Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Carl zeiss Jena Sonnar serial 0000000
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:21 pm    Post subject: Carl zeiss Jena Sonnar serial 0000000 Reply with quote
Hi,

This is my first post on this forum. I am not much of a writer but now I really need the help of the experts here on this site.

Today I went to pick up a lens that supposed to be a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1:2 f=8,5 cm.
But it isn't, although that's exactly what is printed on the rim of the lens. I just don't have a clue what it is that I bought:

The lens has no mount. It has no thread at the back either.
It has an aperture- and focus-scale but no rings can be turned. Nothing moves on this lens. It's all rock solid.
The serial number is 0000000 (7 zeros) !
You can not look through it, there is some kind of mirror of polished metal behind the front-glass.
The lens is 8,5 cm long and that polished metal is stuated at 2cm from the front. (You can simply stick a ruler 6,5 cm deep in the lens from the back).

Does anybody has a clue what I have bought?






Last edited by Lucse on Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:03 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:26 pm    Post subject: Re: Mystery Sonnar. Reply with quote
Lucse wrote:
Hi,

This is my first post on this forum. I am not much of a writer but now I really need the help of the experts here on this site.

Today I went to pick up a lens that supposed to be a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1:2 f=8,5 cm.
But it isn't, although that's exactly what is printed on the rim of the lens. I just don't have a clue what it is that I bought:

The lens has no mount. It has no thread at the back either.
It has an aperture- and focus-scale but no rings can be turned. Nothing moves on this lens. It's all rock solid.
The serial number is 0000000 (7 zeros) !
You can not look through it, there is some kind of mirror of polished metal behind the front-glass.
The lens is 8,5 cm long and that polished metal is stuated at 2cm from the front. (You can simply stick a ruler 6,5 cm deep in the lens from the back).

Does anybody has a clue what I have bought?





It could be a demo lens used for display?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Mystery Sonnar. Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:

It could be a demo lens used for display?


That's about the only logical explanation for this mystery that I can think of as well.
It's a pity. It would have been fantastic if this lens was the real thing.

Could this "lens" still have some value for a collector?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Mystery Sonnar. Reply with quote
Very strange lens, indeed.

calvin83 wrote:
It could be a demo lens used for display?

This could be an explanation but, IMO, if it was for display/advertising it should have a mount.
Probably it is a "sketch" prototype, an initial model made only to verify some of the exterior parameters/look/ergonomics of the lens.
It certainly has a value for collectors.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If this really is a model/prototype of this lens then I guess this is a VERY rare object.
(The serial number kind of pointed allready in that direction Wink).

I've just send a mail to the Zeiss museum with the same question as the one that I posted here.
Let's hope they will answer it.

If they do I will post their reply in this thread.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The barrel looks like it's from a 1960's Russian Jupiter.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The barrel looks like it's from a 1960's Russian Jupiter.


Which is quite logical of course as the Sonnar lenses were the ancestors of the Jupiter-8 (50mm f2.0),
the Jupiter-3 (50mm f1.5), the Jupiter-11 (135mm f4.0) and the Jupiter-9 (85mm f2.0).

A picture of the first version of the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 85mm f/2.
My "lens" looks very similar but still there are a lot of differences as well:



PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A curious item! Could it be used as a lens at all, regardless the lacking mount? What I see on your last shot of the lens looks like a blind metal plate instead of the lens block. Is it correct or just an optical illusion?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
alex ph wrote:
A curious item! Could it be used as a lens at all, regardless the lacking mount? What I see on your last shot of the lens looks like a blind metal plate instead of the lens block. Is it correct or just an optical illusion?


Yes, what you see in the last shot is the metal plate seen through the tube (that sticks out from the back).
This object can not be used as a lens because of that metal plate that's behind the frontglass. And even without that plate it still would have only that one glass element in the front.

It's possible to stick my finger in the protruding tube (at the back) and feel the inside of the lens. And everything feels very smooth.
I've never fingered a lens of which the glass was removed Wink but I am rather sure that if this was such lens it wouldn't feel like that.

There is not one screw to be found in the whole construction either. And I've put all my force in trying to unscrew a piece of it but nothing budges.
I have not mentioned this before but this "lens" weighs 477 gram! Where the aluminium version of this lens only weighs 260 grams (although I am not sure if the first chrome/nickel version of this lens weighs as little).

All this convinces me even more that this is a mockup and that dan_ is right.
So, like he said: "this is probably a "sketch" prototype, an initial model made only to verify some of the exterior parameters/look/ergonomics of the lens".

Yesterday I wrote a mail to the "Zeiss Museum of Optics" as well as to the "Optical Museum Jena" to ask them if they could give me more info about this mysterious "lens".
But sadly neither one of them has replied so far.

