laptoprob
back to basics
Vl
Vl
it was too obvious: Vergütete Linsen: Coated Lenses.
This also explains why on early models there is no 'VL' marking.
Vl
it was too obvious: Vergütete Linsen: Coated Lenses.
This also explains why on early models there is no 'VL' marking.
Hacker
黑客
What about 5cm vs the 50mm usage?
laptoprob
back to basics
Don't know, Stephen. The 5cm one may be an early one. Do you know the numbers? Mine is a non-VL, doesn't look coated to me. No colour shine like the ' VL' pic you posted earlier. Mine has 9884xx.
dberger
Established
My 50mm Quinon does not have the 'VL', but is coated. The lens is too clear (i.e., not enough reflections off the front), too contrasty, and was made at a time when lens coating was already ubiquitous.
Perhaps, if 'VL' does denote a coated lens, Steinheil just stopped marking lenses as such when there was no longer a marketing benefit to having the mark. Other optical houses did this.
Then again, who knows?
Cheers,
David
Hacker
黑客
Mine is #9886xx. No VL and 5cm.
Hacker
黑客
Using the Quinon for the very first time today:
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
Wow! Those photos are gorgeous! Nice work, great lenses you've got there. I assume the rangefinder lurkers will now start driving up the price of this lens, eh?
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
laptoprob
back to basics
You know what's even more amazing? Tha Quinon is coupled down to 60cm. Further than most cameras can follow. Only gripe is the focus is the wrong way around compared to all other Leica (-fit) lenses.
The Rigid Nikkor's focus down to 18". You have to cut out part of the threads to use with an M-Mount camera to follow to 0.7m. Roland did that with his Nikkor.
xoDox
Member
For whatever reason a Russian lens 3K 5cm f1.5 didn’t make to the list. It’s an intermediary lens between Carl Zeiss Sonnar and Jupiter-3 and was made in late 40s. My example is dated 1948 and it’s number #000574. Russian 3K stands for Sonnar Krasnogorsk as far as I know. The lens looks a bit different from the true Zeiss Sonnar and much different from Jupiter-3. The rumors are that all 3Ks were made from the German glass. It draws exactly as Sonnar Zeiss 5cm f1.5. Here is a picture made with the post-war veteran.
Attachments
ferider
Mentor
If you want to add the ZK 50/1.5 (which makes sense, IMO; I had one and gave it away for Xmas), you should add the ZK 85/2, as well. Rumour is that not only were these lenses assembled from original Zeiss pieces, but on original Zeiss equipment and in parts by original Zeiss employees - just not in Germany. Similar but different to a Jupiter 9. I still have mine 
, see here: http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/1321319_zxHjn.
Cheers,
Roland.
, see here: http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/1321319_zxHjn.Cheers,
Roland.
Last edited:
Hacker
黑客
The Tanar couples down to 45cm....
ampguy
Mentor
Although an SLR lens, the early versions of the F mount Nikon 105/2.5 was a Sonnar design, later changed to modern design. Currently the best lens available for portraits, if the PC coated MF non AI version.
Recently, I was asked to work on some very unusual 5cm F1.5 Sonnar lenses. They run from an original German lens, to one that is German- but looks like it was assembled for practice, down to just "strange!".
They are all Sonnars.
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=224
Test shots with each of the Five mystery Sonnars. One shot from each at F1.5 and F4.
http://www.ziforums.com/album.php?albumid=114
They all focus NOW. None of them did before.
They are all Sonnars.
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=224
Test shots with each of the Five mystery Sonnars. One shot from each at F1.5 and F4.
http://www.ziforums.com/album.php?albumid=114
They all focus NOW. None of them did before.
ampguy
Mentor
but ...
but ...
were they designed to focus?
I would venture that in some cases, not perfectly.
but ...
were they designed to focus?
I would venture that in some cases, not perfectly.
That is good and useful information.
The lenses were complete, and had helicals. some looked like practice lenses- as in one without a distance scale engraved on the focus ring, and optics module frozen into place. The focus was WAY off and the only way to correct it was to polish the Cam down so that the RF agreed with the actual focus. A couple had misassembled helicals. I had to leave the near-focus stop screw out once they were assembled to focus properly. So- they focus a little bit closer than 3ft now, maybe to ~2.5ft. One looks like a longer focal length lens in a custom-made barrel. I gave my ultrasonic cleaner a real workout.
after seeing M vs A this weekend- Maybe these lenses are the "Missing Link".
The lenses were complete, and had helicals. some looked like practice lenses- as in one without a distance scale engraved on the focus ring, and optics module frozen into place. The focus was WAY off and the only way to correct it was to polish the Cam down so that the RF agreed with the actual focus. A couple had misassembled helicals. I had to leave the near-focus stop screw out once they were assembled to focus properly. So- they focus a little bit closer than 3ft now, maybe to ~2.5ft. One looks like a longer focal length lens in a custom-made barrel. I gave my ultrasonic cleaner a real workout.
after seeing M vs A this weekend- Maybe these lenses are the "Missing Link".
Last edited:
xoDox
Member
Didn't know that Annual reports could be so funny... or maybe not so funny depending how you read this passage. BTW, I just realized that ZK sounds exactly as a slang word in Russian meaning "a prisoner". I wonder if this is just a coincidence, a black humor or else.
There were four ZK lenses produced by Krasnogorsk plant:
ZK 50/1.5; ZK 50/2; ZK 85/2 and ZK 135/4.
In the old Soviet photography books they stand alone from Jupiter lenses (and they look different)! Being quite similar to German made Sonnars, there are lots of small differences in engravings of numbers, "m" vs. "M", size of red triangle etc. Also, coating of Sonnar is stronger, it is more violet vs. bluish of ZK.
Here are a few pictures of the true Sonnar (on the left) and ZK. The Sonnar underwent a major overhaul recently in the hands of Henry Scherer -- previously the lens didn't focus at all -- he corrected the problem and confirmed its geniuity. The ZK focuses almost perfectly and what's more strange (for the Russian lens) it came with a rear Leica cap. I'm not an expert in rear caps, but it looks it was made in the 40-50s. Now with all these historical reports it looks like the caps were brought to Russia together with lenses in one luggage.
Attachments
xoDox
Member
I rebuilt my wartime 5cm F1.5 Sonnar in that same block, 28588xx. It and my 272 block 5cm F1.5 LTM Sonnar lens both have solid black lines for the aperture index.
285 lens
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=143
272 lens
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=120
On the four CZJ LTM Sonnars that I've worked on, the three key parts of the helicals of the CZJ Sonnars have matching 3-digit or 4-digit serial numbers. You have to take the focus ring off to find them. Any chance that Henry noted yours? It would be interesting to correlate them to the Lens SN. Might give a better idea of how many were actually made in LTM.
AND- it sounds like the Post 1954 J-3's use a different optical prescription than the earlier ones. I'll be testing my 1953 J-3 against the German Sonnars soon.
285 lens
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=143
272 lens
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=120
On the four CZJ LTM Sonnars that I've worked on, the three key parts of the helicals of the CZJ Sonnars have matching 3-digit or 4-digit serial numbers. You have to take the focus ring off to find them. Any chance that Henry noted yours? It would be interesting to correlate them to the Lens SN. Might give a better idea of how many were actually made in LTM.
AND- it sounds like the Post 1954 J-3's use a different optical prescription than the earlier ones. I'll be testing my 1953 J-3 against the German Sonnars soon.
Last edited: