Uncommon, Rare, and Collector's Delights.

boojum said:
I have no doubt that you know how eBay works. This was not a critical comment. I was just saying that the seller could come around for another bite at the apple, a smaller apple next time.
Click to expand...

No offense taken. My point is just that it would make more sense for the seller to set a reasonable minimum & have an "ambitious" Buy-It-Now price instead of having such an arbitrarily high starting bid.

But who knows, maybe he'll be vindicated & it will find a buyer even w/that starting bid.
 
Ebay used to be the alternative to overpriced stores. Now all the stores are on ebay.

There are some items that I know have been on ebay for five or more years. The stores, not knowing what to make of supply and demand, never lower their prices. It's just like back in the bad old days when you could walk into a camera shop and see the same items on the shelf that had been there a decade ago.
 
dexdog said:
Not a particularly rare lens, this one is interesting because of some extra engraving. A black and nickel 13.5cm f 4 Sonnar, engraved "For China" in addition to the usual "Made in Germany". This lens also has engraved Chinese text that translates as "German Made". Someone on RFF translated the Chinese for me about 10 years ago, and explained that it was composed in an old fashion style of characters. Part of a batch of 200 such lenses completed October 23, 1934.




This thread is giving my SmugMug account quite the workout!
Click to expand...

Sorry, just seeing this now. I think the historical background to these lenses was the brief period between 1933 & 1937 when Nazi Germany was assisting the Republic of China, including military modernization (my grandfather was 1 of the Nationalist officers on the receiving end), in return for raw materials from China & favorable access to the Chinese market for German exports. Sort of the flip-side to the later cameras & lenses marked "For [the Japanese puppet state] Manchukuo [recognized by Germany in 1938]".
 
dexdog said:
This got delivered today, and I need to blow off some dust, obviously. A CZJ 85/2 in Contax mount, part of a batch of 500 lenses completed August 30, 1937. This is one of the earlier versions of this lens, only stops down to f 16, instead of f 22 as in later lenses. Kinda hard to get a good pic of it in poor light, but the front element of this lens is coated, even though the name ring does not have the red "T". I think that other lens surfaces near the nose of the lens may be coated too. Rear element is not coated. I have been looking for a nice clean example of this lens for a while now, and this one has "perfect" glass to borrow a Sonnar Brian term.


Click to expand...

God, that is a pretty lens!
 
As I noted in post #245 in this thread: I weighed the Chrome CZJ and Nikkor. The CZJ weighs 600 grams, while the Nikkor weighs a mere 495 grams. I have used both on a Sony a7III, and for some reason the heavier CZJ lens feels a bit less nose-heavy than the Nikkor, which weighs less and is shorter, possibly because the longer CZJ lens affords a better hand hold.
 
The "old" lenses are almost an addiction. Well, maybe not "almost." They can easily be rationalized by the wonderful images they provide. I was just looking at an image of crab pots and boats I took with a CV 35mm 1.4 Nokton II. Good lens, accurate and sharp but a cold lens without what I prefer to see in an image, some "warmth." Yes, I know those intangibles are a crappy way to speak of lenses and open me for derision but the older lenses have that effect on me. No, I have not done a double-blind test.

A case in point was that I did some quick lunchtime portraits of a friend with a not too recent Canon 50mm LTM f/1.8 and a '57 KMZ Jupiter 8. The J8 was more accurate in color and the Canon gave the portrait subject Rosacea which was not true. The Canon is a good old lens. But that Jupiter bested it in this instance on an M9 which does color pretty well. This one had the board and sensor upgraded by Wetzlar. I've four focal length KMZ Jupiters now and like them all. I have to be more aware of them compared to other lenses, the Jupiters, but so far I keep liking them more and more. And I am quite hopeful for the Amotal which is arriving tomorrow. My J8's are away for CLA's so I will have to compare it to the Canon 1.8.

I am avoiding the old Zeiss lenses as that would be opening another can of worms. I will content myself with the Soviet copies. The old pre-war (WW II) Zeiss is beautiful with images to match but the gap between need and want is huge. But so tempting. I suppose it is safe to "just look." ;o)
 
boojum said:
The "old" lenses are almost an addiction. Well, maybe not "almost."
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would delete the almost. I rarely use 50s for general photography, prefer 35mm, but have a lot of vintage 50s on hand. Current favorite is the Fujinon 5cm f2.
 
dexdog said:
Yeah, I would delete the almost. I rarely use 50s for general photography, prefer 35mm, but have a lot of vintage 50s on hand. Current favorite is the Fujinon 5cm f2.
Click to expand...

I am really fond of the '57 KMZ J8 but have just gotten a '51 KMZ J12. That 35 and the Canon LTM f/2.0 are nice lenses. The CV 35 f/1.4 N II is good at everything but warmth. The 2" Amotal was a "must buy" just from what I have seen of the images. I shopped for months before I found a US one in great shape from a high approval seller. Flickr search Amotal in pictures and be dazzled. Well, I was. You might yawn.

I have come to like the older lenses. Are they more "film like" or more color solid or less glaring or what? They please me more than the excellent lenses currently being sold as good as they are. It could also be that I am just a cranky old fart, too.
 
furcafe said:
But very heavy, matched (or exceeded) by only the chrome 8.5cm/2 Nikkor-P in Nikon RF or Contax mount which was based on it.
Click to expand...

I have some of the Nikkors which are of course based on the Zeiss models. Though not the 85mm lens. At this time I have the 105mm f2.5, the 135mm f3.5 (chrome) and the 135mm f3.5 black and chrome. All are heavy and beautiful to behold.
 
peterm1 said:
I have some of the Nikkors which are of course based on the Zeiss models. Though not the 85mm lens. At this time I have the 105mm f2.5, the 135mm f3.5 (chrome) and the 135mm f3.5 black and chrome. All are heavy and beautiful to behold.
Click to expand...

Just like Peter's lenses, I have the Nikon 105/2.5 and the 135/3.5 but I also have the 85/2 from Roland (Ferider).
 
dexdog said:
Yes, there are several accounts on Flickr that show off the qualities of the Amotal. All are better photographers than I am.
Click to expand...

Same f'ing problem here. If i could only purchase my way to glory. But skip the accounts with the scan of photos.

So many Amotals seem to be in and around Hong Kong. I theorize that cameras go well in the crowded and busy town where there is the money for the electro-mechanical toys we so enjoy. Confined spaces make small important. Cameras and photography are a natural of conspicuous consumption and art. And the competition has to be keen where the slightest advantage is pursued, hence the prized old lenses, valued like a prized old vintage.

Digital photography had to expand that with the elimination of film processing and printing. And as Hong King never, ever seems to sleep you can step out onto the street any time of day or night and see great color and action. The food is great, too. You know those Cantonese, "Yamcha!"

Added later: I am paging through the scan of Amotals on Flickr and one person, Brunnhilde Life, has many good photos. The light is almost always good while the focus is not. Some really good ones are out of focus while the color, light and composition are good. I think there is a lesson there.
 
dexdog said:
As I noted in post #245 in this thread: I weighed the Chrome CZJ and Nikkor. The CZJ weighs 600 grams, while the Nikkor weighs a mere 495 grams. I have used both on a Sony a7III, and for some reason the heavier CZJ lens feels a bit less nose-heavy than the Nikkor, which weighs less and is shorter, possibly because the longer CZJ lens affords a better hand hold.
Click to expand...

Ha, I couldn't find that post (the software for this site is, shall we say, "less than ideal" for browsing long threads like this 1 😉) & couldn't remember which 1 was heavier! My CZJ is bit older than yours (2139387) & I've used it on occasion as a portrait lens on my a9. I had the LTM version of the chrome Nikkor-P, but sold it to a friend since I already have the lighter black Nikon RF version which is actually more versatile for me because I can use it on my Nikons in addition to my Leicas or Sony.
 
i have used both an a Sony a7III, and in a blind test would not be able one from the other consistently ( I had a friend take pictures with both lenses without telling me which lens was which), although I think that the Nikkor may produce slightly warmer/red shifted colors. Both are great lenses.
 
peterm1 said:
I have some of the Nikkors which are of course based on the Zeiss models. Though not the 85mm lens. At this time I have the 105mm f2.5, the 135mm f3.5 (chrome) and the 135mm f3.5 black and chrome. All are heavy and beautiful to behold.
Click to expand...

I have the Nikkor 8.5cm and 105 cm Nikkors in Contax mount and the 8.5cm and 13.5 cm in Nikon RF mount. Beautiful lenses all
 
dexdog said:
Yeah, I would delete the almost. I rarely use 50s for general photography, prefer 35mm, but have a lot of vintage 50s on hand. Current favorite is the Fujinon 5cm f2.
Click to expand...


Somewhat of a coincidence you should say that, as after losing a buying opportunity in the last 3 seconds on Ebay, for the much rarer Topcor 5cm/F1.8, usually sold with the Leotax G, I decided to give the Fujinon a go. Have used this lens sparingly on a couple other Leotax's and look forward to putting my first roll through my latest "Bucket List" acquisition.


My Real Leo G.jpg
 
The Cooke Amotal arrived today. I have been running around the area trying to find sunlight and color at the same time. The Rhododendrons are in bloom here and there are many folks who have the bushes. I'll try not to bore you too terribly much with the Cooke color and light but here are some blooming Rhodies over at Fort Columbia, across the river from me.


Amotal 01.JPG​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom