simonOWO
Member
Found a silver rim ZO with lighter weight, indicating redesigned interior?
Possible mixed components from different lens?
I’m curious to know the weight of lenses from 48xxx to 91xxx.
Possible mixed components from different lens?
I’m curious to know the weight of lenses from 48xxx to 91xxx.
Last edited:
Räuber
Well-known
If you look at the table with variations you see that there are 2 silver filter rim Opton Sonnars. Both share the same exterior but a different weight. It is almost impossible to tell the difference by photos. So I made a guess where the split can be found. Therefore the serial numbers are red. Those numbers are not set in stone, they are guessed. I even gave both variations the same short name because optically they are indistinguishable. I noticed that I missed to document it in the guide though. Maybe I split it into 2 variations with separate names.
Thank you for sharing your finding. As you see I expected the internal change to happen later. As written before it was an internal change to the holding of the glass elements that caused the weight difference. This improvement made it easier to screw and adjust the glass elements in the body, spared brass metal, saved some time in production and made the body lighter.
Hopefully we can get more people reporting the weight of their Opton lens so we might get a better picture when the real split in production happened.
I did not weigh them- but I have taken apart multiple 50mm F1.5 Sonnars that indicate production of the two types was concurrent, more than a clean switch-over.
dexdog
Veteran
I have ZO 50/1.5 number 1046569, weight is 159 grams
simonOWO
Member
Yes, I have seen at least three types of rear assembly from west Zeiss.
Most of the later one from CZ, 152g, one retaining ring hold the rear group, naked rear group slide out without any brass securing it.
A different type, exist both with CZ, ZO silver rim, ~167g. After removing the retaining ring holding the rear element, optical assembly slides out with brass around the glass group.
And the third, I have only seen one with ZO silver rim, 210g, same as above, but somehow heavier.
I asked someone to weight their ZO silver rim, SN 48003, 210g
Most of the later one from CZ, 152g, one retaining ring hold the rear group, naked rear group slide out without any brass securing it.
A different type, exist both with CZ, ZO silver rim, ~167g. After removing the retaining ring holding the rear element, optical assembly slides out with brass around the glass group.
And the third, I have only seen one with ZO silver rim, 210g, same as above, but somehow heavier.
I asked someone to weight their ZO silver rim, SN 48003, 210g
Räuber
Well-known
Well I suspect it is a Zeiss-Opton with black filter rim?
dexdog
Veteran
Yes
Räuber
Well-known
Zeiss Sonnar 50mm F/1.5 - regular Versions and Specs
This page contains an overview over all regular versions of the Zeiss Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 and some of its Soviet, Japanese and Todays der...
vividlyfading.blogspot.com
Mine weights 206g.
I have an out-of-time silver rim Opton-Sonnar with serial 851917 that weights 168g.
I had another silver rim Opton-Sonnar with serial 576615 that weights 167g.
I was not aware of the weight difference of the silver rim Opton-Sonnar for a long time. I got a chance to buy one of the first Opton-Sonnars and took the plunge. I was confused when I put it on a scale and it showed 206g. That is a massive difference! @TenEleven helped me to find an explanation for the difference.
When I updated the spreadsheet of versions the last time I tried to look into it where they might have changed the internal build. I looked at some stored images of Opton-Sonnars. The very first heavy variation might be detected by looking at the rear end of the lens. The black paint is sometimes broken and you can spot the brass beneath. The later lighter variation does not show such a behavior. But I have not a lot of examples on my HD and the pictures are sometimes bad. It is difficult to spot. I went with a gut feeling for when they might have changed the build. But it seems it is even more extreme than expected. They already changed it in the very first batch produced in West-Germany. What could be a better estimation? 1000 produced copies of the heavy silver rim Opton-Sonnar? 600?
I have another strange Opton-Sonnar in my collection that is too light.
Opton-Sonnar with serial 717094 weights 139g !!! I could not find a second West-German Sonnar that is as light. The lightest West-German Sonnar I have seen weights 151g. I asked around and the lowest was 149g. But 139g to 154g (the average) is a big difference. My CLA guy only replied there is no difference to other Sonnars... Any idea on this?
simonOWO
Member
yep, I would say they changed brass to aluminum, thank you for pointing out the color
Maybe your 139g was even more aluminum? Like built with leftover parts from war time?
Maybe your 139g was even more aluminum? Like built with leftover parts from war time?
