1953 and 1954 J-3s

dexdog

dexdog

Mentor
Local time
6:20 PM
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
3,282
I have been using/collecting KMZ J-3 lenses in LTM for the last 15 years or so, and currently own 8 or 9 of them. Yeah, not near as many as some RFF folks, but still a good sample ;).
I have J-3s from 1950, 1951, 1952, 1955 and 1956. Scrolling through eBay since 2005, I recall seeing very few J-3s produced in 1953 or 1954 (i mighta seen a 1953 once, but don't recall for certain). I have J-8s made in 1953 and 1954, and they are commonly found on eBay. I would be interested to know if others on RFF have seen or own 53 and 54 J-3s, and how common they might be.
 
One of our members whom I haven't seen for a while (on here) has a 1954 J-3. He got two J-3s from Brian (a 1954 and a 1957) and sold the 57 to me (for cheap, thanks Jan). He kept the 54 because it had Zeiss in it. I can't remember his RFF name....perhaps pedersen or jpedersen or janp or maybe Jan Pedersen? Anyway, Jan has the lens, Brian had it at some point. At least one 1954 J-3 exists.
 
I kinda figured that KMZ was producing lenses in those years, it is just that I don't remember seeing many on eBay. Of course KMZ J-3s in general were turning up less frequently in the last couple of years
 
I have a '51 KMZ. Brian seems to think it is Zeiss from indications he can identify. It is an OK lens but not my best. I have to use it more often to get a better idea of just how well, or poorly, it works. But all in all I think the KMZ Jupiters can be really good lenses. But exercise caution on eBay.
 
I have seen several 1953 J-3's, and they were some of the best ever.
I had one 1954 J-3, and did sell it. It required some work. It's been a while since I've seen one on Ebay.
1954 is the first year that the version 2 J-3 was produced using Russian Glass. The supply of Schott glass was probably getting low, and KMZ wanted to have a replacement. The production ran in parallel through early 1956. I have a v1 1956 KMZ and three V2 1956 KMZ and a V2 1955 KMZ. The v1 is better- not as much field curvature, closer to the wartime Sonnar lenses.
 
Thanks. How does one distinguish the various 1956 versions, are serial numbers helpful? I have a couple of 56s, one is 03857 and other is 04246. Both are good lenses with pristine glass, although I think that the later one is a bit sharper. I was thinking I should branch out and get a 1957 ZOMZ so that I can have a J-3 from the year I was born.
 
Mine is clean from 56. Shimmed between FED-2 and Leicas. After receiving of 50 1.8 Canon as Helen's gift I sold my last Cron.

I don't understand the hoarding of same lens copies. And if you have J3 here is no point to have J8.
With limiting amount of lenses like this, it is kind to hold into less to have more been able to use them.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Mine is clean from 56. Shimmed between FED-2 and Leicas. After receiving of 50 1.8 Canon as Helen's gift I sold my last Cron.

I don't understand the hoarding of same lens copies. And if you have J3 here is no point to have J8.
With limiting amount of lenses like this, it is kind to hold into less to have more been able to use them.
Click to expand...

You will find that most J-3's vary greatly in quality from one to another. Finding a clean one is hard, and finding a clean one that is a top performer is even more difficult.
After going through hundreds of J-3's, and "a lot" of J-8s, I have some of the best ever made. As far as holding on to them- they used to sell for $50. All of the J-3's and J-8's that I have were rebuilt by me. Many were unusable until taking them apart and rebuilding them. I prefer the ones that were unusable when I got them, as the glass is usually perfect- because the lens could not be used for photography. I had to adjust the spacing of the optical groups in both 1950 KMZ J-3's that I have. Both have Zeiss serial numbers. They were used for assembly practice, one had sewing thread holding it in the mount. As good as the Wartime Sonnar now.

It's been a long time since I sold one, but I have given several away. ZOMZ- given away, Valdai usable for Parts, and the "K" in KMZ stands for Keeper. Those- I have sold some, but not in a long time. I sold the 1954 J-3 to help fund the M Monochrom. I paid for most of the M9 and M Monochrom by converting Sonnars to Leica mount and selling for $300 to $500. They are closer to $1000 now.
 
At one time about a decade ago I had a J-3 from 1953 that I sold on RFF to a fellow member who was located on Iceland.
I may have had another example from 1954 but it may have been a Jupiter-8, I'm not sure.

