Jupiter 11 - f4/135mm. Made 1970

[tao2]

Picked up this lens, half-price sale 22 GBP. This is the lens (on one of my Zenits)




Always knew it was a very good lens, just didn't realise how good. This was my first test with it. All shots, wide open. Sony a700 body. CC welcome.

[ajohnw]

I see no shots !

John
-

[ajohnw]

Seems my Opera is broken! I see them now

John
-

[Shadowman]

Nice series, the lens itself looks like a piece of machinery. Enjoy!

[Donald]

A cracking set of shorts, Boab. And I think I recognise the location of #2. Used to sit in the car and eat my piece (sandwiches) just out there.

As for the lens, what a piece of engineering. They don't make 'em like that nowadays!

[tao2]

Here's a link tae specs...http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_385.html

Mine's is M39 thread. The lens is a lot smaller than it looks. That Zenit is tiny, a Zorki body with the SLR extension box. It's much smaller than most AF teles that size.

PS Aye Donald, it's Victoria Park. Ah was once the Victoria Park world champion at 9 hole, pitch 'n' putt. Went round in 19 (par 27).

[bnnrcn]

Very nice images

[John 2]

No doubting the quality Robert. Superb. I had an idea that the Russians used East German Glass in their lenses. Couldn't confirm that but Googleing around, I found this and thought you might be interested.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/0...bert-chisholm/

[deetheturk]

Cracking looking piece of kit Boab, nice images tae!

[tao2]

No doubting the quality Robert. Superb. I had an idea that the Russians used East German Glass in their lenses. Couldn't confirm that but Googleing around, I found this and thought you might be interested.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/0...bert-chisholm/

Hi John,

Aye, read that piece in Steve Huff's a couple of years ago.,

As part of war reparations, the Soviets seized a huge amount of materièl from the Zeiss factories in occupied Germany (not East Germany). This included camera parts, glass etc. The Allies also gave away almost every German patent available (not just photographic) but industrial, commercial as well.

The Soviets filled several trains and shipped most of it (including some German engineers!), tae Ukraine's Arsenal factory which began producing the Kiev camera, a replica of the Zeiss Contax. German glass and parts went intae several different lens models, mostly produced in the KMZ factory but only lasted 2/3 years after the war before running out. These lenses are much sought after and command high prices.

Ah have a pile of FSU lenses, including a Jupiter 8M (50mm f2), Jupiter 11 and 12 (35mm f2.8) and a couple of DDR Pentacons. The semi-myth about crude engineering and poor workmanship in these lenses belies the fact that hundreds of thousands are still being used and enjoyed worldwide. Many of them do need a strip down, re-grease etc. but who wouldn't after 40/50/60 years? Much is made of the longevity and engineering of Leica lenses but if ye can afford one then ye can also afford tae have them CLA'd every 4/5 years tae keep them in top shape.

Ye can buy around 10-12 FSU lenses for the price of a Leica CLA . Iso alcohol, alu polish and good grease fixes Soviet lenses for another 40 years...

The advent of mirrorless and CSC cameras has given these lenses a new lease of life.

[John 2]

Interesting Robert, thanks. The Allies did the same for other technologies of course which leads me to ask when is looting not looting?

[Rebel]

Lovely shots Boab!

[ajohnw]

Forgot to mention - great shots and looks to be an excellent lens.

In think it pays to bear in mind that Russia by it's very nature gets a lot of bad press. A more factual aspect is that Jena found itself in Russian hands and that part of Germany became a Soviet satellite. Out of interest some time ago I picked up a rumour that the USA smuggled the design of the Hassleblad out of that side of Germany as well.

One reason for moving it all might have been down to a salary problem - people walked to the other side of Germany especially in more professional occupations because the pay was higher and they didn't come back. This eventually started making schools and hospitals etc dysfunctional and probably gave rise to the wall. The arms factory aspect is interesting as well. Russia was probably the first country to mass produce arms with interchangeable parts in serious numbers, really serious numbers. That goes back to the time of the Tsars. One of Stalin's aims was to modernise Russia so it may have been a logical place to move optics to.

