Photos from Carl Zeiss Jupiter sonnar 85mm 2.0

[johannielscom]

A while ago I found a 1951 Jupiter-9 85/2.0 with a Zeiss optical block. It was as new if not completely new and came with its original passport, saying it was optimised for Leica.

I took it with me on a three day trip to Maastricht NL and Aachen GE in July.

Just click on the shot below to see some shots on my website:




EDIT: Feel free to repost your favorite shots back here

 

[batterytypehah!]

Made my day, Johan! Aachen is my hometown. I love it, it's beautiful, the only thing it lacks is a river -- for which we'd always have Maastricht ;-)

 

[dexdog]

Johan, that lens is a beauty when you nail the focus! Well done.

I recently picked up a 1951 J-9 too, $150 on eBay from a seller in Estonia. The internal elements have Zeiss serial numbers that check out against Thiele. Like yours, mine appears to be set up for leica standard because it fouses accurately on a Canon P and leica M2.

Your pictures remind me that I need to make the effort to go into Washington DC sometime to take pictures- more interesting opportunities than the quiet suburb that I live in.

 

[johannielscom]

Johan, that lens is a beauty when you nail the focus! Well done.

I recently picked up a 1951 J-9 too, $150 on eBay from a seller in Estonia. The internal elements have Zeiss serial numbers that check out against Thiele. Like yours, mine appears to be set up for leica standard because it fouses accurately on a Canon P and leica M2.

Your pictures remind me that I need to make the effort to go into Washington DC sometime to take pictures- more interesting opportunities than the quiet suburb that I live in.

How cool is that! Two of 'em, what are the odds!

I'll have another look for the serial number on mine, maybe they are from the same batch!

Observation: on mine the index mark for distance and for the aperture do not line up. When threading the front with the optical block back in, the aperture mark goes past the index mark for distance.

This shot shows it:

1955 M3-DS with 1951 Jupiter-9 by buzzardkid, on Flickr.

Earlier in a thread here I concluded (and Brian agreed) that the lens's focal length should be shortened to make it fit Leica standards, and I calculated it should be set to 83,7mm. That same night I found this lens online and Brian confirmed that the optical block should go in deeper to get to that 83,7mms.

Question: is your lens like this too? With the aperture mark screwed in past the distance index mark?

We might unleash an online feeding frenzy for non-lining Jupiter-9s here 😀😀

 

[furcafe]

I hereby offer to show you around if you let me borrow your "new" 5cm/1.5 LTM Sonnar for a few shots! 😉

Your pictures remind me that I need to make the effort to go into Washington DC sometime to take pictures- more interesting opportunities than the quiet suburb that I live in.

 

[dexdog]

Furcafe, Brian has first dibs on the new Sonnar, but you can use it after he is done. 😎 I actually work in the District/Chinatown, but rarely go into the city unless I am going to obtain a visa, or have out-of-town visitors. What can I say- I'm a hick from the suburbs

 

[dexdog]

Question: is your lens like this too? With the aperture mark screwed in past the distance index mark? 😀😀

Yep, my J-9 looks just like yours. I wondered about that when I first got the lens, but after I found out that it focused fine on a Canon P, I didn't think anything else about it. I see that your lens has the same big (2-3mm) screw on the aperture ring that my lens exhibits.

The CZJ serial number of my lens is (2)851104, on the rear lens group

 

[johannielscom]

Dex,

mine is (2)840054. Thiele says the batches are 3 months apart! I can imagine that the same people who put my lens together also worked on yours.

Interesting to see that the approach to get the lens suited for Leica standard apparently was a policy. Guess I'll have a look around on the net if I can locate another early Jupiter-9 with the distance index and aperture mark not lining up, because that might likely be a CZJ optical cell in a Jupiter-9 barrel.

something to look for online, always nice, right?

 

[furcafe]

No problem deferring to Mr. Sweeney. I work in Federal Triangle, so we can always meet for lunch. Chinablock can be good for street shooting, though the light usually sucks that time of day.

I grew up in the suburbs (in MD). Couldn't wait to get out, but I realize that puts me in the distinct minority (family & old friends are still out there), in the U.S., anyway.

Furcafe, Brian has first dibs on the new Sonnar, but you can use it after he is done. 😎 I actually work in the District/Chinatown, but rarely go into the city unless I am going to obtain a visa, or have out-of-town visitors.

