Re: Lens hood and filter size of CZJ Tessar 5/3.5 collapsible
Yes, sorry it did not come through. ?I’ll try again now. ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Thanks Maurice. Did you mean to send an image in your message? Unfortunately it's not showing in my email or on this forum online.
|
Re: Lens hood and filter size of CZJ Tessar 5/3.5 collapsible
Thanks Maurice. Did you mean to send an image in your message? Unfortunately it's not showing in my email or on this forum online.
|
Re: Lens hood and filter size of CZJ Tessar 5/3.5 collapsible
On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 07:54 AM, acousmetre wrote:
Could someone please advise what lens hoods, old or new, will fit the Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 5cm 1:3.5 collapsible? From the serial number the lens was made in 1937.?
?
Also, I believe that the filter size is 25.5mm. Is that correct?
|
Re: Lens hood and filter size of CZJ Tessar 5/3.5 collapsible
This hood was made to fit on the body and useful for several lenses for the Contax. ? I have one and it works well with my Contax II and 50mm f/3.5 Tessar.
|
Lens hood and filter size of CZJ Tessar 5/3.5 collapsible
Hello,?
Could someone please advise what lens hoods, old or new, will fit the Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 5cm 1:3.5 collapsible? From the serial number the lens was made in 1937.?
Also, I believe that the filter size is 25.5mm. Is that correct?
Thanks?
|
Servicing Zeiss Opton Biogon 35/2.8 (Contax II)
Dear all,
I need to access the two rear elements of my Zeiss Opton Biogon 35/2.8 (Contax II mount). I removed as much as I could from behind, but I do not see what would be the next steps. None of the different parts numbered from 1 to 6 on this photo can be moved:
Someone has any idea or exerience how to remove the rear lens?
Thank you.
|
Hans, thank you very much for taking your time to take measurements so I can make a comparison between the two models.
Well, I have just completed the same exercise and come up with these ‘estimated results’?
Both the viewing and taking lens appear to be of similar size in dimension, approximately 35.5mm?
The distance between the centre of both lenses is approximately 48mm
Finally, the overall distance taken from the very top of the viewing lens to the very bottom of the taking lans is approximately 84mm
Already with your kind assistance, I’ve figured out that the lens caps suggest no standard universal fit between the Ikoflex III compared to other Ikoflex models.
Incidentally, the flash terminal works great triggering my strobes on all sync speeds. The 1/200 shutter speed is a little restrictive but for portraiture which is the primary reason I bought the camera, speeds up to 1/200th is fine as it will always sit
on a tripod with a cable release. The only doubt I ever had was investing money in such an old camera, I’me sure glad I did. Hopefully I’ll start sharing my results with the Flickr community.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 22 Nov 2021, at 13:20, Hans Kerensky <hanskerensky@...> wrote:
?
Hello Paul,
Just did some measurements on my post-war 854/16 Ikoflex IA with a Zeiss Opton Tessar 75mm 1:3.5 lens.
Taking lens filter size is 35.5mm thread or 37mm push-on.
Viewer lens filter size is 29mm push-on.
Distance between the middle of the taking and the middle of the viewer lens is about 43mm
Best regards,
Hans
Hi Bob,
Nice to hear from you, thanks for your interest.
Any assistance would be most welcome.
Take care pal.
|
Hello Paul,
Just did some measurements on my post-war 854/16 Ikoflex IA with a Zeiss Opton Tessar 75mm 1:3.5 lens. Taking lens filter size is 35.5mm thread or 37mm push-on. Viewer lens filter size is 29mm push-on.
Distance between the middle of the taking and the middle of the viewer lens is about 43mm
Best regards, Hans
Hi Bob,
Nice to hear from you, thanks for your interest.
Any assistance would be most welcome.
Take care pal.
|
Hi Bob,
Nice to hear from you, thanks for your interest.
Any assistance would be most welcome.
Take care pal.
|
Hello Paul.? Greetings
Unfortunately I cannot contribute any practical
experience/information on this particular Rollei - however you
have piqued my interest.....and I will look it up myself too.
