Two Converted CZJ 5cm F1.5 Sonnars visit the Marine Museum at Quantico

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
11:49 AM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
17,267
I met up with a fellow Sonnar enthusiast at the Marine Museum this weekend, brought along two Sonnars recently converted to Leica mount. Both Sonnars bought off RFF. I’ve been asked several times to list the different versions of the F1.5 Sonnars. This is not an easy question to answer except to state “A LOT”. Based on shooting with and taking apart A LOT of Sonnars over the last 20 years, there seems to be changes to the Sonnar design every year or two throughout the run. Small changes to the optics, bigger changes to the optics, introduction of coatings on the front element, later to all surfaces, changes to the coating, changes to the mechanical construction and materials used. I have Sonnars made within the same batches that show changes. I’m up to Twelve Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5 Sonnars made between 1932 and 1945. They are all different. Add a 272 ZK, 272 J-3, and 286 J-3 to the line-up.

If someone were to ask- “What is the best of the Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5 Sonnars?” The answer is easy. Find one with a serial number that starts with 272. It can be a ZK Sonnar or a 1950 Jupiter-3 with Zeiss serial number starting with 72 stamped into the rear triplet.

If someone asks “What is your Favorite 5cm F1.5 Sonnar?” It is the 1607 block lens- a 1934 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, one of the first with filter threads that can be converted using a J-3 LTM mount. This lens was originally in a Contax mount with a Black ring. I picked up a second lens from this group recently; SN was within 60 of the first. No black ring on the Contax mount, chrome finish.

The 267xxxx 5cm F1.5 Sonnar T is converted using a KMZ focus mount, bought off Ebay. The mount was not assembled correctly, the inner helical was misthreaded ½ turn. The internal focus stop screw was also missing. Both fixed, cleaned and lubed. KMZ focus mounts are the best. The mount had a ZOMZ J-3 put in it, not “perfect” but good, rather than shimming it for the mount it was not made for- put the Sonnar into it. This Sonnar is one of the first to use a Metal alloy rather than the heavy brass of earlier lenses. The internal coatings are soft, and the surface behind the aperture has lost about 1/3rd of its coat. This is from lubricants outgassing. I had another Sonnar in this batch that had the same problem. I have earlier and later Coated Sonnars that do not have this problem.

Wide-Open, on the Leica M9




Corporal Jones:
 
Last edited:

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
11:49 AM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
17,267
At F1.5 again,



At F4-


This lens is good, stops down to F22. "I Suspect" that Zeiss revised the formula after this batch, in time for the 272 batch. Of interest- All of my ZK and J-3 with Zeiss SN on the rear triplet are from the 272 batch and 285 batch. I do not know if there are any stamped "67xxxx"- I've not seen one.
 

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
11:49 AM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
17,267
The second lens- a 1934 Uncoated 5cm F1.5 Sonnar originally in a chrome Contax mount, last digits 399. My first one from this batch- 344. That one came in a Contax mount with a black ring. Both have a beautiful bloom. To characterize "this version" of the Sonnar- seems to be more center sharp, and "bluer blues" than later lenses. This one had a ding in the filter ring, removed with a tool bought from Micro-Tools. "Picky", but I found many of these early Sonnar lenses are picky with which filters screw in what lens. This one- Russian filters are perfect for it, so it goes to the M Monochrom. Yellow filter used for all shots.

Wide-Open,




At F4.


This lens was 7 years old when Pearl Harbor took place.
 

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
11:49 AM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
17,267
Wide-Open,





I shimmed this lens for optimal use wide-open with the Yellow filter on it. Yet another factor that needs to be considered using a Rangefinder camera. Totally worth it.
 
Top