This one is fake - I am 100% sure. Although, it's a good one
😀 .
First, the majority of ginuine ZK 5cm/2 were made collapsible and only a few rigid.
Second, the so-called ears on the aperture ring are tiny here! Most likely, the original aperture ring grip was filed down to make up the ears, but still you can see the step (the leftover from the old grip)- so this job was not done very accurately.
Third (and most important), on the ZK the aperture numbers are engraved in line with the ears (see the right picture of ginuine ZK).
Lastly, I've never heard that ZKs have a "holder" (have no idea of the better word for the thing that stands apart from the lens housing - on the bottom right of picture), but J-8 from the early 50's have it.
I can't speak about bubbles - you need to see the lens. Aslo, coating has a special cast on ZKs and it's different from later J-8.
Unfortunately, I don't have ZK 5cm/2, but I made quite a research on this subject, so you may be sure. The picture of the ginuine ZK 5cm/2 aperture ring is taken from
http://www.dvdtechcameras.com/collect/arsenal/1/k6.htm . The LTM (Zorki) version has exactly the same design of the aperture ring, but I couldn't find a ZK picture of such quality.
Most likely J-8 from the early 50-s was used here to reproduce ZK 5cm/2. I think it's optics is good, but it should be placed in another price category.
Word of warning: don't trust the engravings on the front ring they can be easily faked with the moder equipment.
Any opinions as to whether this purported 50/2 Zonnar Krasnogorsk in LTM is legitimate, or a fake? eBay auction 350190980848. Looks old and beat up, but I am wondering whether the engraving on the front ring looks OK. I am pretty sure that the very early ZKs had the 19-rhombus-48 dating system, but don't have any FSU reference books to look it up. In any case, don't feel like gambling the $200 blindly to get a $50 Jupiter. Nothing against the Jupiters, but I could find one in LTM a lot cheaper than this one.
