TenElevens Sonnar/Zeiss curiosities

[TenEleven]

I have been wanting to make this particular posting for a while but put it off time and time again.
Well, now's the time. In this post I want to share some of the strange lenses that I have accumulated over the years of looking for Zeiss stuff. Most of these will be Leica (L39) mount but there is a Contax mount one as well.

Furthermore, for the sake of brevity and to not repeat a lot of info that Brian already has posted - I'm going to be mostly skipping over the "standard" LTM war-time lenses which range from 28mm to 135mm and their Contax-mount brothers. All lenses focus correctly to their appropriate standards unless otherwise mentioned.

Wartime LTM Sonnar 5cm f/1.5 - Full Brass Finish
Let's start with a lens that's not particularly strange, just rare. It's your typical, albeit early war-time LTM Sonnar lens. It's been finished in brass entirely - even the helical, lens mounts and everything is made of brass - making it a very heavy and dense lens. It is in fact at 236 grams (8.3oz) heavier than even the Lomography Jupiter3+ which comes in at 219 grams (7.7oz). Sadly it has seen a lot of use so the helical needed some heavy grease to prevent any wobble.

Post-war LTM Sonnar 5cm f/1.5 - Aluminum Mount
These are, to my understanding at least, legit. The Thiele is mum on them but they appear in the correct serial lots. I have seen several of these and they all have the same, rather simplistic construction of a helical ground into the back of the lens over which then the rear part is simply "screwed on" - the only thing stopping you from fully unscrewing it is a screw thread into the rear part that rides along a groove that has also been cut into the rear mount. Interesting hour-glass shape. Finished in 1947. Weighing in at 136grams (4.7oz)


??? LTM Sonnar 5cm f/2 - Aluminum (Re?)Mount
Continuing the hour-glass theme, we have this very light-weight all aluminum 5cm f/2 Sonnar LTM lens. It has a strange serial number that is however appropriate to a 5cm f/2 Sonnar, according to the Thiele book it was made in 1937 and comes out of a lot of 3000. It's quite possible that this was either re-mounted or had been lying around in the Zeiss factory and finished post war as the design of the front bezel is more reminiscent of very late post war Sonnars. Surprisingly it focuses (accurately!) down to 0.7m exactly with RF coupling. Very curiously it takes 41mm as opposed to the usual 40.5mm filters. Leitz SOOEY adapter fits. Weighs a mere 100 grams (3.5oz)



Wartime LTM Sonnar 5cm f/2 - Brass & Nickel Mount - Collapsible
Next up we have a quite early collapsible LTM 5cm f/2 Sonnar. Interestingly it is finished in Brass with a Nickel coat. It weighs a rather hefty 212g (7.4oz) compared to its more normal Aluminium finished brother weighing in at almost exactly half that 110g (3.8oz). Also furthermore as shown mounted here it has the "period typical" 11'o-clock focus-tab position for the lens locked at infinity. Fittingly it was ordered in 1932, in a lot of 5000 but as the Thiele dryly states: "Beleg Fehlt" - missing finishing slip. Very curious.




Continued below...

 

[TenEleven]

​Wartime LTM Sonnar 8.5cm f/2 - Brass/Aluminum Finish - Arriflex remount
Perhaps the least curious item here, but I still thought it worth a mention as I have seen around three or four copies of this particular lens now. It's an Arriflex Sonnar 8.5cm remounted to LTM. Its slim shape makes it quite light-weight at 274grams (9.6oz) The construction is very simple suggesting some sort of private work-shop was behind it. However I assume that the customization is not recent and most likely happened some time shortly after the war. Sadly the internal baffling of the narrow focus mount throat is insufficient, causing parasitic reflections. Finished from a lot of merely 50 in 1944.