Edit: I did some further investigation and I found that a prototype of a Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1:2 5cm was sold on "Catawiki" a few months ago.
This lens also had the 0000000 serial number! It lacked the glass and the metal plate inside but it did had a threaded (mounting?) tube:
https://veiling.catawiki.nl/kavels/8845871-uniek-no-0000000-carl-zeiss-jena-sonnar-1-2-5cm-prototype-zonder-lenzen

I also found a "ZEISS IKON DRESDEN M42 2/58MM T SONNAR PROTOTYP" that was sold on ebay, with serial number 000, but this seems to be a fully working lens:
http://www.ebay.nl/itm/Zeiss-Ikon-Dresden-M42-2-58mm-T-Sonnar-Prototyp-/232157244640?hash=item360da66ce0:g:ajgAAOSwB09YO2PD


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I never owned one of these and have no expertise, just a silly idea.

What if the |-OnNTep forgers found out prototypes are rare collectors items?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
buerokratiehasser wrote:
I never owned one of these and have no expertise, just a silly idea.

What if the |-OnNTep forgers found out prototypes are rare collectors items?


"!-OnNTep forgers" ????? I am sorry but I nor Google have a clue what that could meen.

Edit: I've translated "forger" and one of the meenings is "to make a forgery"... so a counterfeiter.
Just a silly idea: I hope you are not insinuating that I am such a person?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
!-O nNTep

just think Russian...
Ю – (ju) П – (p) И – (i) Т – (t) Е – (je) Р – (r) Wink


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasan wrote:
!-O nNTep

just think Russian...
Ю – (ju) П – (p) И – (i) Т – (t) Е – (je) Р – (r) Wink


Lubitel sometimes sold with strange latin names.

I once saw Voigtländer sold as "Yvighänder".



PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
No, no, nothing like that, it only came to mind when I remembered the

List of forgeries: klassik-cameras.de/Zeiss_Fakes.html

As I said, I don't own these lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
buerokratiehasser wrote:
No, no, nothing like that, it only came to mind when I remembered the

List of forgeries: klassik-cameras.de/Zeiss_Fakes.html

As I said, I don't own these lenses.


No problem. It was my stupid mistake.
That "|-OnNTep" sounded VERY familiar but I was too focussed on searching for an English explanation of that word (and too tired as well I suppose) that the obvious didn't spring to mind.
It's like looking for your glasses everywhere while they are sitting on your nose Wink.

Thanks for that link about the fake lenses. I had not seen that page before.
But I am absolutely sure that this is not a fake item. I will not go into detail but the age and the history of it are making this as good as impossible.
____________

Many thanks to all who helped me out and replied in this thread.
Thanks to you all this mystery is solved for me now.

I do not know what I will do with this "lens" though.
I am a passionate old-lens-collector and amongst many others I own a dozen Carl Zeiss (aus) Jena lenses as well.
But it's not as if I focus on collecting that particular brand.
Besides that I only collect lenses that I can use and enjoy on my camera (a Sony A7II). So this lens doesn't really fit that bill either.

... But still, it's darned nice to own such a unique piece Smile.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
So... almost exactly 2 years ago I have send a very polite mail to the "Zeiss Museum of Optics" as well as to the "Optical Museum Jena" to ask them if they could give me more info about this mysterious "lens".
I never received a response from either one of them.

Two days ago I did a second attempt, but this time I only adressed the Zeiss Museum of Optics.
And behold I received an answer:

Quote:
Dear Mr. Sesselle

We got an answer regarding your lens:

That's very difficult to answer.

It could be from Zeiss Ikon Dresden. In Jena it was not usual to give only zeros, so it could be a fake!

I hope, this information is useful anyway.

Best regards

Dr. Wolfgang Wimmer


So I still don't know a thing about this so-called 'lens'. But what really surprised me is that even this 'doctor' said that this lens could be a fake.
According to me this is totally impossible.

This lens is obviously made with factory-perfect precision. To be able to make such a lens one would need very specialed machinery and the skills to operate them.
Just look at the lettering on the frontlens-rim, on the colour job of the black rings... Everything is made with perfect precision and finished at the highest possible level.

And why would they make such a fake prototype lens? For the money? If so then there should be reports on the internet about other 'prototypes' like this.. which there are not.
If they just made one, the cost, effort and time invested to get it to this factory-perfect level would by far exceed the money it could fetch.

So why would somebody do the effort of making such a perfect 'mock-up' that is totally different from any lens ever made? Why would they create such a thing completely out of scratch without using any existing lens or even lensparts ??? It makes no sense ! None at all.

It’s a VERY unique, perfectly crafted piece and not some home-made Russian DIY stuff where they simply replaced the original ring of a Jupiter lens by an amateurish self-fabricated one.
If this piece is fake then it’s the best made fake lens ever.

Fake? I am sorry, but this really gets me worked up.
Just look at the pictures and read the description attentively and tell me in all honesty if you think that this is not as real as it can get.
Strange, special, unique, one-of-a kind, rare, never seen... yes, but fake? No, it's a lot of things, but that it ain't.