Currently I do however own a 1953 Jupiter-12, 35mm 2.8 lens.
I use it on the early Leica II in conjunction with a very early (under 400 serial number) KMZ turret viewfinder. It's an identical version from the (Contax) Zeiss Ikon viewfinder. It is painted in military green.
 
boojum said:
I have a '51 KMZ. Brian seems to think it is Zeiss from indications he can identify. It is an OK lens but not my best. I have to use it more often to get a better idea of just how well, or poorly, it works. But all in all I think the KMZ Jupiters can be really good lenses. But exercise caution on eBay.
Click to expand...

Oops, the "J3" I have is a J12. If this keeps up they won't let me out of the home anymore. Sorry.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/334550537072

1948 ZK 5cm F1.5 above, looks authentic. But mine is perfect, this one in the Auction has a damaged filter ring and scratched glass.
Click to expand...

Brian, I think that you are being too kind concerning the condition of the glass... I would call it a wreck. The damaged filter rings might be fixable, but I maybe not. The really fine threads on these lenses are difficult to shove back into shape even with proper tools. I have had about 50% success rate on these things,
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Mine is clean from 56. Shimmed between FED-2 and Leicas. After receiving of 50 1.8 Canon as Helen's gift I sold my last Cron.

I don't understand the hoarding of same lens copies. And if you have J3 here is no point to have J8.
With limiting amount of lenses like this, it is kind to hold into less to have more been able to use them.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons for hanging onto these lenses is that I don't wanna go through the hassle of selling and mailing them. eBay fees are close to 20%, and mailing them after waiting in line for 45 minutes at USPS is a PITA. I have not sold a lens on eBay since 2012, but have given away 20 or so to relatives, friends or other people that were most likely to put them to good use. I have recently given away a couple of Canon APS-C SLR digital cameras and lenses for the same reason
 
Sonnar Brian said:
The only way to tell the difference is to unscrew the fixture for the rear triplet.
Click to expand...

Easily done in most cases, but what are does one look for? I can unscrew my later 1956 lens, but serial number 5603857 is apparently "unscrewable" and I don't wanna force it because it is very usable as is on my Sony a7iii.
 


The V2 KMZ has the guide ring on the rear fixture like the ZOMZ. BUT- it has a different wall thickness.

The V1- different threads, no guide ring. The latest KMZ V1 I've seen is a 1956 with low 3-digit SN.

 
dexdog said:
One of the reasons for hanging onto these lenses is that I don't wanna go through the hassle of selling and mailing them. eBay fees are close to 20%, and mailing them after waiting in line for 45 minutes at USPS is a PITA. I have not sold a lens on eBay since 2012, but have given away 20 or so to relatives, friends or other people that were most likely to put them to good use. I have recently given away a couple of Canon APS-C SLR digital cameras and lenses for the same reason
Click to expand...

I ship often using USPS online. There I buy and print my labels and request a pick-up. The next day the packages are picked up next to my front door. I rarely need to go to the post office anymore.

As far as selling, I am considering trying this forum but don't know much about using the sales section yet.
 
dexdog said:
One of the reasons for hanging onto these lenses is that I don't wanna go through the hassle of selling and mailing them. eBay fees are close to 20%, and mailing them after waiting in line for 45 minutes at USPS is a PITA. I have not sold a lens on eBay since 2012, but have given away 20 or so to relatives, friends or other people that were most likely to put them to good use. I have recently given away a couple of Canon APS-C SLR digital cameras and lenses for the same reason
Click to expand...

I don't want to break you of tthis habit of giving things away, but: did you know that you can ask the Post Office to pick up your packages for mailing? If you use Ebay or some other service that will generate the label for you, this is such a simple way to ship. When I used to auction, I tried to make everything finish at the same time so one trip to the post office. When I discovered this pickup service, I switched to fixed price selling on Ebay. Pretty simple overall. Yes, still 20% overhead. But, that's actually not bad compared to running a store.

Mike
 
The real problem with Ebay for small/private individuals selling, "The Buyer is always Right" attitude. Too much fraud on the part of buyers. Second problem with selling- International Shipping has gone up in price dramatically and requires much more time and effort to do.
Easier to find a shop that will sell on consignment, or a professional Ebay seller that will sell on consignment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top