Wartime LTM Sonnar 8.5cm f/2 - Aluminum Finish - Contax(?) remount
Seguing into the next more interesting lens, which will also segue into the next one adding a bit more light into a story recently reported on by Marco Cavina, we have a aluminium remounted Sonnar 8.5cm. A solid 305grams (10.7oz) Finished in 1946 - supposedly originally in Contax mount, however right next to it in the Thiele (chronologically speaking) are several LTM lenses. I'd like to point out that the blueing is quite of mediocre quality, the 'T' mark isn't the right color. And the aperture blades are uncharacteristically (for Zeiss) made of Steel. However the fit and finish is of very high quality. I'd also like to point out the much more sophisticated RF tracking mechanism which uses a sled, akin to the LTM Nikkor 85/2.
​

??? Sonnar 5.8cm f/1.5 - Aluminum Finish - Stuka 87 "SturzVisier" remount
Likely from the same factory as the above, Marco Cavina has written extensively about this Sonnar lens which was apparently used to project the target reticle in Stuka 87 dive bombers. Snatched from the bombed-out Zeiss factories and remounted into LTM and Contax mounts is this lens. I'd like to point out the similarities with the above lens, relatively high quality craftsmanship, very mediocre bluing - a fraudulent 'T' mark that someone had clearly attempted to erase at a later point, and uncharacteristic steel-finished aperture blades. It focuses accurately on Leica bodies, denoting a decent craftsmanship and the optical qualities are better than one would expect of a target-reticule projecting lens. The serial is continuous with its brethren but makes no sense in the Zeiss canon. It weighs (181grams) (6.3oz)
​​

Post-war Oberkochen "Carl Zeiss" Sonnar 50mm f/1.5 - Brass Mount
Second-to-last we have a 1955 "Carl Zeiss" post-war re-designed Sonnar 50mm (not cm) f/1.5 lens. It is all brass finished which results in the lens weighing a solid 231grams (8.1oz) The mount claims "Made in Germany" and denotes the f/1.5 opening and DOF scale correctly, making me think that this is likely a very cleverly done remounting of a post-war Sonnar into a Summarit housing. I have seen two examples of this exact style of finish so far. The helical has no adjustments or translations and focuses to the 51.6mm Leica standard perfectly - as does the lens inside - aka it will *not* focus correctly mounted into a Contax mount shell. Very interesting.

​​​

War-time Contax Mount Sonnar 5cm f/1.5 - Brass inner tube, aluminum shell
One of the strangest and perhaps most exciting finds to me was this particular lens. When I bought it it was your normal war-time Sonnar 5cm f/1.5 in Contax mount with T coating. Weighting a surprisingly heavy 156grams (5.5oz). When I opened the lens to service it - however I found that the lens had mechanisms inside that its other war-time brothers did not. The mechanism had been disabled by someone with a piece of paper shoved under the ball-bearing. Insanely luckily no parts were missing. Namely this lens has a click-stop which briefly arrests the motion of the aperture at the appropriate f/stop positions with an audible "click" sound. Akin to modern lenses. This required a special external barrel for the lens as the circumference is thus slightly increased. Made from a lot of 3000 in Contax mount finished in 1943. The internal numbers match up.
​​​

That's all for now, while I didn't cover all my curiosities I have covered what I think are the most interesting ones and hope this will be enough to get some discussion started. Of course please let me know if you wish to have any of these lenses elaborated on and I'll share what I know.​

 

[Sonnar Brian]

This is just an amazing collection!

The attachments are no showing up for the last Four lenses- there might be a forum limit on the number of attachments allowed in a single post.

I would appreciate you reposting the last for lenses with uploaded attachments. I've also come across some odd Sonnars- several similar to ones you've posted.

 

[TenEleven]

This is just an amazing collection!

The attachments are no showing up for the last Four lenses- there might be a forum limit on the number of attachments allowed in a single post.

I would appreciate you reposting the last for lenses with uploaded attachments. I've also come across some odd Sonnars- several similar to ones you've posted.

Thank you for your kind comment, and yes originally I intended this to be a single post, but I had to split it into two.
I guess something went wrong during that operation. I've re-uploaded and re-attached the images in the second post. I hope they show up now.

 

[raid]

Thank you for sharing with us your rare lenses. There is a lot of history here.

 

[dexdog]

Thanks for posting, you have some very unusual lenses!

 

[dexdog]

I have a couple of the 8.5cm/f2 lenses, they are similar to yours, and I have always thought of them as being cobbled together outta spare parts.

 

[boojum]

Great post and great info about the Zeiss lenses. Am I correct in assuming that the 8.5cm f/2.0 Zeiss is what became the Jupiter 9?

 

[dexdog]

Yep. I have a 1951 J-9 that has CZJ serial numbers on interior lens elements and pieces of the alloy barrel.