TenEleven
Well-known
I find it hard to believe that you could get another 10+ grams savings in using more aluminum. The mount and aperture parts have to be chromed brass, since otherwise you would have immediately spotted the difference. I guess one way to know for sure would be to take the lens apart and weigh each of the parts VS a normal 150g lens.Zeiss Sonnar 50mm F/1.5 - regular Versions and Specs
This page contains an overview over all regular versions of the Zeiss Sonnar 5cm f/1,5 and some of its Soviet, Japanese and Todays der...
Mine weights 206g.
I have an out-of-time silver rim Opton-Sonnar with serial 851917 that weights 168g.
I had another silver rim Opton-Sonnar with serial 576615 that weights 167g.
I was not aware of the weight difference of the silver rim Opton-Sonnar for a long time. I got a chance to buy one of the first Opton-Sonnars and took the plunge. I was confused when I put it on a scale and it showed 206g. That is a massive difference! @TenEleven helped me to find an explanation for the difference.
When I updated the spreadsheet of versions the last time I tried to look into it where they might have changed the internal build. I looked at some stored images of Opton-Sonnars. The very first heavy variation might be detected by looking at the rear end of the lens. The black paint is sometimes broken and you can spot the brass beneath. The later lighter variation does not show such a behavior. But I have not a lot of examples on my HD and the pictures are sometimes bad. It is difficult to spot. I went with a gut feeling for when they might have changed the build. But it seems it is even more extreme than expected. They already changed it in the very first batch produced in West-Germany. What could be a better estimation? 1000 produced copies of the heavy silver rim Opton-Sonnar? 600?
I have another strange Opton-Sonnar in my collection that is too light.
Opton-Sonnar with serial 717094 weights 139g !!! I could not find a second West-German Sonnar that is as light. The lightest West-German Sonnar I have seen weights 151g. I asked around and the lowest was 149g. But 139g to 154g (the average) is a big difference. My CLA guy only replied there is no difference to other Sonnars... Any idea on this?
What about the iris? Does it look as normal? Even on the more common opton variants the iris holder is made from aluminum by the way, which can be a bit of a weak spot after extremely heavy use since the blade pivots themselves are brass. However the interchangeable nature of the entire aperture mechanism means you could just drop in the working aperture from a junker and no one would be any wiser.
TenEleven
Well-known
I swore to be done with these, but it looks like I have a Opton Silvernose 89136 on the way.
Once it's here I'll weigh it and also most likely disassemble it and see if it reveals any secrets. I'll post here.
I bought it in basically new condition, now it looks like cr*p because I used the living heck out of it. Fantastic lens. But that's why I usually don't buy minty gear...
Once it's here I'll weigh it and also most likely disassemble it and see if it reveals any secrets. I'll post here.
I also have a Opton 50/1.5 1049479 - weighs 156 grams.
I bought it in basically new condition, now it looks like cr*p because I used the living heck out of it. Fantastic lens. But that's why I usually don't buy minty gear...
Last edited:
JakobN
JakobN
ZO 50/1.5 88051 weighs 170g
TenEleven
Well-known
89136 got here and weighs 164 grams in original condition. (It still had the original smelly Zeiss grease - ugh)
By the way of internal construction, which adds weight - these early "Silver Nose" lenses have a strip of leather within the aperture actuator mechanism to make it feel more smooth or to stop dust ingress - not sure which. Which would add a couple of grams and more importantly it might add some variation depending on whether or not it has soaked up some extra moisture or grease.
Also it's likely that people will remove this if it got too grody which, together with the aluminum retaining rings would help explain some of the variations.
I have also noticed that the rear lens retainer comes in two materials. One of the silver-noses it's aluminum, the other it's finished in brass.
By the way of internal construction, which adds weight - these early "Silver Nose" lenses have a strip of leather within the aperture actuator mechanism to make it feel more smooth or to stop dust ingress - not sure which. Which would add a couple of grams and more importantly it might add some variation depending on whether or not it has soaked up some extra moisture or grease.
Also it's likely that people will remove this if it got too grody which, together with the aluminum retaining rings would help explain some of the variations.
I have also noticed that the rear lens retainer comes in two materials. One of the silver-noses it's aluminum, the other it's finished in brass.
Last edited:
155g
Shostka
Member
Hello, I have a copy of black barrel of Jupiter-8M made in 1981, #8110448. Unfortunately I can't weight my lens, but I will tell later. I hope this information is useful for you...
I've never seen a 5cm F1.5 Contax Mount Sonnar like this one. Not only is the mount engraved with "Made in Germany" twice: The rear surface is coated, the front surface is coated, AND the barrel is held in with 3 set screws.
I have seen Four lenses from this batch with coated front elements. All the same color, almost impossible to catch in a photo. The eye picks it up. The rear element- coated, but coating worn. The vacuum deposition equipment was installed at the factory in 1935, about when this batch was being produced.
One of the 3 set screws is stuck, I would normally have to drill out. But- this lens is so unique, I will not do that. Fortunately the rear group unscrewed from the barrel easily and the haze is not gone.
My earlier CZJ 5cm F1.5- first lens I converted to LTM. Almost 20 years ago.
One screw out. Went to take out the barrel, it did not budge. Then I looked - realized this lens has 3 set screws in it.
I just ordered a new 1.2mm Wiha screwdriver- will see if the screw comes out...
I have seen Four lenses from this batch with coated front elements. All the same color, almost impossible to catch in a photo. The eye picks it up. The rear element- coated, but coating worn. The vacuum deposition equipment was installed at the factory in 1935, about when this batch was being produced.
One of the 3 set screws is stuck, I would normally have to drill out. But- this lens is so unique, I will not do that. Fortunately the rear group unscrewed from the barrel easily and the haze is not gone.
My earlier CZJ 5cm F1.5- first lens I converted to LTM. Almost 20 years ago.
One screw out. Went to take out the barrel, it did not budge. Then I looked - realized this lens has 3 set screws in it.
I just ordered a new 1.2mm Wiha screwdriver- will see if the screw comes out...
Last edited:
I got a chance to test "Three-Set-Screw Double-Engraved" Sonnar and it is noticeably better than my current Sonnar from the same batch that I've owned for 20 years. This makes a total of Five that I've handled from this batch.
Why three set screws? Look at a number of lenses and you see three set screws used: holding the helical into the mount for ZOMZ and Valdai J-3s; aperture rings of Sonnars and Jupiters; Focus rings of Sonnars, Jupiters, and many other lenses. I believe this is for better alignment: the pressure from the screws is spread out evenly at the 120degree angle. I learned the hard way to never fully tighten one set screw when putting the helical back into the mount of a J-3, it throws it off angle "ever so slightly". I learned tighten the screws down evenly across the three, a couple of turns and a final tightening.
SO: Brian's DR**2 analysis on this lens based on: 1) it is an early Version 3 5cm F1.5; 2) The front and rear element are both coated; 3) Three set screws used to hold the barrel in place for better alignment; 4) Marked "Made in Germany" twice so you cannot miss it when looking at that coated rear element. I believe it is an "Advanced Technology Demonstrator", engineering sample, show piece, "whatever buzzword you want to use" to show the best of Zeiss to the English-Speaking Market.
Why three set screws? Look at a number of lenses and you see three set screws used: holding the helical into the mount for ZOMZ and Valdai J-3s; aperture rings of Sonnars and Jupiters; Focus rings of Sonnars, Jupiters, and many other lenses. I believe this is for better alignment: the pressure from the screws is spread out evenly at the 120degree angle. I learned the hard way to never fully tighten one set screw when putting the helical back into the mount of a J-3, it throws it off angle "ever so slightly". I learned tighten the screws down evenly across the three, a couple of turns and a final tightening.
SO: Brian's DR**2 analysis on this lens based on: 1) it is an early Version 3 5cm F1.5; 2) The front and rear element are both coated; 3) Three set screws used to hold the barrel in place for better alignment; 4) Marked "Made in Germany" twice so you cannot miss it when looking at that coated rear element. I believe it is an "Advanced Technology Demonstrator", engineering sample, show piece, "whatever buzzword you want to use" to show the best of Zeiss to the English-Speaking Market.
SO- there were FOUR set screws holding the barrel into the mount. Three held the Ring that @Räuber first introduced to us. This Sonnar has that ring held in by three set screws. Take it off using the 1.2mm x40 Wiha, after a little light oil applied and given time to soak in- out it came. I replaced it. This ring is in so tight that you must apply pressure to get it back on, the 3 set screws that hold it in are that tight. AND- this lens has never been opened since the ring was put on. There were metal filings in it, from drilling a Tap in deeper for the set screw. I cleaned them out. Once the ring is off, the single set screw I'm used to seeing was exposed. Longer than the other 3. Lens apart, and back together again.