I have Rollieflex 6008 camera + lenses and accessories.
Best regards
Bob Sommerville
Fremantle, Western Australia
On 22/11/2021 7:25 am, Paul wrote:
Hello to the group,
My name is Paul and I’me new to this group, thought some helpful
fellow members may be able to offer some advice please.
I have fairly recently got my hands on the Ikoflex III, the
overall condition is excellent, near mint.
I’ve had it professionally serviced and the images certainly
live up to expectation.
I would like to add a few filters for black & white and also
a lens cap.
Regarding the filter size thread, would that be 35.5mm
Also, should I assume that the lens caps are a universal
standard fit across all the Ikoflex models or not ?
The Ikoflex III 853/16 / L64039 that I have has a flash nipple /
terminal unlike the modern PC Sync Socket found on more modern
cameras.
I’me curious wether this has been retrofitted at some time as
the manual doesn’t mention a flash terminal.
Oddly, on close inspection, page 16 of the Ikoflex III manual
shows 2 photographs frontal view, the bottom photo shows where
the flash nipple is located opposite the viewing lens yet the
top photo doesn’t.
The flash nipple as shown on the bottom photo is not repeated in
any of the photos shown within the manual.
?The Ikoflex III that I have has the flash nipple located
exactly the same place and the highest shutter speed is 200th /
Sec which has me thinking either it’s factory ?fitted that
didn’t get carried over in future production units as the manual
states the Ikoflex III has a 400th ?/ Sec shutter speed or
possibly somebody has had it fitted ?
I would appreciate any advice,?
Thanks.
Paul..
--
|
Hello to the group,
My name is Paul and I’me new to this group, thought some helpful fellow members may be able to offer some advice please.
I have fairly recently got my hands on the Ikoflex III, the overall condition is excellent, near mint.
I’ve had it professionally serviced and the images certainly live up to expectation.
I would like to add a few filters for black & white and also a lens cap.
Regarding the filter size thread, would that be 35.5mm
Also, should I assume that the lens caps are a universal standard fit across all the Ikoflex models or not ?
The Ikoflex III 853/16 / L64039 that I have has a flash nipple / terminal unlike the modern PC Sync Socket found on more modern cameras.
I’me curious wether this has been retrofitted at some time as the manual doesn’t mention a flash terminal.
Oddly, on close inspection, page 16 of the Ikoflex III manual shows 2 photographs frontal view, the bottom photo shows where the flash nipple is located opposite the viewing lens yet the top photo doesn’t.
The flash nipple as shown on the bottom photo is not repeated in any of the photos shown within the manual.
?The Ikoflex III that I have has the flash nipple located exactly the same place and the highest shutter speed is 200th / Sec which has me thinking either it’s factory ?fitted that didn’t get carried over in future production units as the manual states the Ikoflex III has a 400th ?/ Sec shutter speed or possibly somebody has had it fitted ?
I would appreciate any advice,?
Thanks.
Paul..
|
Hi Folks
Just subscribed to this group as I've purchased a really clean Contax IIa Color dial set-up with a Sonnar 50mm f1.5.
The serial numbers and descriptions are as follows:
? ? Contax IIa Color-dial - A-50496 - depth of field measured in feet, clean chrome and no "Zeiss bumps"
? ? Sonnar 50mm f1.5 - "Carl Zeiss Jena Nr.2725949? Sonnar 1:1,5 f=5cm T"? - go to f22 and has aperture ring tabs?
It is a really clean kit and I've enjoyed putting two rolls of Ultrafine 400 through it...developing them night.? I can't wait to see how it compares with my Leica M6 w/Summicron 50mm.
While I'd love to know when both were produced (the IIa is around June 1954, the Sonnar might be Dec 1941), I'm not going to let it stop what has been an enjoyable set-up.
Thanks, JOHN
|
Re: Carl Zeiss Planar 35mm 1:3.5
The Planar 35mm f3.5 is a post war lens that was made in Oberkochen (West Germany).
