is shaped on both lenses, quite similar to the biogon (or should it be biotar/biometar?) design.
One thing struck me today as I looked to the slightly worn out KMZ J-12 : the coating wasn't purple as on the ARSENAL J-12, but light blue, exactly as the coating of my Carl Zeiss Jena 50/2 Sonnar (collapsible, prewar, coated but non T). Could there be the slightest possibility that those very early Jupiter-12, made in Kiev/Contax mount at KMZ use original "Zeiss glass" ?
At this point, I'm wondering if any of us can trace back the earliest production batches of the Jupiter-12. The earliest I've found is 1957, another member has contributed one to the lens database and also states 1957, produced at KMZ, light blue coating. I would be curious to know if there have been earlier batches. I've included here three photos of both lenses.
Cheers,
Max
Attachments
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
meep meep! anyone has a clue?
VinceC
Veteran
I haven't a clue, but my 1960 Jupiter looks like your 1957 version. I'll study it a little closer when I get home tonight.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I've seen these, and did notice the resemblance you've pointed out, Massimo. I also wonder if this mounts in the post-war Contax bodies too...
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
Thank you for the replies, I'm curious to get your feedback Vince, and Gabriel, I wish I had a Contax-IIa to try out! but if they are copied (and they surely must be) from the prewar biogon design there are little chances that they could fit.
Cheers,
Max
Cheers,
Max
W
wlewisiii
Guest
My understanding is that none of the Kiev mount J-12 lenses will fit the postwar Contax IIa. This has to do more with the redesign of the shutter than anything else. So any difference in early and late lenses won't have any impact on the fit for the Kiev/Contax mount cameras.
OTOH, there is some difference between pre-1957 & post-1957 thread mount J-12 lenses. The pre-1957 lenses apparently (I have not had one to test this) have a slightly larger rear element that causes them to not fit on many LTM cameras such as the later Canon models that have light baffles internally. However my 1975 J-12 fits my Canon 7 just fine. It is a very tight fit, but it does fit much to my budget's joy
Hope this is of some help,
William
OTOH, there is some difference between pre-1957 & post-1957 thread mount J-12 lenses. The pre-1957 lenses apparently (I have not had one to test this) have a slightly larger rear element that causes them to not fit on many LTM cameras such as the later Canon models that have light baffles internally. However my 1975 J-12 fits my Canon 7 just fine. It is a very tight fit, but it does fit much to my budget's joy
Hope this is of some help,
William
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
Thanks William, any information is interesting I feel like an FSU lens anthropologist right now, trying to date the oldest known Jupiter-12 If you find any little bone or fragment let me know
I feel like an FSU lens anthropologist right now, trying to date the oldest known Jupiter-12 If you find any little bone or fragment let me know
R
rpinchbeck
Guest
I've got a 1955 J-12 in Contax mount. I'm at the office but will have a look this evening and post my finding.
Cheers,
Russ Pinchbeck
Cheers,
Russ Pinchbeck
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
Thanks Russ!
santino
FSU gear head
my pre-war 2/50 Sonnar has also blue coating (without T*). thats probably of no help
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
it's of no help but it's nice to speak about those nice lenses
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
Thank you Roland for your comment. I am soon going to disassemble the lens and clean it. It's a bit dirty. I'll keep you guys updated. Your comments are welcome
dbseney
Member
I have two KMZ Jupiter 12's. One is a Contax mount made in 1958; it has a very blue
(purple) coating. The other is a LTM made in 1959 and appears to be only very lightly coated, if at all. The rear element on the Contax mount is larger in area and extends further than the rear element on the LTM mount.
The Contax mount lens takes great pictures. My IIIf was ailing so I have not used the LTM mount lens yet. But just got the IIIf back from Youxin Ye who replaced the front curtain and CLA'd it and now it is ready to go. By the way, the rangefinder/ viewfinder are now so bright I nearly fainted the first time I looked through them. He certainly does a great job, very quickly and very reasonably.
Donald
(purple) coating. The other is a LTM made in 1959 and appears to be only very lightly coated, if at all. The rear element on the Contax mount is larger in area and extends further than the rear element on the LTM mount.
The Contax mount lens takes great pictures. My IIIf was ailing so I have not used the LTM mount lens yet. But just got the IIIf back from Youxin Ye who replaced the front curtain and CLA'd it and now it is ready to go. By the way, the rangefinder/ viewfinder are now so bright I nearly fainted the first time I looked through them. He certainly does a great job, very quickly and very reasonably.
Donald
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
perhaps yours has the deep blue coating that can be found on some KMZ lenses, such as my 1960 J-9 in Contax mount.
The J-12 depicted above has a very distinct light blue coating, exactly similar to the coating of my prewar 50/2 Sonnar. Side by side there's no difference in color coating.
your lenses infos are interesting, feel free to submit the lens informations so that I can add those to the Russian Lenses Database Project (check Russian RF forum thread) Cheers!Max
The J-12 depicted above has a very distinct light blue coating, exactly similar to the coating of my prewar 50/2 Sonnar. Side by side there's no difference in color coating.
your lenses infos are interesting, feel free to submit the lens informations so that I can add those to the Russian Lenses Database Project (check Russian RF forum thread)
Cheers!MaxVinceC
Veteran
My 1960 Jupiter is definitely a KMZ. Rear element is identical to the KMZ in your photo. Also has light blue coating. Letters are in Cyrillic. Yet it's not identical to your 1957 lens because the front ring reads 2,8/35 instead of 1:2.8 F3.5 as in your photo.
