Thypoch lenses from China

Archiver said:
So I guess 'not buying a lens for eight months' ended today. Sorry to hear you fell off the wagon again. :LOL:
Click to expand...

The lens referred to moved in here some months ago. Maybe eight. ;o) It's a peach, a real gem. A 1941 CZJ f/1.5 5cm. Restored to former glory by the lens wizard. It's a honey. Herr Bertele had a touch with lenses and his Sonnar design is still around a century later. That is what I call staying power.

 
I was told that one went for $2K in Europe. I spent around 10 hours doing the CLA and conversions. I used to charge $25 and left over parts for doing this for RFF members. One way to build up spare parts and shims. Prices of J-3's and Sonnars are way up. My favorite 5cm F1.5 Sonnar is from 1934, and put it in a Black J-3 focus mount. I spent $70 on it- Ebay, was an absolute mess when received. The glass looked like wax paper, as shown on the auction and explained why no one else bid on it. RIMG0024.jpgsonnar_1607_3.jpgL1016552.jpg
Zeiss changed the formula after the 16xxxxx block. Probably better edge-to-edge, but the older formula is center-sharp and seems to render a deeper color.

More than 10 hours on that one. Skyllaney is the place to go for having these conversions done professionally.
Skyllaney chose to use the 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar as the basis for the Bertele Sonnar. The 5cm F2 used soft glass for the front element, and most have damage. The 5cm F1.5 has hard glass, much easier to find a really clean example. Internal haze- cleans off, but be careful not to remove the Bloom of the lens.

I've kept 8 of my 5cm F1.5 conversions- a pair from the 1607 batch made within 100 of each other, material and finish changed. 190x batch- made within 100 of each other, one coated the other uncoated. Test batch of coating the optics in 1936. 255x batch- one coated "T", the other uncoated. And a 267x batch- alloy construction, but before the optics were reformulated. (EDIT) 175x batch: mine has a coated front element, I've seen one other from this batch also with coated front element. Three original LTM Sonnars. Chrome nose, black nose, and "transition" lens.
 
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian said:
I was told that one went for $2K in Europe. I spent around 10 hours doing the CLA and conversions. I used to charge $25 and left over parts for doing this for RFF members. One way to build up spare parts and shims. Prices of J-3's and Sonnars are way up. My favorite 5cm F1.5 Sonnar is from 1934, and put it in a Black J-3 focus mount. I spent $70 on it- Ebay, was an absolute mess when received. The glass looked like wax paper, as shown on the auction and explained why no one else bid on it. View attachment 4832363
Zeiss changed the formula after the 16xxxxx block. Probably better edge-to-edge, but the older formula is center-sharp and seems to render a deeper color.

More than 10 hours on that one. Skyllaney is the place to go for having these conversions done professionally.
Skyllaney chose to use the 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar as the basis for the Bertele Sonnar. The 5cm F2 used soft glass for the front element, and most have damage. The 5cm F1.5 has hard glass, much easier to find a really clean example. Internal haze- cleans off, but be careful not to remove the Bloom of the lens.

I've kept 7 of my 5cm F1.5 conversions- a pair from the 1607 batch made within 100 of each other, material and finish changed. 190x batch- made within 100 of each other, one coated the other uncoated. Test batch of coating the optics in 1936. 255x batch- one coated "T", the other uncoated. And a 267x batch- alloy construction, but before the optics were reformulated. Three original LTM Sonnars. Chrome nose, black nose, and "transition" lens.
Click to expand...
You are over qualified as “collector” the lens spanner wrench is cool.
 
A hijack here, I was looking at some stills from the movie The Zone of Interest and was impressed by the lovely almost pastel colors and IQ. And I was surprised to find that they are a new line of Leica cine lenses, M 0.8. Some can be had in M-mount, like the 50mm f/1.4 (probably T/1.4) at a stupid $9K at B&H. I am glad I am beginning to think of church mice as affluent so that I cannot entertain any far out dreams of an M 0.8. But if you can get a peek at The Zone of Interest stills see what you think. I would be interested in other folk's onions on these new lenses. Here is a link to some and a discussion of the movie: Zone Of Interest's Haunting Realism: Archival Images & Production Designer On The WW2 Drama's Historical Accuracy
 
This shot was made with my Sonnar 1:1,5 f=5cm Nr. 1628901. I prefer to use this lens on my Nikon S2 and not via an adapter on a Leica. The lens is all nickel, but has the painted "black band". The glass is pristine, but I see some small dust particles between the lens elements. The f stop has 13 blades and works very smooth. I was surprised by the tremendous quality of this uncoated lens.

gelatin silver print (sonnar 5cm 1:1,5) nikon s2

K. Nevenzel, Dutch painter, 2022.

1710195106793.png
 
Last edited:
the problem I have found with inexpensive lenses is sample variation
you might get a great one -- or not so good
all 3 1.4 lenses are very large -- for an rf camera
 
enasniearth said:
the problem I have found with inexpensive lenses is sample variation
you might get a great one -- or not so good
all 3 1.4 lenses are very large -- for an rf camera
Click to expand...

Why a company would fall down on QC baffles me. I know the old FSU lenses were irregular. Perhaps it is the same "meet the quota, quality be damned" mentality in China as was in the FSU. Are there irregularities in this line of lenses? I have not heard of them but have heard generally good reviews.
 
the only way to tell is to shoot with it. -- I agree that with modern construction & design its possible
to make a great lens for perhaps less cost -- china has shown they are capable of top end design & production
for me a more compact design at f2 is a better option - on digital the high iso settings have gotten much better
& lens speed is less of an issue - on film maybe you need the extra speed or the larger aperature shot wide open
for the limited depth of field
 
I checked the Matt Osborne test of the CV vs the Thypoch 25/28. Good lenses both, the CV a bit better. But of you want a really nice 28mm and can do f/2.8 the Canon LTM is a great lens at a great price.

L5010390.JPG​
 
Well, I got a fair number of lenses, including Leica lenses both modern and vintage. Also got many other brand lenses for my RF cams.... including one that supposedly went from Sonnar Brian to another RFFer then on to me 😁. A J-3 that seems to perform well. I tend to acquire lenses for qualities or attributes that I need, or I just find interesting. Don't we all?
Now I'm considering a new lens for the fleet: and it's either the LLL Speed Panchro or a Laowa 14mm. Such a disparate pair to choose from!* Note that Thypoc is not among my current interests...they seem too big and have almost non-existent focusing rings.😮

*To be honest, the probability of acquiring both the LLL and Laowa by end of year is > 0.5
 
rfaspen said:
Well, I got a fair number of lenses, including Leica lenses both modern and vintage. Also got many other brand lenses for my RF cams.... including one that supposedly went from Sonnar Brian to another RFFer then on to me 😁. A J-3 that seems to perform well. I tend to acquire lenses for qualities or attributes that I need, or I just find interesting. Don't we all?
Now I'm considering a new lens for the fleet: and it's either the LLL Speed Panchro or a Laowa 14mm. Such a disparate pair to choose from!* Note that Thypoc is not among my current interests...they seem too big and have almost non-existent focusing rings.😮

*To be honest, the probability of acquiring both the LLL and Laowa by end of year is > 0.5
Click to expand...
I understand your purchasing ‘strategy’.

I’m fascinated by the TTArtisan 35 apo-m, even though it’s really too big for my M’s. But it might be interesting on my two electronic vf bodies…

And the Laowa 2:1 apo- macro, to ‘scan’ half frame - overkill if ever there was I suspect, and likely vulnerable to field curvature.

But I’m an incorrigible experimenter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top