 

[f16sunshine]

Looks very promising Johan. I like the shot of the fellow in the wheelchair in particular.
Last year I was forced to sell my Opton 2/85 in Contax mount. I loved that lens and will regret it's sale I'm sure. The old sonar 85's are classic in rendering. My favorite look from a short tele.

Cheers!

 

[dexdog]

Dex,

mine is (2)840054. Thiele says the batches are 3 months apart! I can imagine that the same people who put my lens together also worked on yours.

Interesting to see that the approach to get the lens suited for Leica standard apparently was a policy. Guess I'll have a look around on the net if I can locate another early Jupiter-9 with the distance index and aperture mark not lining up, because that might likely be a CZJ optical cell in a Jupiter-9 barrel.

something to look for online, always nice, right?

My J-9 serial number is 5100931. The serial number of my CZJ version of the 85/2 in LTM is 2851294, with a 1946 production date. Apparently, my 1951 J-9 and 1946 CZJ 85/2 Sonnar were produced from the same batch of 2000 lenses described by Thiele. The design and construction of the CZJ lens is damn near identical to the Jupiter-9, but the two lenses have different styles of engraving, and the Zeiss has a black ring at the front of the lens and a silver one at the rear element, while the J-9 has a silver ring up front and a black ring at the rear element. The aperture index and focusing index line up almost exactly on the CZJ lens, while my Jupiter lines up off-center like your lens

I have to wonder about the same batch of lenses being used to produce both CZJ and Soviet products. I also have a 1945 CZJ 35mm Biogon and a 1950 J-12 produced from the same batch of glass. Things must have been chaotic for parts of the same batch to be made into both CZJ and Soviet products. Either that, or I do not give the counterfeiters enough credit for being sophisticated- who knows.

 

[johannielscom]

Looks very promising Johan. I like the shot of the fellow in the wheelchair in particular.
Last year I was forced to sell my Opton 2/85 in Contax mount. I loved that lens and will regret it's sale I'm sure. The old sonar 85's are classic in rendering. My favorite look from a short tele.

Cheers!

Thanks Andy! Good to see you posting again!

This Sonnar 85/2.0 probably cured my craving for a Hektor 73/1.9, although I still love the looks of that lens and of the shots it can produce.

Next stop will be to shoot the lens wide open in early and late daytime with a red filter and IR-sensitive RolleiRetro 400S. I'm hoping for some interesting shots from that!

 

[johannielscom]

My J-9 serial number is 5100931. The serial number of my CZJ version of the 85/2 in LTM is 2851294, with a 1946 production date. Apparently, my 1951 J-9 and 1946 CZJ 85/2 Sonnar were produced from the same batch of 2000 lenses described by Thiele. The design and construction of the CZJ lens is damn near identical to the Jupiter-9, but the two lenses have different styles of engraving, and the Zeiss has a black ring at the front of the lens and a silver one at the rear element, while the J-9 has a silver ring up front and a black ring at the rear element. The aperture index and focusing index line up almost exactly on the CZJ lens, while my Jupiter lines up off-center like your lens

I have to wonder about the same batch of lenses being used to produce both CZJ and Soviet products. I also have a 1945 CZJ 35mm Biogon and a 1950 J-12 produced from the same batch of glass. Things must have been chaotic for parts of the same batch to be made into both CZJ and Soviet products. Either that, or I do not give the counterfeiters enough credit for being sophisticated- who knows.

Dex,

the saga continues. Jupiter-9 serial on mine is 5100582. Most likely both your lens and mine were handled by the same people at Zeiss in 1945/46, and then once again by the same Russian workers in 1950!

 

[dexdog]

Johan, I have noticed that my J-9 has 2 different styles of engraving on the numbers, as seen in the attached photo. The aperture numbers are similar in style to the engraving on my CZJ 85/2 Sonnar, although somewhat larger. The engraving of numbers on the J-9 distance scale do not look like those on the J-9 aperture ring, or any engraving on the CZJ lens. From the pictures in one of your posts above, it appears that your lens has the same two types of engraving as mine.

 

[oftheherd]

No problem deferring to Mr. Sweeney. I work in Federal Triangle, so we can always meet for lunch. Chinablock can be good for street shooting, though the light usually sucks that time of day.

I grew up in the suburbs (in MD). Couldn't wait to get out, but I realize that puts me in the distinct minority (family & old friends are still out there), in the U.S., anyway.

Well, I'm just up the street from you at N. Capitol. Chinese is always good, and a few minutes of street shooting wouldn't hurt, then back to work. For me J-lenses would be the Kiev. Anybody want to try that?