HU: BLACK J-3 50mm/1.5 in LTM

[raid]

Brian Sweeney got me the J-3, and he once wrote:"Raid: I think your lens is from 1962. It was one of the sharper of the bunch, despite the cleaning marks. It has the "eyeball with optical ray" logo, right? Walker (Doubs43) told me that they were produced in smaller numbers with higher quality control, by a subsidiary that made lenses for the military."

... to which Doub43 said: " That is correct according to Princelle's book. The "ZOMZ" (eyeball-light ray logo) factory was under the KMZ military-industrial complex umbrella and backed up the main plant. Princelle says that the ZOMZ-made chrome LTM J-3 is "uncommon" and the same lens in Kiev mount is "rather rare". Plants that manufactured for the military generally had better quality products from all I've been able to learn.

Walker"



Thank you, Brian. I love such little pieces of history.


Raid

 

[vrgard]

Interesting, Raid. Thanks for sharing this history. Caused me to search for more info on my black J3. Turns out mine is a 1975 made by Valdai in Russia and bears what is called a "shish kebab" logo.

-Randy

 

[Spyderman]

Brian: it seems mine silver J-3, manufactured in Zagorsk (ZOMZ) with serial number starting 63.... also has the optics module where the rear group cannot be unscrewed from the back like on J-8. What can I do to shim it correctly? Is there any hope at all 😉 ?

 

[raid]

Interesting, Raid. Thanks for sharing this history. Caused me to search for more info on my black J3. Turns out mine is a 1975 made by Valdai in Russia and bears what is called a "shish kebab" logo.

-Randy

Randy: When I was asked here whether my J-3 was made by KMZ, I started to google for logos on FSU optics, and I spent about two hours reading older threads on this topic. It really is interesting to read about the history of lenses.

Raid

 

[vrgard]

Randy: When I was asked here whether my J-3 was made by KMZ, I started to google for logos on FSU optics, and I spent about two hours reading older threads on this topic. It really is interesting to read about the history of lenses.

Raid

Sure is interesting, Raid. Also interesting to wonder where our lil' lenses may have been over their decades of existence. And it sounds like you already found where on the web the logos are shown and described but if not then let me know and I'll post a couple I came across.

-Randy

 

[raid]

Randy: This is a good start for reading up on FSU lenses:

http://www.cameras.alfredklomp.com/introduction/

http://www.rus-camera.com/history.php?history=kmz

http://www.zenitcamera.com/qa/qa-logos.html

http://www.commiecameras.com/sov/index.htm

Raid

 

[ferider]

I agree with Randy and Raid, these are great lenses, but mechanical construction is quite poor. Unique look wide open.

But, you have to be very lucky to buy a well collimated lens (or get
a "Sweeneyfied" lens), even Fedka and Oleg only do infinity collimation,
and the risk of poor close up/wide open performance is high.

I am using the father of the J-3, a ZK 50/1.5 from 1950 that came
well collimated out of the box.

Roland.

 

[vrgard]

As usual, Raid, you're WAY ahead of me. I had seen a couple of those links but not all of them. Looks like I've got some reading to do. Thanks!

And Roland is right about the advantages of a well-collimated J-3 lens. I'm not sure I see any great benefit in only having correct infinity focus for a fast lens that I plan to use in close up, relatively dark settings. Which makes me very happy to have my "Sweeneyfied" J-3 lens which does great up close.

I'm curious, Roland, when you say this lens has a unique look wide open. Are you merely referring to the Sonnar look or to something more/different about the J-3 specifically?

-Randy

P.S. Just to show what a properly collimated J-3 can do, here's a shot taken with my J-3 wide open and at about minimum focusing distance. Focus is on the empty glass containers/holder for same.

 

[raid]

I agree with Randy and Raid, these are great lenses, but mechanical construction is quite poor. Unique look wide open.

But, you have to be very lucky to buy a well collimated lens (or get
a "Sweeneyfied" lens), even Fedka and Oleg only do infinity collimation,
and the risk of poor close up/wide open performance is high.

I am using the father of the J-3, a ZK 50/1.5 from 1950 that came
well collimated out of the box.

Roland.

Hi Roland,

I may have been lucky to get a Sweeneyfied "KMZ controlled J-3." It is very sharp wide open abd it has a pleasing rendering for portraits. Cosmetically it looks bad. This makes it a great travel lens. Nobody would want to steal such a bad looking lens.

