The designation for multicoating on Zeiss lenses, for hasselblad and contax,
among others, is T*, called t star. That coating is perhaps the finest
multicoating possible. The hasselblad lenses with it are superior, and the
lenses I had with my Contax G2 were clearly (no pun intended) the best lenses
for 35 I've ever seen or used. The T* coatings are more recent, in that they
were first used in the sixties, I think, or perhaps even the seventies. They
are patented and trademarked by Zeiss, the our side of the iron curtain Zeiss,
but who knows what happened on the other side.
Bill Pearce
From: Moose [mailto:olymoose@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 3:48 PM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] CZ Jena Tessar
On 12/7/2010 4:04 AM, AS wrote:
>> That is pretty much what I have, however yours has the T designation. The T
>> means that it is multicoated? Mine does not have that and marked "C.Z.
>> Jena.". I checked w Zeiss Historica and looks like my lens was produced in
>> the late 40's.
Do you have a link? the home page wasn't very helpful - and I'm occasionally
lazy. :-)
This is the one I have, with a lower serial #.
<http://www.mflenses.com/mfl-ebay/Zeiss-Tessar-2.8-50-red-T-14-blades.html>
"I sell my Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 2.8/50 mm lens, aluminium barrel, M42 mount.
This lens belongs to a batch that was
released for sale on June 12th, 1953. It is labeled with the red T, which means
that it has Zeiss coating on all lens
elements. It features 14 blades for a perfectly round highlights shape at all
apertures. This model is the best and more
valuable and desireable Tessar 2.8/50 Jena model that exists. There are other
versions with fewer blades, or without red
T., or in the less desireable Exakta mount."
There must be some serious collectors out there if they have found out the
release dates for specific serial number ranges!
On 12/7/2010 5:37 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> There is only reported CZJ 50/2.8 preset and it does hit the mirror. I think
> that's the one we're speaking of.
Two, actually. Mine is between them in serial number. It's possible to remove
the rear part, mount it on the camera and
move the mirror up manually - and indeed the mirror runs into the rear of the
lens.
> But I'd guess a little bit of filing off the bottom of the rear cell would
> likely fix that.
Possibly. It would certainly be true if the two guide pins for the focusing
helicoid that screw into the rear ended up
on a horizontal axis when mounted, and certainly not true if they were
vertical. As it it, they are at another angle and
it's not clear to me whether cutting back the rear of the mount enough to clear
the mirror would impact one of them or
not. As the list suggests, there isn't an obvious way to adapt it to fit.
(BTW, I happen to have a Jolos adapter that looks like the one he says he used.
It has a lip at the back to actuate the
auto diaphragm actuation pin on later lenses. The lip prevents the CZJ 2.8/50
from screwing all the way in. I also have
a well used older design from the 'Bay with no lip.)
Another consideration is from the link above. That guy is asking €130 for a
lens in no better shape than the one I have.
I would have guessed it's just another of thousands of old lenses, worth
little. Apparently not.
Stymied at least for the moment.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3302 - Release Date: 12/07/10
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|