R
rpinchbeck
Guest
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
I should take a few more photos this afternoon, there's also a difference in the f-stop engraving, the KMZ j-12 looks like Russ' one, the other one is more different. Thanks for all your updates, we start to see some light on this topic!!
Thanks for all your updates, we start to see some light on this topic!!outfitter
Well-known
Attempting to extract meaning from FSU lens coatings is like reading tealeaves. My KMZ Kiev mount J-12 of 1960 has faint blue coatings while the 1982 LZOS has purple. Some comments:
1. While Zeiss lens barrels were used in early Kiev lenses through about 1950 (indicated by Zeiss like assembly numbers on the various parts) no one knows whether Zeiss glass was used in those lenses. The notion that there are real Zeiss lenses re-badged as Soviet lenses is mostly wishful thinking.
2. West German Zeiss re-formulated the 35mm Biogon after the war to fit the Contax IIa by shortening the amount it intrudes into the body - it is also a better lens IMO. Carl Zeiss Jena continued to make the pre-war design and those will not fit the Contax IIa.
3. Pre-war Contax lenses with light blue coating and no "T" mark are likely post-war non-factory after market coatings. I have a 50mm f1.5 Sonnar in this condition as well as a wartime "T" coated one and both work equally well.
Michael
1. While Zeiss lens barrels were used in early Kiev lenses through about 1950 (indicated by Zeiss like assembly numbers on the various parts) no one knows whether Zeiss glass was used in those lenses. The notion that there are real Zeiss lenses re-badged as Soviet lenses is mostly wishful thinking.
2. West German Zeiss re-formulated the 35mm Biogon after the war to fit the Contax IIa by shortening the amount it intrudes into the body - it is also a better lens IMO. Carl Zeiss Jena continued to make the pre-war design and those will not fit the Contax IIa.
3. Pre-war Contax lenses with light blue coating and no "T" mark are likely post-war non-factory after market coatings. I have a 50mm f1.5 Sonnar in this condition as well as a wartime "T" coated one and both work equally well.
Michael
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
There are obviously no number markings and it seems that the rear element is uncoated. I have yet to disassemble the lens and clean it. The body is clearly a soviet one, the f-stop marking ring however is more "in the style of zeiss markings" than of later soviet markings. it is exactly the same as Russ' 1955 J-12. And very similar to the Biogon depicted in Mike Kovacs' post here : http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17914
My Arsenal J-12 has it less spaced, with huge numbers and tiny decimals such as this : 2.8 4 5.6 8 11 16 22
I'm certain that a J12 or a pre-war Biogon won't fit a Contax-IIa due to the redesign of the camera.
What strikes me however, is the resemblance between my lens and the lens depicted in the link above. I'm not feeling in wonderland, that's merely an early J12 with similarities with a prewar biogon. H. Scherer states in his website that the design is copied on the Biotar and that one cannot see through a Biogon lens (?). I almost won a CZJ Biometar once on eBay, I wish I could've seen how the lens is made more precisely (photos were blurry and not taken by one who knows how to depict a lens features).
About this lens, I won it on eBay from an austrian seller, it was described as a fully functioning J-12 with some heavy brassing on the barrel. It came in a brown leather pouch on the bottom of which was a Zeiss-Ikon A.G. Dresden pink paper saying that "the Biogon should not stand on its convex rear lens". (in german, english, french and spanish).
Best regards,
Max
My Arsenal J-12 has it less spaced, with huge numbers and tiny decimals such as this : 2.8 4 5.6 8 11 16 22
I'm certain that a J12 or a pre-war Biogon won't fit a Contax-IIa due to the redesign of the camera.
What strikes me however, is the resemblance between my lens and the lens depicted in the link above. I'm not feeling in wonderland, that's merely an early J12 with similarities with a prewar biogon. H. Scherer states in his website that the design is copied on the Biotar and that one cannot see through a Biogon lens (?). I almost won a CZJ Biometar once on eBay, I wish I could've seen how the lens is made more precisely (photos were blurry and not taken by one who knows how to depict a lens features).
About this lens, I won it on eBay from an austrian seller, it was described as a fully functioning J-12 with some heavy brassing on the barrel. It came in a brown leather pouch on the bottom of which was a Zeiss-Ikon A.G. Dresden pink paper saying that "the Biogon should not stand on its convex rear lens". (in german, english, french and spanish).
Best regards,
Max
micromoogman
Well-known
I find it most unlikely that any zeiss elements remained in production in USSR for more than a couple of years after the war, if that. I could contribute with pic of a minty 1956 KMZ lens with an almost undetectible coating. Some amber some blueish tones, but not as in your face as my LTM 1961 Lytkarino lens. It is blue for shure. It is not a great color photo lens, everything tends to be green/yellow with it...