Pre-war Carl Zeiss Jena lenses for the Contax are marked "Carl Zeiss Jena" on the front lens retaining ring
On Friday, April 23, 2021, 05:56:17 AM EDT, <acousmetre@...> wrote:
I think I was incorrect that the lens is from the 30s. I had read that production started then (or thought I'd read) but that seems to be wrong and production started in the 50s. So that's not a Jena serial number on the front ring. Could someone please confirm that? And in which case I don't think it's worth buying as I'll likely lose the coatings.
|
Re: Carl Zeiss Planar 35mm 1:3.5
I think I was incorrect that the lens is from the 30s. I had read that production started then (or thought I'd read) but that seems to be wrong and production started in the 50s. So that's not a Jena serial number on the front ring. Could someone please confirm that? And in which case I don't think it's worth buying as I'll likely lose the coatings.
|
Re: 105/3.5 Industar 24 and 105/3.5 Opton Tessar
Ouch!
There goes another one of my brilliant schemes!
Thanks Alex
Javier
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021, 01:06:51 PM EDT, Alex Varas via groups.io <alexvaras@...> wrote:
I don’t think they are, at least with the old uncoated Tessars from 531/2. I got one camera with Zeiss front and Industar rear, not sharp, just blurry sh*t. > On 21 Apr 2021, at 19:51, Javier Perez via groups.io <summarex= [email protected]> wrote: > > ?Hi everyone > > Was wondering. > > Are the Industar 24 from a Moskva 5, and the Opton Tessar on an Ikonta close enough that I could swap out the front element? > > Any info is greatly appreciated. > > Javier > > > > >
|
Re: 105/3.5 Industar 24 and 105/3.5 Opton Tessar
I don’t think they are, at least with the old uncoated Tessars from 531/2.
I got one camera with Zeiss front and Industar rear, not sharp, just blurry sh*t.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 21 Apr 2021, at 19:51, Javier Perez via groups.io <summarex@...> wrote:
?Hi everyone
Was wondering.
Are the Industar 24 from a Moskva 5, and the Opton Tessar on an Ikonta close enough that I could swap out the front element?
Any info is greatly appreciated.
Javier
|
105/3.5 Industar 24 and 105/3.5 Opton Tessar
Hi everyone
Was wondering.
Are the Industar 24 from a Moskva 5, and the Opton Tessar on an Ikonta close enough that I could swap out the front element?
Any info is greatly appreciated.
Javier
|
Please scan and send the Contaflex Super manual to wnsbks50@...Thank you BodieBill
|
Re: Carl Zeiss Planar 35mm 1:3.5
This i don't know as it's on an online Ebay-type site. I'll be sending it to a lens restoration specialist in S?o Paulo.
|
Re: Carl Zeiss Planar 35mm 1:3.5
When you say "mouldered", is the mold internal between lens elements? If only polishing the front element will the internal mold degrade the quality of the image? Are there practical instructions for removing mold in lenses?
Dear Zeiss collectors,
I have a Contax III and a Contax IIa for which I'd like to get 35mm lens. I have the opportunity to purchase a Carl Zeiss Planar 35mm 1:3.5 at a price considerably less than I see on Ebay and auction websites (the lens in question is selling for the equivalent of 130 euros), although it it looks mouldered and I will potentially need to have the front element polished, something I've had done successfully before with two Sonnar 5cm/2 collapsible lenses. The lens is otherwise complete with front and rear metal caps and leather bag. It has a serial number of 1588xxx, which I think dates from 1934.
Being a Zeiss, I assume it's an excellent lens, although I have not managed to find much information on it from photographers that actually have one. Nor can I find much in the way of photos (specifically film photos) taken with one on Flickr.
So, my doubt is, whether or not I should wait for post-war Biogon to appear at a good price or take the risk on restoring the Planar.
I'm very fond of the 1930s Sonnar 5cm/2, another uncoated lens. Can I expect similar performance from the Planar? Does the Biogon offer any real advantage? I understand that the Biogon was the more expensive of the two.
Thanks a lot,
Iain
|
Maurice Greeson
acousmetre