View Full Version : Another Hybrid J-3. 1953 J-3 with 1982 Front Element.
Brian Sweeney
09-22-2009, 16:34
I picked up a second 1953 KMZ J-3 for "cheap", ~$75 with shipping. It was a mess. The front element had some serious coating damage and a chip, missing set screws, and the helical was mis-assembled. Spent a few hours working on it, repositioned the helical in the mount for infinity focus, tapped new holes for set screws, and replaced the front element with one from a 1982 "new-old-stock" J-3 from leonphotojazz65. I've used this optic with a focus mount, but it was not very sharp wide-open. Improved stopped down to F4. In this new configuration, it looks really good.
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1331
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1333
The new front optic has a yellow tint. Very Pretty.
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1335
But would it work? Using the TTL viewer, the overall sharpness at F1.5 was much improved over the original damaged optic.
Does not mean much until results are on film.
At F1.5:
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1369
Tight Crop:
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1371
F1.5:
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1366
Stopped down to F4:
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1365
And Infinity at F1.5.
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1364
Looks good throughout the range. Sometimes mixing optics changes the focal length, in this case it looks like both close and infinity focus is good. Dumb Luck.
bmattock
09-22-2009, 16:40
Impressive, Brian.
I have had a couple of CZJ/J-3 successes recently with mixing optics, and with moving glass whole hog between mounts. Once is dumb luck, several instances is good engineering? ;)
wolves3012
09-23-2009, 01:47
Brian,
Is this kind of "transplant" likely to be possible and work on a J-8? I have a '56 J-8 (silver, tabbed type) with severe cleaning marks on the front element. I've tried it out and it's obvious the marks are affecting it.
Brian Sweeney
09-23-2009, 01:50
I've done this before on a J-8. Sometime in the late 1960s or so, the optical formula changed and the glass became larger in diameter. You have to be more careful. I think any from 1962 and earlier should work. I will check my stash of spare parts.
The aperture ring has to come off, and some hidden set screws come out to take off the front. a little more involved. I have done this.
ALSO: The rear module of the J-8 will go into a Zeiss 5cm f2 collapsible, but the front glass does not.
wolves3012
09-23-2009, 01:58
I've done this before on a J-8. Sometime in the late 1960s or so, the optical formula changed and the glass became larger in diameter. You have to be more careful. I think any from 1962 and earlier should work. I will check my stash of spare parts.
The aperture ring has to come off, and some hidden set screws come out to take off the front. a little more involved. I have done this.
ALSO: The rear module of the J-8 will go into a Zeiss 5cm f2 collapsible, but the front glass does not.
I was thinking more of a late, black type as a donor, since they're easy to find. Presumably that won't go then?
Brian Sweeney
09-23-2009, 02:04
I've run into issues with later lenses. I need to check with the spares.
Brian Sweeney
10-06-2009, 15:43
It amazes me how glass made thirty years apart can work out so nicely!.
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=148&pictureid=1440
Gave the hybrid 53/82 J-3 a real workout this weekend. It did great. Funny to see the yellow coated optic on this 1953 lens. A real mix of Russian and German glass. It did quite well.
I just love hearing about rescued lenses and cameras - wish I could do it myself , but dee'spraxia .
Drawing OK , making models , but engineering - forget it .
mynikonf2
10-07-2009, 09:18
I just love hearing about rescued lenses and cameras - wish I could do it myself , but dee'spraxia .
Drawing OK , making models , but engineering - forget it .
Brain, I must echo the above sentiments. There is an art to your work in both the lens mechanics & the producing of your photo's. Bravo!!!
funkaoshi
10-07-2009, 09:35
Nicely done. I bought one of your hybrids from another fellow on RFF. It works wonderfully. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/funkaoshi/tags/jupiter3/)
Brian Sweeney
10-07-2009, 11:04
You never know how these hybrids will come out. The 59/86 hybrid shown above came out Amazingly sharp, better than the sum of the parts.
The next one I did was a 58/74 hybrid that came out "soft", but with very good bokeh. The focal length of that lens better matched the Nikon/Leica standard. It's now in S-Mount, and is a nice portrait lens.
58/74 hybrid J-3, wide-open.
http://ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=97&pictureid=1266
Great work, Brian. I am impressed ... as usual!
Brian Sweeney
10-07-2009, 11:23
Thankyou! I'm really attached to my J-3's, and I end up using them more than any of my other lenses. And I have a lot of other lenses!
I just bought Ten 40.5mm multi-coated UV filters from Popflash. Somehow, I end up needing a lot of them...
Brian once saved a lens for me by replacing the rear optic of a pre-war Sonnar 5cm 2.0 with one from a J-8. It came out great.
... replaced the front element with one from a 1982 "new-old-stock" J-3 from leonphotojazz65. ...
Any explanation for this surplus of optical J-3 parts from this seller ? Just my curiosity...
Joao
There is guy on ebay who seems to have optical parts for the J-3. No clue if it is the same guy Brian got his from.
edit: it is the same guy ... leon
Brian Sweeney
10-07-2009, 13:23
I bought four J-3 optical blocks from Leon, and 8 Menopta 53/1.8's. He gave me a great price on shipping, and is 100% reliable. I used the two best optical blocks to repair J-3's that had "bad glass". However: I found two of the optical modules were "okay", but no where near as good as the 1950s lenses. So- I tried replacing the badly damaged front elements in two 1950s J-3's with the front elements from these new lenses. It worked out great!
My theory: the glass in the 1980s lenses are good, the optical fixtures are just not as good. You have to take them apart to really appreciate it. The 1950s J-3's are better made than the Wartime Sonnars in LTM. And I have a couple of those as well. The design is "streamlined", and easier to work on. A case of simpler is better.
Hi Brian, do you know what a average price for 1950 J-3 in good condition? Thanks.
The one on ebay costs $150 plus shipping. The lens has a scratch on it. The seller says there is no scratch,then ha says in the next sentence that there is a scratch. This is a rather old lens, but it costs as much as a genuine Zeiss Jena Sonnar 5cm 1.5 from the 1940's.
Brian Sweeney
10-08-2009, 12:57
Sent a PM regarding price.
There are a lot of Contax/Kiev mount J-3's on Ebay at present. Prices have moved up. That could be my fault...
The 1950 J-3's were transition lenses. I had one in Leica mount, and could never get it to focus properly. It was a mix of German and Russian parts, and I suspect the machining was too far off. My 1953 KMZ J-3 was under $100, and is one of the best Sonnar lenses that I own. Every bit as good as my Wartime Zeiss lens that cost over 4x as much.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.