So it just arrived. It's a keeper. I'll be doing some shooting with it this weekend. The contrast is much higher than the traditional Sonnar when used wide-open. More like the traditional lens at F4. Focus shift is there, just like the classic Sonnars. Out of the box, it front-focuses slightly on the M9 and is perfect at F2. On my M8, it is perfect at F1.5. Pretty much what I expected based on the other Sonnars that I have.
The price: Popflash (RFF Sponsor) has them on sale for $1,057. that has the Ebay vendors beat, and is less than I found it elsewhere.
"So Finally", I have the first generation (mine is 1935) of F1.5 Sonnar and the latest generation of F1.5 Sonnar for the same camera.
The price: Popflash (RFF Sponsor) has them on sale for $1,057. that has the Ebay vendors beat, and is less than I found it elsewhere.
"So Finally", I have the first generation (mine is 1935) of F1.5 Sonnar and the latest generation of F1.5 Sonnar for the same camera.
raid
Dad Photographer
Congrats, Brian. Shower us with images next.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Gentlemen, can we get back on subject? 
Anybody up for a wartime Sonnar shoot-out? I reckon there's enough people owning one here by now? My lens would like it, I'm sure!
Anybody up for a wartime Sonnar shoot-out? I reckon there's enough people owning one here by now? My lens would like it, I'm sure!
"Off Topic"- yes, that is the one. So,
So: Leica Mount F1.5 Sonnars-
1935 5cm f1.5 Sonnar, coated front element converted to LTM;
1937 Uncoated 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, converted to LTM;
1943 Wartime Sonnar "T" 5cm F1.5, Perfect Glass LTM;
1945 Wartime Sonnar "T" 5cm F1.5, LTM;
1946 "Post War" 5cm F1.5 Sonnar "T" LTM;
1949 ZK Sonnar 5cm F1.5, LTM, parts have German Serial Numbers engraved.
And now add in the Modern Sonnar 50/1.5. Zeiss should have engraved it in cm.
Six against One...
raid
Dad Photographer
CZJ 5cm 1.5
xoDox
Member
Its real, its a conversion, a zeiss sonnar in a russian mount.
There are more real, conversions, hacks ect.. then there are fakes i bet.
Probably shoots better than the one your holding in your hand
I feel a sonnar shoot off coming on!
Actually, I didn't use the word FAKE I just mentioned that the lens constructions and engraves are similar to -J-3 from 50's and much different from Sonnar. An experienced seller should know this! Obviously, I didn’t say a thing about glass rendering quality.
You can say nothing about glass and its coating until you have it in your hands. BTW, ZK and early J-3s share the same type of coating with original CZJ Sonnar. In the 50’s J-3 received different coating about the time when production was moved to Zagorsk from Krasnogorsk. Actually, the glass formula became different as well.
I believe I know what I am talking about. I have a CZJ Sonnar (pre-war in Contax mount), confirmed CZJ Sonnar from 1945 (LTM), ZK -49 and J-3s from 1951 (2), 55, 56 (2) and one from 1960. J-3s are from Krasnogorsk and Zagorsk factories. Having a variety of GAS (J3AS !), I wanted to prove myself that J-3 from 50-s is as good as the original German lens. I don’t want to put on the net the typical dull “brick wall” pics; at least I proved it to myself that J-3 is a great lens and needs just a touch of adjustment to shine.
In fact, the best Sonnar among the gang is the one that was adjusted by Brian. I failed with it, because the dishonest seller sold it to me with a wrong rear optical module. (BTW, WAS IT A FAKE J-3 or the sellers mistake?) Brian combined my J-3 (1951) with a rear optical part of J-3 (1956). It matched and became my sharpest Sonnar at 1.5. What does it prove? The quality control in the 50’s was good enough that two J-3 parts from different batches matched each other perfectly.
Any Sonnar shootout that I do will have entries from my KMZ J-3's in it!
A J-3 made from a 1955 KMZ optics module with a 1980s front element in it.
Between Zeiss, KMZ, Nikon, Canon, and Tanack... I have 17 Sonnar formuls lenses in Leica Mount. And that is not counting about the same in Contax and S-Mount.
A J-3 made from a 1955 KMZ optics module with a 1980s front element in it.
Between Zeiss, KMZ, Nikon, Canon, and Tanack... I have 17 Sonnar formuls lenses in Leica Mount. And that is not counting about the same in Contax and S-Mount.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
These lenses should be very similar in performance. It is not important whether a lens is collapsible or not. The old Sonnars are comparable optically. The condition of a lens and the match between camera and lens will play the major roles.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Great!, btw how does a CZJ collapsible 5cm/2 in LTM look like?
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Brilliant, classic-looking color rendering!