Miles.
Beamsplitter
FOUR set screws... the plot thickens!
TenEleven
Well-known
Not that rare or exciting but interesting from a historical point of view, I think. @Räuber might also be interested.
It's already pretty much established, that after the Americans first and then the Russians carted off all the gear and assembly tools, the Jena factory and the workers had to start again from scratch. This, of course, led to the mechanical (and likely optical) design of the 3 million post-war Jena lenses to be a radical departure from what the prewar and wartime (and Russian) designs were like.
So here is a lens that probably marks this transition from where they scavenged the few parts they still had while the production of new mounts and lenses spun up.
Very early 3million Serial. 3001483 External housing is that of a prewar chrome Sonnar. External housing is made from brass. The aperture ring is made from a lighter alloy and the machining of the aperture wing is less well defined than usual.
I brightened the image to make it visible. There is a red 'T' between the '5cm' and 'Carl', it however has been expunged. Scratched and then filled in with black paint. The lens is only partially coated with the middle triplet being fully coated and the rear triplet rear lens bearing remnants of coating. But not the aperture facing side!
Also the rear triplet housing bears the serial number x268716 making it prewar. It has some balsam separation, but the lens works and registers correctly to the Contax standard without me having done any work to it (I have since maintained it) which leads me to believe that this was likely "factory" and not someones repair since the chances of achieving the correct focal length of 52.4mm by swapping in a random rear triplet are very slim.
Lastly we can see that the aperture mechanism belongs to a war-time lens going to what I assume is f/22. However the aperture scale itself only goes to f/11 as customary for pre-war and very early war-time lenses.
The lens weighs 181grams, the rear element diameter is 24,21mm and the front clocks in at 34,55mm.
Edit: The other thing that makes me believe that this is factory work is the deleted red 'T'. If this had been an unscrupulous seller or faker, the red 'T' would have actually increased the lens value at the time, especially in 1946 when most amateurs would likely have never seen a coated lens before not knowing what it even looked like. So they would have just kept it - especially since the lens is - at least partially - coated. But I guess that's not enough for Zeiss to label it 'T'.
We see this in the 'SturzVisier' or 'Leica' Sonnars which are (well the LTM mount is, the glass is real) fakes, and some despite being uncoated bear a fraudulent 'T' which later was changed to a 'V'.
It's already pretty much established, that after the Americans first and then the Russians carted off all the gear and assembly tools, the Jena factory and the workers had to start again from scratch. This, of course, led to the mechanical (and likely optical) design of the 3 million post-war Jena lenses to be a radical departure from what the prewar and wartime (and Russian) designs were like.
So here is a lens that probably marks this transition from where they scavenged the few parts they still had while the production of new mounts and lenses spun up.
Very early 3million Serial. 3001483 External housing is that of a prewar chrome Sonnar. External housing is made from brass. The aperture ring is made from a lighter alloy and the machining of the aperture wing is less well defined than usual.
I brightened the image to make it visible. There is a red 'T' between the '5cm' and 'Carl', it however has been expunged. Scratched and then filled in with black paint. The lens is only partially coated with the middle triplet being fully coated and the rear triplet rear lens bearing remnants of coating. But not the aperture facing side!
Also the rear triplet housing bears the serial number x268716 making it prewar. It has some balsam separation, but the lens works and registers correctly to the Contax standard without me having done any work to it (I have since maintained it) which leads me to believe that this was likely "factory" and not someones repair since the chances of achieving the correct focal length of 52.4mm by swapping in a random rear triplet are very slim.
Lastly we can see that the aperture mechanism belongs to a war-time lens going to what I assume is f/22. However the aperture scale itself only goes to f/11 as customary for pre-war and very early war-time lenses.
The lens weighs 181grams, the rear element diameter is 24,21mm and the front clocks in at 34,55mm.
Edit: The other thing that makes me believe that this is factory work is the deleted red 'T'. If this had been an unscrupulous seller or faker, the red 'T' would have actually increased the lens value at the time, especially in 1946 when most amateurs would likely have never seen a coated lens before not knowing what it even looked like. So they would have just kept it - especially since the lens is - at least partially - coated. But I guess that's not enough for Zeiss to label it 'T'.
We see this in the 'SturzVisier' or 'Leica' Sonnars which are (well the LTM mount is, the glass is real) fakes, and some despite being uncoated bear a fraudulent 'T' which later was changed to a 'V'.
Last edited: