LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
So creemy....which film did you use with J-3?
Well, not before at least one shot in color and wide-open...
My 1953 J-3, closest focus and wide-open at F1.5. On the Bessa R2.
![]()
Go for the 1952 J-3.
I think the above shot is with Kodacolor Gold 200.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Another shot with my 1953 J3.
M8, ISO 640, shot wide open.
M8, ISO 640, shot wide open.

stompyq
Well-known
My best J-3's have been the KMZ 1950's J-3's. The second best are those from GOmZ through about 1960. The worst have been from the 1980s.
http://ziforums.com/album.php?albumid=97
How can you find this out? from the serial number??
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
How can you find this out? from the serial number??
The first two numbers on the serial number denote the production year.
stompyq
Well-known
The first two numbers on the serial number denote the production year.
Thanks!!!!!!!
jmkelly
rangefinder user
As we have discovered how easy this lens is to work on and how good it can be, auction prices are going up. The days of getting these gems for less than $100 seem to be behind us.
raid
Dad Photographer
$125 is a good price these days for a J-3.
I picked up another 1953 J-3, ran $140 with shipping. Described as having some light marks on it, we'll see when it gets here. Th SN is lower than my current two, and I want to find out when some of the internal differences came into play.
jmkelly
rangefinder user
I thnk I mentioned to Brian that the last LTM J-3 I bought for $125 arrived with a good mount and two front elements, but instead of a rear triplet it came with three random uncemented lenses and a ridiculous hand-made spacer. It looked like something cobbed up from bottom-of-the-drawer scrapings. I would have sent it back except that I just needed it for parts. My concern is that we may be approaching the point where we need to buy two $125 J-3's to get the parts to create one good lens. Not that that's not do-able, and fun, and probably worth it from the standpoint of image quality
. Just saying.
raid
Dad Photographer
I nearly bought a 1957 J-3 last night, but let it go for under $90 because it looked rough to my eyes. I am now preferring the "pretty looking" J-3 lenses. Maybe they are less scavanged from parts.
I've run into some J-3's that required a lot of work. The last 1953 J-3 was in that category, the helical was misassembled, was missing 2 of 3 set screws for the focus ring, the focus action was horrible, and the front element was shot. Replaced the front with a new one and rebuilt the mount.
Wide-open, with the new front element.
Stopped down F4;
I have several j-3's with bad front elements and good rear modules. So the front element is the tough one. Raid had the same problem with a CZJ Sonnar from KEH- the rear module was "just wrong". I put in a rear module from a J-8.
Wide-open, with the new front element.
Stopped down F4;
I have several j-3's with bad front elements and good rear modules. So the front element is the tough one. Raid had the same problem with a CZJ Sonnar from KEH- the rear module was "just wrong". I put in a rear module from a J-8.
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.