(Dr? I wonder in what he actually is a doctor).


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a real Sonnar 135 f3.5 with serial no: 10000000


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The 8.5cm F2, I suspect it is an engineering sample/mechanical mock-up. I doubt it is a "fake" as it is a black and chrome lens, no filter ring threads- meaning it was made before 1935.

Rare, collectible- but the not a useful photographic lens. To rare to "part out" to transplant optics into. But, it would be tempting.

Does the Aperture mechanism operate?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fiftyonepointsix wrote:
The 8.5cm F2, I suspect it is an engineering sample/mechanical mock-up. I doubt it is a "fake" as it is a black and chrome lens, no filter ring threads- meaning it was made before 1935.

Rare, collectible- but the not a useful photographic lens. To rare to "part out" to transplant optics into. But, it would be tempting.

Does the Aperture mechanism operate?


Nothing operates on this lens. There is no aperture and as I wrote before: This 'lens' feels rock steady, nothing budges or turns. Not a single screw/screwhead can be detected either.

Inside it feels very smooth, as if the complete body was milled out of one piece of metal, with only the single piece of glass, the flat metal and the tube being attached into it.
(My English is not that good in these technical terms, I hope you understand what I am trying to say).


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 5:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
No doubt is is a demo lens. I'd wait til I'd heard from the Zeiss Historica people first but with the right sales pitch and market it could be sold for quite a lot of money.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I will try to find the time to take some nicer pictures of this lens.

philslizzy wrote:
No doubt is is a demo lens. I'd wait til I'd heard from the Zeiss Historica people first but with the right sales pitch and market it could be sold for quite a lot of money.

I don't really know yet if I am going to sell it or not.
I have a lot of lenses in my collection and some of them are rather rare.
But this is by far the most special item that I own.
It could well be that it even is the only example in the entire world... and I like the sound of that Wink.

philslizzy wrote:
I have a real Sonnar 135 f3.5 with serial no: 10000000

Is this some 'special' lens as well or just coincidence?


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like a demo. I know wide angle barrel lenses with only half of a symmetrical lens design in front of a mirror where the aperture normally is put. Copy machine optical part for 1:1 Reproduction. Your lens is not one of them.

In the 1980's I had two of the copy lenses and had them machined on a lathe to connect to a symmetrical lens without the mirrors. It did not really deliver bestond 1:1. Wide coverage though.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Looks like a demo. I know wide angle barrel lenses with only half of a symmetrical lens design in front of a mirror where the aperture normally is put. Copy machine optical part for 1:1 Reproduction. Your lens is not one of them.

In the 1980's I had two of the copy lenses and had them machined on a lathe to connect to a symmetrical lens without the mirrors. It did not really deliver bestond 1:1. Wide coverage though.


I am very sorry but I do not really understand what it is that you are saying.
(In total honesty: I don't even have a clue what it is that you are talking about).

Could you please explain it in a way that I can understand it?

Last edited by Lucse on Wed Feb 27, 2019 12:09 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now we are getting somewhere Smile.

I just received the news from "Carl Zeiss AG" that they have forwarded my email to the “Technische Sammlung Dresden”.

They will contact me as soon as possible.

I am really looking forward to read there reply.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lucse wrote:
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Looks like a demo. I know wide angle barrel lenses with only half of a symmetrical lens design in front of a mirror where the aperture normally is put. Copy machine optical part for 1:1 Reproduction. Your lens is not one of them.

In the 1980's I had two of the copy lenses and had them machined on a lathe to connect to a symmetrical lens without the mirrors. It did not really deliver bestond 1:1. Wide coverage though.


I am very sorry but I do not really understand what it is that you are saying.
(In total honesty: I don't even have a clue what it is that you are talking about).

Could you please explain it in a way that I can understand it?

(Edit: Ha, what a small world it is Smile.
I just clicked on the link in your signature and I saw that you live only about 12 kilometers or so from where I live).


I doubt I can explain it better. You mentioned the mirror like part in the lens you have, behind the front lens. That reminded me of the lenses with mirror I had and described in my first message. You still follow me?

Now I will describe the copier lens I was familiar with. A symmetrical lens of the Planat or Plasmat type has 6 elements, aperture in the center, 1 group of two elements + one separate element at each side of the aperture. For 1:1 reproduction of an A3 document that lens is halfway the original and the projected image that will make the copy. If instead of letting the light go through the total of 6 elements only half of that lens is used, so 1 group + one element = 3, and a mirror is put where the aperture was then a symmetrical lens is created again but its optical path is half way reflected. Not easy to use for A3, the image is projected on the original. But if the A3 is cut in half and one part removed the projection of the remaining half falls next to that original and in the same plane. The rest of the machine is mechanics and chemistry. Baffle to block direct light sideways between original and projection plane. Possibly more mirrors in the path to separate the illuminated part further from the projected image and/or vary scaling of the document copy.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2