dexdog
Veteran
The screws on both of my Biogons look similar to the one on Tom's lens. Not sure that the size and style of screw is dispositive of much of anything.
Last edited:
mynikonf2
OEM
35 Biogon
35 Biogon
Congratulations Tom on your latest find & my compliments on the photo documentation of it. I have been following this thread for awhile now, with great interest, almost makes me want to start chasing after CZJ LTM lens too (not enough $ to do everything). :bang:
35 Biogon
Congratulations Tom on your latest find & my compliments on the photo documentation of it. I have been following this thread for awhile now, with great interest, almost makes me want to start chasing after CZJ LTM lens too (not enough $ to do everything). :bang:
enasniearth
Well-known
russian zeiss
russian zeiss
tom, i am afraid i will have to disagree on your observation that post wwII zeiss products were russian built . it would be similiar to stateing that all leitz products post wwII during the occupation were us built .
although the zeiss works was in the russian occupied zone and many leading technicians had headed west , the zeiss works produced many fine products in east germany . the russians required that the line be restarted (rebuilt ) to show that all contax items could be produced . many optical assemblies were genuine war time production mounted in late 1945 . these on hand assemblies were the first post war zeiss products . in many cases genuine wartime glass stock was ground for new optics .
zeiss east germany produced lenses for contax in the 3000000 plus range after much of the works was shipped to the soviets , and in fact some early west german items were made in east germany for the new zeiss in stuttgart.
your biogon is genuine wartime , you had stated that the same front cap on the biogon was not original for a 1.5 wartime sonnar i had a year or so back .
on wartime and early postwar production you can assume nothing . to continue to state that zeiss east production useing wartime materials were russian produced is inaccurate at best .
russian zeiss
tom, i am afraid i will have to disagree on your observation that post wwII zeiss products were russian built . it would be similiar to stateing that all leitz products post wwII during the occupation were us built .
although the zeiss works was in the russian occupied zone and many leading technicians had headed west , the zeiss works produced many fine products in east germany . the russians required that the line be restarted (rebuilt ) to show that all contax items could be produced . many optical assemblies were genuine war time production mounted in late 1945 . these on hand assemblies were the first post war zeiss products . in many cases genuine wartime glass stock was ground for new optics .
zeiss east germany produced lenses for contax in the 3000000 plus range after much of the works was shipped to the soviets , and in fact some early west german items were made in east germany for the new zeiss in stuttgart.
your biogon is genuine wartime , you had stated that the same front cap on the biogon was not original for a 1.5 wartime sonnar i had a year or so back .
on wartime and early postwar production you can assume nothing . to continue to state that zeiss east production useing wartime materials were russian produced is inaccurate at best .
Last edited:
I've suspected a number of Sonnars labeled as "fakes" and "counterfeits" came from this period, immediately following the end of the war. Too many with common features, but not enough numbers to have been regular production. I picked up an odd Sonnar with a SN286xxx. The rear group is different from pre-war and wartime production in Contax/Leica and Arriflex mount. Closer to post-war lenses with SN3million and over.
A lot of lenses were produced in low-volume, very "one-off" quality to the individual lenses. I'm sure the workers of the Zeiss plant were scurrying to get production running again.
A lot of lenses were produced in low-volume, very "one-off" quality to the individual lenses. I'm sure the workers of the Zeiss plant were scurrying to get production running again.
dexdog
Veteran
Not too surprising that the Biogon appears to be a remount in a post-war barrel, given that it is calibrated in feet. The rear element looks a lot like one pictured in the Small/Barringer book on Non-Leitz LTM lenses. The one in the book has an unengraved barrel that looks like it was turned from a piece of plumbing pipe- functional, but way ugly.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
<Off-Topic mode on>
More wartime gear, not Sonnar-related.
Found a 1941 IIIc with red shutter curtain and probably original to the camera 1940 Summitar for sale tonight.
I have no relation to the seller, and an empty wallet. And really should not indulge anyway since I have all the cameras I need.
So, if you're interested PM me and I'll send you the link to the sale.
<Off-Topic mode off>
More wartime gear, not Sonnar-related.
Found a 1941 IIIc with red shutter curtain and probably original to the camera 1940 Summitar for sale tonight.