Looting? Not really. It's all down to several countries drawing a line across some one elses country after a war so who owns the copyright? It's pretty certain due to what went on along the Eastern front that Russia had a significant impact on German defeat.

Design rip offs is pretty common in most areas. For instance one of the Zeiss designs is a simple and pretty obvous modification of a design that goes by the name of a Cooke triplet. The design change might even just be made to make glass production easier and cheaper. Also allowing a patent to be taken out even if it offers no significant advantage.

Russian quality in this period can't be that bad as there is still a lot of it about that is still ok. The volume in some areas is pretty high - probably down to a wish for full employment so a lot finished up well greased and stored in salt mines if rumours are to be believed. The drop in quality in more recent years could have all sorts of reasons at it's route. There was a period when retailers were telling me that it's now too expensive. I've always had an interest in under priced quality optics. Optically post war it's pretty clear that they went in their own direction fairly rapidly with one advantage over us lot. The Biolam microscope for students is an interesting example. It was a very high quality part, not so since price cutting, it's now a bit of a pig. They only made one student microscope instead of several companies competing for the business. Some say this microscope is basically one that came from the line drawn on a map but if it aint broke why fix it as the saying goes. They also did a number of others that were totally different. It appears that some were not available in the west.

I'm not a sympathiser by the way. Just a subject that has interested me for a long time that it isn't easy to get hard information on. Jena ? There is a run down on the town here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jena

From knowledgeable people in the microscope world it's pretty clear that just because something has Zeiss stamped on it doesn't have to mean that they actually made it. This can include optics as well as the other parts. Business types seem to clutter together and provide services for each other The smaller ones eventually collapse and disappear but that wasn't the case up to say the 60 / 70's or some such period. I always wonder how my father bought a pair of Carl Zeiss binoculars off a Russian importer - rather cheaply as well. Clones ? I wonder. They are way better than what is generally about now.

John
-

[tao2]

Hi John,

Design rip offs is pretty common in most areas. For instance one of the Zeiss designs is a simple and pretty obvous modification of a design that goes by the name of a Cooke triplet. The design change might even just be made to make glass production easier and cheaper. Also allowing a patent to be taken out even if it offers no significant advantage.

Most lens designers have a Cooke triplet derivation, Tessars, Elmars, Ektars etc. They were all improvements on the original (many of these improvements suggested by H.D.Taylor himself who designed the triplet). In fact, the majority of modern lenses are improved versions of the original triplet. The key phrase is "derived from"; while all the above plus Nikon+Canon are "derived from", ALL the FSU lenses are described as "copies" - probably Cold War thinking carried over.

Just a subject that has interested me for a long time that it isn't easy to get hard information on. Jena ?

Carl Zeiss Jena is a good story. A couple of years after WWII, CZ Jena, with the help of the Americans, moved tae Oberkochen (the Dresden factory had been destroyed). Both factories continued tae work together and develop products. When the breakaway East Germany severed all contact with West Germany, CZ became Carl Zeiss Oberkochen and CZ Jena became VEB CZ Jena. The W. German CZ were given patents and trademark rights by the Americans but CZ Jena continued tae use the original name.

After about 20 years in the courts, the W. Germans won the right tae the name but came tae an agreement with CZ Jena that they would use their trademarks in the west and Jena, in the east. Thus, CZ Oberkochen became ZEISS, then ZEISS - West Germany. CZ Jena became CZ (aus Jena) and Jenoptik, and subsequently Pentacon, harking back tae its roots (PENTAprism CONtax).

Moral of the story is,...if ye want a vintage CZ Jena from the 50s/60s/70s, don't buy Zeiss at very expensive, inflated prices - buy a Pentacon, same optical design, in most cases, same optics, build and materials.

Ah have 2 Pentacons f2.8 /135mm one is a 1st. generation MF, f2.8-f32!, a heavy, 15 bladed "bokeh monster" not my description...



A perfect circle...




A great lens, ah wouldn't part with, cost me 15 GBP, worth about 10 times that now. Exactly the same as the Zeiss 135mm.



.