The Zenzanon Lens Saga, Part 1, Why did Nikon REALLY stop making lenses for Bronica?

The Zenzanon Lens Saga, Part I:
Bronica’s quest for optical excellence after Nikon lowered the boom

By Jason Schneider

When Zenzaburō Yoshino unveiled the original Zenza Bronica Z, a brilliant new modular 6 x 6 cm SLR of his own design, at the Philadelphia Camera Show in 1958, it created an instant sensation. But Bronica wasn’t a lens maker and developing such an exquisitely complex camera body had depleted the company’s resources, so Yoshino wisely decided to source the Bronica's interchangeable lenses from Nippon Kōgaku (Nikon), the world-renowned Japanese optics and camera manufacturer. With its superb, precision-ground Nikkor lenses, the Bronica could compete on an equal footing with its archrival Hasselblad who by that time was using Zeiss lenses, each mounted in its own Compur leaf shutter.

rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg - Click image for larger version  Name:	rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg Views:	0 Size:	37.0 KB ID:	4757657
Original Bronica Z of 1959 was swiftly replaced by the (slightly) more reliable Bronica D (DeLuxe) which was nearly identical in specs and appearance.

Nippon Kōgaku (Japan Optical Co. in English) made a huge variety of lenses and optical instruments for, among others, the Japanese Navy before and during WWII, and was adept at producing high quality optics for everything from microscopes to large format cameras. During the early ‘50s they even ventured into producing 75mm f/3.5 Nikkor lenses for top-of-the-line models of the Airesflex and Tower Reflex, both Japanese medium format, 2-1/4 square twin lens reflexes. Nikon continued to produce lenses for focal plane shutter Bronicas from 1958-1972 turning out over 2 dozen different types ranging from an ultra-wide 30mm f/4 to a gargantuan 1200mm f/11 super telephoto. Then they stopped, and Bronica was compelled to find other sources for lenses of comparable quality and prestige—not an easy task considering that the exceptional performance and acclaim of Nikon lenses was one of the chief attractions of the Bronica line.

Zenzaburō Yoshino was a camera super fan without a camera factory and apparently with little or no photo industry experience. How he managed to convince Nikon to produce his lenses and take part in his risky business venture is pretty much an unanswered question in U.S. photo literature. Yoshino takes on the look of a successful Walter Mitty dreamer that somehow succeeded against the greatest odds. The Bronica S series was an honest attempt to produce the best 6x6 film SLR. Kudos to dreamers everywhere!

But why did Nikon stop making Bronica lenses and what exactly happened afterwards? It’s a fascinating story with many still unresolved questions but we’ll do our best to provide as accurate an account as possible and to dispel at least some of the enduring myths.

Specific references to Nikon’s exit from its longstanding arrangement with Bronica are rather thin on the ground and those that do exist are often misleading and tantalizingly incomplete. To quote from Camera-Wiki’s excerpt on the Bronica EC of 1972, “The most common lens often bundled (with the EC) is the 75mm Nikkor f/2.8, but problems with Nikon forced Bronica to consider other options so they decided to start manufacturing their own lenses. Bronica still needed a (normal) lens quick (so) the lens changed over to one marked ‘80mm f/2.8 Zenzanon by Carl Zeiss Jena DDR’ that was based on a Biometar type design.” A second published article on focal plane shutter Bronicas states that “Nikon decided not to manufacture lenses for Bronica, so the company decided to produce their own optics under the brand name Zenzanon. The situation led Bronica to have a very limited supply of the standard 75mm f/2.8 Nikkor lens when they were to announce their newer Bronica EC series of cameras. Alternatives were needed and an 80mm f/2.8 MC Zenzanon by Carl Zeiss Jena DDR was produced. A variety of different Zenzanon branded focal length lenses were made as the supply of Nikkors decreased.”

rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg - Click image for larger version  Name:	rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg Views:	0 Size:	37.0 KB ID:	4757657

80mm f/2.8 Zenzanon MC by Carl Zeiss Jena DDR was one of the first Zenzanon lenses. it's, rare, exceptional and priced accordingly.

Well, there certainly was an 80mm f/2.8 MC Zenzanon by Carl Zeiss Jena DDR in Bronica mount, it was multicoated (hence the MC), and it was an outstanding lens based on the iconic 80mm f/2.8 Biometar originally designed for the Pentacon 6. However, its barrel, mount, helical, control rings etc. look the same as those on previous Bronica Nikkor lenses, suggesting that either Carl Zeiss Jena supplied the optical components that were then assembled by Bronica in Japan, or that Bronica sent the mechanical components to East Germany for final assembly. Indeed, it’s doubtful that any Zenzanon branded lenses made prior to those for the SQ- and ETR-series Bronicas were actually “produced” or “made” entirely by Bronica—at very least the optical components were furnished by such leading companies as Tokyo Optical Co. (Topcon), Carl Zeiss Jena, and (in the case of the 150mm f/3.5 Zenzanon and possibly others) by Norita, which was founded by an ex-Tokyo Optical Co. employee. In short, in the focal plane shutter Bronica era, Zenzanon was largely a marketing name, though it’s entirely possible that Bronica had some input in setting the specs.

rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg - Click image for larger version  Name:	rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg Views:	26 Size:	17.6 KB ID:	4757659

80mm f/2.4 Zenzanon optical diagram shows its 6-element, 5-group design. Said to be the fastest Bronica lens, it's outstanding, uncommon. and pricey.

The other longstanding myth enshrined in the comments quoted above is that Nikon suddenly cut off the supply of Nikon/Nikkor lenses to poor little Bronica just as it was introducing the revolutionary EC with electronically controlled focal plane shutter in 1972 and that they had to scramble for an instant solution. In fact, Bronica had been acutely aware of the need for robust, high-quality alternatives to Nikkor lenses for quite some time, and there’s reason to believe that the “sudden split” was a long time coming. Proof of this can be found in the impressive lens list at the end of the Bronica S2A manual of 1969, which includes, along with 10 Nikkors ranging from a 40mm f/4 to a 1200mm f/11, no less than 4 Zenzanon lenses, the 80mm f/2.4, 100mm f/2.8, 150mm f/3.5, and the ponderous 300mm f/4.5. This establishes that Bronica was well on its way to optical independence at least 3 years before Nikon supposedly picked up its marbles and abruptly departed.

rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg - Click image for larger version  Name:	rs=w:1440,h:1440.jpg Views:	26 Size:	17.6 KB ID:	4757659

Late black Bronica S2A with the superb 100mm f/2.8 Zenzanon that was included in the lens list in the S2A instruction manual of 1969.

Some knowledgeable photo historians have conjectured that Nikon really parted with Bronica so they could concentrate all their energies into designing and producing lenses for their wildly successful Nikon F series and its many 35mm SLR progeny. This idea seems plausible but it’s refuted by the fact that Nikon kept on designing and making lenses for other niche markets such as large format view camera lenses, and in the mid ‘70s even designed and produced the superb 80mm f/2.8 Nikkor lens used in the cool new modern version of the folding Plaubel Makina that was marketed in Japan by DOI.

So, what was the real reason behind Nikon’s final and complete breakup with Bronica? According to those in the know, who are now mostly deceased and spoke off the record, it probably came down to money. While both parties knew the relationship was winding down, what caused the sudden rift was that Bronica simply wasn’t paying its bills, and Nikon pulled the plug. Why did Bronica renege on its obligations to Nikon? Although the then current Bronica S2A was, by far the most successful model the company had ever produced, development and tooling costs for the radically new Bronica EC must have been enormous, putting a financial strain on the company. At this point the details, such as the time frame or how much money was involved, must remain a mystery, but the happy result is that out of this debacle sprang an extensive line of exquisite Zenzanon lenses, among the finest medium format SLR lenses ever made. We’ll cover them all in detail in the next installments.
 
Thanks, Jason, very interesting. My used S2A came with the 80/2.4 Zenzanon, and it's a wonderful lens. I will interested to know the maker of the lens. Certainly if it's Tokyo Optical or CZJ, those are two top notch makers.
 
The 80/2.4 is indeed a very special lens. I would still be a 'Buroni' user if an SL66 hadn't come my way for a price I couldn't resist. I love focal plane medium format cameras
 
I would love an SL66, particularly one of the older ones. Krikor Marelian (Krimar Photo, now retired I guess) told me they're hard to service. I figured he would know! Do you have a repair person for yours?
 
I'd always felt (based on outside advice) that I had dodged a bullet not buying an S2A back in the early 80s, by putting it off for a year I was able to afford a Hasselblad 500c. I was intrigued by the Nikkor lenses on the Bronica and the whole package looked sexy. I still see great work being done on the SQ and GS series but thats a different kettle of fish. The Nikkor on my Plaubel 67 was also superb. . .when the rangefinder worked (which wasn't often).
 
I would love an SL66, particularly one of the older ones. Krikor Marelian (Krimar Photo, now retired I guess) told me they're hard to service. I figured he would know! Do you have a repair person for yours?

I owned three of the non meter ones for my commercial photo business. I bought two used and one new. It’s hard to estimate but guessing I’d say I put 35,000 rolls through them over the nearly 30 years I used them. Needless to say the lenses are fantastic and they’re mechanically superb.

Through all that use I only had two repairs on a body. One of the older bodies had a curtain ribbon break and the other older one locked up. Jimmy Koh serviced them for me and always did a first rate job.

The body that locked up was a problem. Jimmy took it apart and didn’t find any issue but on reassembly it was still locked. He disassembled it again and reassembled it and this time it functioned perfectly. He never figured out what was wrong.

Jimmy has retired from repairs and to my understanding he was once the head of Bronica service and was Rollei trained. Jimmy said the SL66 was the most complex SLR ever built.

The only reason I sold them was when digital came in. I couldn’t use a digital back on it so I sold the 3 bodies, 7 backs, 2 polaroid backs and 8 lenses.

The only other issues during the time I owned them was backs needed rebuilt about every couple years due to the base of film getting thicker. Hasselblad backs also suffered the same issue. Of course in two years that represented a thousand or more rolls through each back.

I also had 2 issues with lenses. Both aperture related on my 30 Fisheye and my 150. Both were simple fixed. One was a broken pin and the other a set screw came lose.

They were, IMO, the most advanced and must rugged medium format SLR’s ever built.
 
Okay, as long as we're talking Bronica... can anyone resolve once and for all the question of how to tell an S2 from an S2A? I've heard that all gray-leatherette versions are S2s, and I've heard there's a serial-number cutoff that may or may not mark the dividing line.

I'd like to know this for sure in case nostalgia overtakes me and I try to re-acquire a replacement for the nice S2A outfit I used to have. I remember from reading photo magazines "back in the day" that the S2A resolved the S2's problems with failed winding gears by nitriding (hardening) the gear train and switching the locking pawl from one that locked on a single tooth to one that locked on three teeth... which seem like sufficiently worthwhile improvements to make it worth trying to find an S2A...
 
I entered here, very excited, because, as a Bronica-fan the topic fascinates me. However I feel not everything was covered.

There were some rumors (on forums) that said that the problems with the unreliable focusing screen positioning on the Bronica SLRs (previous to the EC line) was a source of arguments with the Nippon Kogaku people, who feared their reputation would be tarnished (by users complaining of unsharp pictures where the optics wasn't at fault).

Some other people suggest half-hearted optical efforts such as the Nikkor-Q 135/3.5 as a source of arguments between Bronica and Nippon Kogaku...
 
Back
Top Bottom