I have no relation to the seller, and an empty wallet. And really should not indulge anyway since I have all the cameras I need.
So, if you're interested PM me and I'll send you the link to the sale.
<Off-Topic mode off>
I have one Sonnar with a ~1935 Serial Number, with a coated front element. Other elements are uncoated. I thought it had to be aftermarket until I worked on one just like it, very close in SN. Since then, I've wondered if Zeiss was experimenting with the coating process with these lenses. Companies did that a lot back then. I have a Nikkor 5cm F1.4 in chrome that is much lighter than those a few SN away. Close inspection, the features are just a "little different". Nikon "messed around" with materials, did some limited runs, then went back to the "normal run". I've seen enough Zeiss lenses to know they did some of the same thing.
dexdog
Veteran
what about this LTM 5cm/1.5 Sonnar, eBay 380312817454? Thiele's book shows this serial number as part of a batch of 5000 5cm f:2 Sonnars completed Dec 12, 1945. The notes in the "Sonstiges" column say "z.T. Leica-F". The ears look kinda odd (too wide), however the lens does have the pair of screws on the aperture ring typical of wartime sonnars. Dot for an indicator for the aperture, instead of a line, engravings look a bit irregular, as does the beauty ring . The next 5000 serial numbers belong to a batch of 5000 5cm/1.5 Sonnars, according to Thiele. I have heard that there are errors or inconsistent info in Thiele, but this would seems to be really big error, mis-recording 5000 f:1.5 lenses as f:2 lenses.
Trying to decide if this is worthy of pursuing, especially since it looks to be in decent condition, and will probably bring over $500
Trying to decide if this is worthy of pursuing, especially since it looks to be in decent condition, and will probably bring over $500
Last edited:
EBAY Sonnar 380312817454?: The "wings" on the aperture ring have too many grooves to be regular production. The RF cam is left in metal finish, and is not Black as the regular production lenses.
It looks like one of the post-war "one-offs" with a mix of original parts.
Here is my SN285 lens with the ZK next to it.
It looks like one of the post-war "one-offs" with a mix of original parts.
Here is my SN285 lens with the ZK next to it.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
My ZK looks like having new glass and the cosmetics look great.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
The history behind this lens made me a part-time collector of Sonnar lenses.
raid
Dad Photographer
Tom,
He first wrote me that it is one of 200 Contaflex lenses that were sent to Sweden in retun for metal ore, and Charles Barringer also thought that it was genuine. Then, Marc wrote me that you cannot be sure about when the adaptation was made (in Zeiss factory or outside). The glass is crystal clear. DAG was surprised by it. He made the lens smoother mechanically and he shimmed the lens.
He first wrote me that it is one of 200 Contaflex lenses that were sent to Sweden in retun for metal ore, and Charles Barringer also thought that it was genuine. Then, Marc wrote me that you cannot be sure about when the adaptation was made (in Zeiss factory or outside). The glass is crystal clear. DAG was surprised by it. He made the lens smoother mechanically and he shimmed the lens.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Hmmm. I'm due for a trip to Stockholm....
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
If you get a list of every camera-, thrift- and 2nd-hand store around the city!
Ronny
Well-known
Welcome to Sweden!
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Tom,
that looks real sweet!
Until recently I did not know exactly what the 'original Zeiss lens cap' looked like.
Now that I do I will not forget it anymore, given the fact that I recently did not buy one for small change because I thought it to be a poorly knocked-off fake cap...
that looks real sweet!
Until recently I did not know exactly what the 'original Zeiss lens cap' looked like.
Now that I do I will not forget it anymore, given the fact that I recently did not buy one for small change because I thought it to be a poorly knocked-off fake cap...
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Tom,
I've already revisited that eBay seller several weeks ago, but no cap to be seen. I guess somebody snatched it already... bummer. Currently I cannot even recall what seller it was, so scouring eBay to find another seems the only viable approach...
I've already revisited that eBay seller several weeks ago, but no cap to be seen. I guess somebody snatched it already... bummer. Currently I cannot even recall what seller it was, so scouring eBay to find another seems the only viable approach...
The F2 lenses did not hold up as well as the F1.5 lenses. The front glass is more prone to scratches, like a Summar. I believe the F1.5 lenses probably use a different material, and it just fares better. This opinion is formed after looking at dozens of each.