I grew up reading encyclopedias with similar looking pictures in them!
dexdog
Veteran
Brilliant, classic-looking color rendering!
I grew up reading encyclopedias with similar looking pictures in them!
I didn't mess with the color, left the images bright because it captured the moment well- a blistering hot, hazy and very bright morning in early summer. Film is Kodak Gold 200 ISO. The lens does a good job with color film.
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
BTW, the Marine is wearing a chest-full of medals. I have no idea what he did to earn them, but it musta been extraordinary.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Allright, that does it, I'm gonna shoot some Kodacolor 200 with my 50/1.5 this week!
Now, lets hope for the rain to stop, forecast says it'll be a p*ss-pour week over here... grmpf.
Now, lets hope for the rain to stop, forecast says it'll be a p*ss-pour week over here... grmpf.
OlliL
Well-known
Just a quick HU for a Zeiss T* 85mm at the bay.
Seems to have a defective coating.
Seller says, it was made in 1941.
http://cgi.ebay.de/Zeiss-Sonnar-2-8..._Foto_Camcorder_Objektive&hash=item2eb5cc2a86
Seems to have a defective coating.
Seller says, it was made in 1941.
http://cgi.ebay.de/Zeiss-Sonnar-2-8..._Foto_Camcorder_Objektive&hash=item2eb5cc2a86
dexdog
Veteran
Thiele's book gives a production batch of 600 completed August 19, 1941 in Contax mount, with part of the batch made in Arriflex mount. The hand-scratched numbers visible on the rear element assembly are similar to these types of numbers that appear on some post-WW2 CZJ sonnars and ZK lenses. Interesting.
NikonSP
Member
What can you guys tell me about my lens here.
Last edited:
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
NikonSP,
the engravings say postwar, they are rough. Serial number would concur with that, but by the time CZJ had reached the series 291**** the Russians had taken over completely and if it's anywhere near real, it must have been one of the very last runs of lenses labelled CZJ before they went over to lenses labelled ZK.
Thieles book says the last batch of 285**** was from 02.1946, 50/1.5 lenses Contax mount (but LTMs were amongst those), and the book continues with 301**** from 12.1947, 85/2.0 lenses Contax mount.
Yours is definitely a transition lens but there's no saying where to put it during that transition without disassembling it.
Looks clean though! Any shots from it to show?
the engravings say postwar, they are rough. Serial number would concur with that, but by the time CZJ had reached the series 291**** the Russians had taken over completely and if it's anywhere near real, it must have been one of the very last runs of lenses labelled CZJ before they went over to lenses labelled ZK.
Thieles book says the last batch of 285**** was from 02.1946, 50/1.5 lenses Contax mount (but LTMs were amongst those), and the book continues with 301**** from 12.1947, 85/2.0 lenses Contax mount.
Yours is definitely a transition lens but there's no saying where to put it during that transition without disassembling it.
Looks clean though! Any shots from it to show?
dexdog
Veteran
I will look up the serial number in Thiele's book after I return home, if no one beats me to it. Have you ever unscrewed the front of the lens to check if the rear lens group is stamped with the last six digits of the serial number? This is probably the best single indication of the lens origin. The engraving of the beauty ring and lens barrel looks a bit odd, but this is not definative, of course. One good sign is that the lens has the two screws on the focus ring characteristic of war-time and immediate post-war CZJ lenses (one is used to hold the focus ring in place, the other limits travel of the aperture/iris) - the ZK lenses also have these two screws. One thing that does stand out is the silver sleeve around the rear lens element; this is usually black in color. The silver sleeve is usually found on what Brian Sweeney calls a "transition" lens.
Maybe Brian will check in later.
I see that buzzardkid has already provided serial numbers. That was quick!
Maybe Brian will check in later.
I see that buzzardkid has already provided serial numbers. That was quick!
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Funny is, that while the CZJ lenses have a black rear and a silver front, the Russian lenses have a silver rear and a black front, just the other way 'round.
Any chance on the two words looking similar in Russian (hand)writing? Anybody? Maybe it was a simple translation error from the description to work orders or something similar
@dexdog: I (once again) was sitting at the computer idly, so had me some spare time and the book at hand...)
Any chance on the two words looking similar in Russian (hand)writing? Anybody? Maybe it was a simple translation error from the description to work orders or something similar
@dexdog: I (once again) was sitting at the computer idly, so had me some spare time and the book at hand...
)
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
English to Russian translations:
Front = передний
Rear = задний
Notice that the last four letters of both words are identical.
I'd say that a copying error having caused the switch of black and silver fronts and rears could be a plausible explanation.
Front = передний
Rear = задний
Notice that the last four letters of both words are identical.
I'd say that a copying error having caused the switch of black and silver fronts and rears could be a plausible explanation.
Last edited: