why so much money for a ZK J-3?

[xayraa33]

I know that someone here on the forum said that the glass on the early J-3's was Zeiss glass and this stopped by the early 1950s ( was it Brian Sweeney who said this?) , but other than it being a collector's piece,why the high price?
It cannot be that much better than later Jupiter 3's .

http://cgi.ebay.com/ZK-1-5-50-1948-...9QQihZ007QQcategoryZ30063QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

[reagan]

I'm guessing here, but I would think it's just the "ZK" Zagorsk mark... early, early and just not that many around. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but there are also "ZK f3.5, 50mm" collapsibles, right? Like the Industar.22, but again, not many around.

 

[varjag]

You cannot really judge prices on collectible items by their practical value. It is supply and demand, and there is not that much of supply for genuine ZKs. Plenty of fakes around though.

 

[vanyagor]

ZK has nothing to do with Zagorsk. It is an early KMZ lens and it's rare. That explains the price.

 

[darkkavenger]

Like Vanya says, ZK was the designation given to the seized german optics. I've read that it's something like Zonnar Krasnogorski (Note Krasnogorsk as in Krasnogorski Mechaniceski Zavod) (sorry for the loose translation).

 

[Paul T.]

They don't invariably go for a lot of money. I bought one on the 'bay from 1952 or so, for around $90 or $100 - it matched my 1954 Kiev II nicely, but when I got my Opton Sonnar 50/1.5 back from servicing there seemed little point in keeping it, particularly as the 54 Jupiter 8 is pretty good anyway. I sold it on the bay for around £65 sterling, around $120. Sellers from the ex-USSR hold out for high prices on these items - as they should - but they don't always get them.

The history on these lenses is vague. Very few of the lenses are authenticated as having German glass - those that do apparently have Zeiss serial numbers imprinted (not etched by hand) on the mounting collar of the rear lens group. Mine had Zorki, not Zeiss, glass.

For all that, though, I would still like to get an early Zorki Sonnar collapsible, but i guess i might have to settle for that cheaper, second-best, German equivalent! In the meantime, I still find myselft wondering about the history of the early Knebs that turn up on the 'Bay. The real price of a Contax in the 30s was humungous, and I imagine you would have to be extremely well-connected to earn a nice early camera like the one shown below, by the same seller (it still has the Contax-style focusing wheel).

http://hosting.westernbid.info/images/uploads/leon1965jazz/k491.jpg

 

[varjag]

Very few of the lenses are authenticated as having German glass - those that do apparently have Zeiss serial numbers imprinted (not etched by hand) on the mounting collar of the rear lens group. Mine had Zorki, not Zeiss, glass.

According to KMZ website, all early J-3s (and certainly ZKs) were made from deposits of Schott glass. In 1954 the lenses were recomputed for Soviet own glass nomenclature, since the German stock ran out.

 

[Paul T.]

You could be right, there are many different stories floating around. According to Marc Small, serial numbers were allocated for the Zeiss-made lens elements, and only lenses with these numbers can definitely be said to use glass from the Zeiss factory. Not all of them have them, by any means. My ZK was, if memory serves, from 1952. It was authentic, but the serial number, which was hand-written on the rear lens elements, indicated that the lens elements were of Soviet, and not of Zeiss manufacture. However, it's interesting to know that although the lenses weren't made in Germany, the glass itself may well have come from Schott.

 

[varjag]

Yep, I didn't imply the actual lenses were done in Germany, rather the glass sources.

The page here (in Russian, sorry) names M.D. Maltsev of KMZ responsible for recomputation of the lens in 1954. It also says that "as a part of war reparations for restoration of the ruined industry, USSR has secured Schott technology and equipment, along with various materials including optical glass", which lasted until that date.

 

[Plasmat]

Almost every one on eBay in the last year or two are fakes. The Russian and Ukrainian forgers have discovered that changing an ordinary Jupiter into a "ZK" quadruples the value.

Look carefully, the markings are too new and perfect.

 

[Paul T.]

Nice lenses, Roland. I was hoping that Johnny Luk's adapter would allow me to use my Opton 50/1.5 and early Jupiter 9 on my R-D1 and M4, but sadly it's out of register.

incidentally, I should have pointed out that my $120 ZK was for the Kiev, not LTM. But I still think that these lenses have a 'select' following, and that if it's a genuine auction rather than BIN, they do drop up for less, as long as you're sure it's the real thing.

 

[reagan]

ZK has nothing to do with Zagorsk.

Thanks Ivan. That was purely a guess on my part and can't remember what brought me to that conclusion.

I've read that it's something like Zonnar Krasnogorski...

Interesting stuff, eh? Anybody got any links concerning ZK's? It would be some good info for the RLDB.

Thanks guys!

 

[vanyagor]

Anybody got any links concerning ZK's? It would be some good info for the RLDB.

Thanks guys!

Most lenses produced by KMZ and its associates are listed here:

http://www.zenitcamera.com/catalog/lenseslist.html

It is in russian, so it's a good reason to learn it 😉

A few more links you can find on that same webpage:

lenses of 1949:

http://www.zenitcamera.com/catalog/catalog-lenses-1949.html

amazing link, it contains the photocopy if the pages from a book, single copy of which was released at KMZ

Some info is here too:
http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/feday-about-lenses.html

 

[xayraa33]

Most lenses produced by KMZ and its associates are listed here:

http://www.zenitcamera.com/catalog/lenseslist.html

It is in russian, so it's a good reason to learn it 😉

A few more links you can find on that same webpage:

lenses of 1949:

http://www.zenitcamera.com/catalog/catalog-lenses-1949.html

amazing link, it contains the photocopy if the pages from a book, single copy of which was released at KMZ

Some info is here too:
http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/feday-about-lenses.html

very cool sites.
need to learn to read Russian though.

 

[Krosya]

I have a 50/2 ZK lens in LTM, thats real and in good condition. I had to lube focus a bit to make it smoother. Mine is from 1948 and from what I read - ones from 47-48 were built using Zeiss glass. I don't know if it true or not, but if I had to judge by it's performance - it sure looks like it. It delivers very good results.