 

[Ororaro]

Impressive!
I never understood zeiss lenses from that era: so many versions and secret codes, and all the russian clones...

I own one that is apparently very rare. Quirky, but I love it to bits. Every once in a while I need my zeiss sonnar fix.

 

[dexdog]

This lens appears to be a remounted West German/Oberkochen Zeiss lens, most likely post-1953 given that it is not marked with a red "T" that woulda been the norm on earlier lenses. The early Oberkochen lenses are usually pretty good performers, at least in Contax mount. I have 3 or 4 of these 50mm lenses in Contax mount, and they are very sharp with good contrast.

 

[raid]

This thread reminded me of old times when I would search for such lenses online. I did it again!
I found a Zeiss Jena 5cm 2 from 1938. Would it be a good choice? It is in Contax mount.

 

[TenEleven]

I have a couple of the 8.5cm/f2 lenses, they are similar to yours, and I have always thought of them as being cobbled together outta spare parts.

Do you mean the Arriflex remounted version? Yeah it feels kind of sloppy. Not the best conversion for sure.
The shop that made the version with the RF cam however knew what they were doing, the lens even has internal baffling that even the Contax originals lack. Focus is also very precise.

Impressive!
I never understood zeiss lenses from that era: so many versions and secret codes, and all the russian clones...

I own one that is apparently very rare. Quirky, but I love it to bits. Every once in a while I need my zeiss sonnar fix.

That's a nice Oberkochen Sonnar remount. As dexdog already said these are very good performers with virtually no focus shift on film and lots of punch. They are especially great in black and white, but no slouch for color either.

This thread reminded me of old times when I would search for such lenses online. I did it again!
I found a Zeiss Jena 5cm 2 from 1938. Would it be a good choice? It is in Contax mount.

While I shoot the f/1.5 regularly, the f/2 does have its place (at least in the pre-war sortiment) - the f/2 version still has a very nice rendition and you get sharpness into the corners usually from f/4 or so on-wards. Due to the higher curvature of field on the f/1.5 lenses they usually need stopping down a bit more for landscape subjects. There's of course - especially after 80 years - lots of sample variations so I'm trying to keep this in as-general terms as possible.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

This thread reminded me of old times when I would search for such lenses online. I did it again!
I found a Zeiss Jena 5cm 2 from 1938. Would it be a good choice? It is in Contax mount.

Raid- do you still have the 5cm F2 Sonnar with the J-8 rear triplet in it? The 5cm F2 is a fine performer, but is hard to find with a clean front element.

 

[TenEleven]

Raid- do you still have the 5cm F2 Sonnar with the J-8 rear triplet in it? The 5cm F2 is a fine performer, but is hard to find with a clean front element.

Seconded. A good example is worth its weight in gold however. The above posted hour-glass one actually beats a super-clean collapsible Summicron 50mm f/2 (1.3mil serial) at all apertures and distances. Especially for corner sharpness. It's quite absurd.

Since we are already getting a bit off topic, Brian since you're probably the most Sonnar/Zeiss knowledgeable here - have you found that the early 'T' coated lenses - the coating isn't very hard and it seems to deteriorate in a way that actually negatively affects the performance of the lens?

Sometimes I got the lenses to perform much better by polishing it off. The batches starting with 2.6million seem to be most affected by this.

 

[TenEleven]

Not a Sonnar but still...

Wide-Angle Tessar 2.8cm (28mm) f/8 in all brass "Spy" mount
Here's another odd one that I've dug out from the dry-cabinet. A war-time Zeiss Jena wide-angle Tessar lens, supposedly 'T' coated, although I doubt it would move the needle much on this simple construction. It is however absolutely positively the tiniest size they could make it. Shown here next to a Regular f/1.5 wartime Sonnar 5cm lens and then mounted onto an appropriate also war-time Contax II. The aperture can be adjusted as normal. The focus is obviously only correct at the infinity position of the focus wheel of the camera - the lens is collimated such that it is focused at 3meters (~10ft) to achieve a hyperfocal plane from 1.5m (2ft) all the way to infinity at f/8. Despite being tiny, being made out of brass it weighs in at a dense 97grams (3.4oz)

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Seconded. A good example is worth its weight in gold however. The above posted hour-glass one actually beats a super-clean collapsible Summicron 50mm f/2 (1.3mil serial) at all apertures and distances. Especially for corner sharpness. It's quite absurd.

Since we are already getting a bit off topic, Brian since you're probably the most Sonnar/Zeiss knowledgeable here - have you found that the early 'T' coated lenses - the coating isn't very hard and it seems to deteriorate in a way that actually negatively affects the performance of the lens?

Sometimes I got the lenses to perform much better by polishing it off. The batches starting with 2.6million seem to be most affected by this.

"Complex answer"- I've seen issues with coatings on some of the wartime lenses, and just picked up a 2.72M 5cm F1.5 Sonnar that has led a rough life. The metal on the mount is corroded. I'll be rebuilding it this week, and will be taking photographs. I've noticed some strange "mottling" in the coatings of lenses after 2.6M mark, and know the inner coating especially of the flat surface behind the aperture is delicate and subject to damage. I've removed one, came right off- revealing a perfect glass surface. I wonder if the problem was getting the materials during the war years, and rushing production during war years. I have a 190xxxx (No T) that is fully coated, all coatings perfect and a 272xxxx that is also perfect. I have a 175xxxx with coated front element, and have seen another from the same batch that is identical. For the 190xxxx: I have the fully coated lens, and another made within tens of units that is uncoated. The natural Bloom makes the two very clode in performance. I also have a 255xxxx 5cm F1.5 T, goes to F16 but marked F11, heavy brass- perfect glass. It is from 1938, before the switch to alloy mounts. I have a 5cm F2 T sn 270xxxx, coatings have some cleaning marks- but otherwise good and a 3.5cm F2.8 Biogon T 239xxx- all surfaces are perfect. Back to: I think this was a wartime materials issue.

 

[TenEleven]

Yeah now that I read your answer it makes a lot of sense to me. I also have various coated lenses that predate the official 'T' mark - and yes as you state these are usually either in perfect or very good condition unless they have suffered. Yet, somehow the coating on these wartime lenses has often deteriorated without any obvious mistreatment and yes the coating is also very soft and can be wiped off. In fact this ends up improving the performance of the lens if the coating condition is very bad. In such a case it optically seems to act like a moderate haze. (Highlights bloom out and contrast is generally lowered, sharpness is unaffected.) I've also seen a weird cross-hatching pattern in the coatings of several lenses. I thought these to be wipe marks but now I'm not so sure anymore, the coating may have somehow coagulated?

Further I've seen a lot of lenses in the range of 1.9million - none of which have a 'T' but many, many are blued. I have seen similar bluing in Super Ikontas in the serial range and even Rolleiflexes (standard - model 622). The color and optical properties are very similar, so I'm quite certain that this was done by Zeiss and not a 3rd party. However , the bluing doesn't move the needle much (for Sonnars, for Biogons it really helps) but its certainly better than nothing and also better than the bluing I've seen done post-fact on some other lenses. I also have a 1.6mil and 1.7mil Sonnar that is fully 'T' coated (amber/violet) but has no mark indicating such. Also an early coated Biogon that doesn't have a 'T' but has a red dot drilled into it.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

> the coating may have somehow coagulated?


That is what I am thinking- reacted with moisture, and cloud up. I wonder if Zeiss used drip coatings in some cases, or if rushed work left some optics with impurity in the coating. But- these lenses are all 75+ years old now. The pair of 1950 J-3's with Zeiss serial numbers have perfect coatings and are exceptional performers, as good as my 272xxxx LTM Sonnar 5cm F1.5 with perfect glass.

 

[TenEleven]

I have similar experience with Jupiter-12s the 1950ies KMZ batches, even the ones without Zeiss numbers are all absolutely stellar performers (if they are within calibration, but for 1950 lenses I've never found one that was out-of-spec from the factory - the ones that were had been messed with already.) Jupiter-3s are similarly good with outstanding central sharpness and contrast - however the later Russian computation seems to be more prone to focus-shift than its German counterpart.

Tangentially, I think a lot of the "Russian fake" hysteria one reads on the 'net stems from the fact that the Russians just used KMZ parts to mount Zeiss Glass and vice versa. Parts and material were scarce and they just scavenged and used what was available - that doesn't make these lenses fake or bad in my view. Some of those need work, but once restored they all are decent performers