Raid

 

[raid]

As usual, Raid, you're WAY ahead of me. I had seen a couple of those links but not all of them. Looks like I've got some reading to do. Thanks!

And Roland is right about the advantages of a well-collimated J-3 lens. I'm not sure I see any great benefit in only having correct infinity focus for a fast lens that I plan to use in close up, relatively dark settings. Which makes me very happy to have my "Sweeneyfied" J-3 lens which does great up close.

I'm curious, Roland, when you say this lens has a unique look wide open. Are you merely referring to the Sonnar look or to something more/different about the J-3 specifically?

-Randy

P.S. Just to show what a properly collimated J-3 can do, here's a shot taken with my J-3 wide open and at about minimum focusing distance. Focus is on the empty glass containers/holder for same.

Randy: The image looks nice. The J-3 seems to have a "near Sonnar" look, but maybe I am wrong here. I am not a Sonnar expert as some people here on RFF.

Raid

 

[vrgard]

Thanks, Raid. Just to be clear, the image I posted isn't anything artistic. Intent was simply to show that a properly collimated J-3 can focus up close.

As for the look, I thought the J-3 was a Sonnar design hence had a Sonnar look. Perhaps that's all Roland was referring to above. But if not, I'm hopeful that he will chime in here and further enlighten me.

-Randy

edit: I just found a test shot I did of the J-3 up close and wide open that makes it even clearer that Brian Sweeney's collimation worked. Here's the test shot (with credit to Roland for the "style" of test shot).

second edit: I realized after uploading the test shot that it did not have high enough resolution to show the proper focus. So, I've added a cropped version that should better show the plane of focus. And no, in case anyone is wondering, I'm not focusing as close as 20 inches as the cropped image implies - 20 inches on the tape measure is the point/plane of focus but I'm standing a bit back from the edge of the table where the tape measure starts.

 

[raid]

Randy: Your shots show that you J-3 is fine. I have had no problems with my J-3 since Brian sent it to me. He deserves a special thanks from many of us here.

Raid

 

[ferider]

As for the look, I thought the J-3 was a Sonnar design hence had a Sonnar look. Perhaps that's all Roland was referring to above.

This is what I meant, Randy (The "Ur Sonnar" look 🙂, like seen in your pictures)

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[clarence]

My J-3 wears the guise of a CZJ T Sonnar. Nr. 2846XXX. I got it from someone on rff whose name escapes me right now. I wonder when and where it was originally produced.

Clarence

 

[raid]

Clarence: Is it a CZJ lens or is it just the labeling?

Raid

 

[clarence]

The person who sold it to me said it was a fake CZJ lens but was actually a J-3. it is labelled as a Sonnar.

Here is a picture of it.

Clarence

 

[raid]

Clarence:

I wonder if your J-3 is any different from "regular" J-3 lenses. How did you identify it as a J-3?

Raid

 

[clarence]

Raid, I only know it is a J-3 based on the information given to me by the seller. Having said that, the markings on the lens do look a bit cheap and FSU-esque.

One other thing about the lens which I am intrigued by is that there are two dots marking the current aperture: a red one and a green one. The aperture ring starts and stops at the red one, so I ignore the green one.

Clarence

 

[ferider]

Clarence,

you can see if it's a fake CZJ using two indications:

- focus mark on a Russian lens is "M" on the original CZJ lens "m"
- if you unscrew the front barrel, an original CZJ lens will have a serial
nr. on the barrel, matching the nr. on the front ring.

Even original war-time CZJ lenses have sometimes focus mounts the origin
of which is not clear.

In any case, even if its a fake, from your picture one can see the typical
CZJ coating rings on the inner elements (only the center of the elements
is coated, see also H. Scherer's website). Good indication that (1) your
lens is old, from the late 40s or early 50s and (2) there are at least
some original CZJ parts in it ...

Might not matter to you, as long as it's well collimated a J-3 behaves
almost identically to a war-time 50/1.5 Sonnar.

Best,

Roland.

 

[clarence]

Clarence,

you can see if it's a fake CZJ using two indications:

- focus mark on a Russian lens is "M" on the original CZJ lens "m"

Thanks, Roland. A quick check shows that it is a capital 'M' and not a small 'm'. I'm currently using it on a Fed 2 body and it seems to be working well, but I have not used it at minimum range and maximum aperture yet.

Clarence