PDA

View Full Version : Is the earliest serial number about Zeiss lens I can find?



pierre506
15-Jan-2013, 01:19
Sorry about the bad quality of the pic. It's took by cellphone.



CARL ZEISS JENA Nr. 569

87355

Or, it's fake?

Steven Tribe
15-Jan-2013, 02:37
All the early (around serial no.1000) Zeiss lenses I have had through my fingers have been hand engraved (modernish copperplate) and have been filled with white enamel.
This design does not look 19 century and Zeiss began with standard lacquered brass finish. "number" is abbreviated to No. not Nr.
Perhaps a model number - or from GDR?

fdchen
15-Jan-2013, 03:37
#40 and #82 are in my hand
#20 and many others were shown in eBay many years ago.

Sevo
15-Jan-2013, 04:07
Nr. rather than No. as a abbreviation for number places that lens after 1933 (or at whatever point after that Latin abbreviations in science and engineering were banned). So this will not be a early lens (unless it was re-engraved by a repair man when replacing a worn flange).

It won't be late GDR either - while Zeiss Jena restarted their numbering some time after the late seventies, the (presumably TGL standard font) engravings on any of my late Tessars from that period look very different and more modern.

With that odd mix of typographies I suspect a late wartime product, when production had been relocated to other companies and underground facilities, utilizing whatever tools were at hand. Or it might be from the immediate post-war period, when some laid-off Zeiss employees were assembling lenses at home from parts taken from the shelled out factories, to swap or sell on the black market. In any case, the number will not be a official Zeiss serial - it either is a fragment, or something entirely different.

pierre506
15-Jan-2013, 05:38
I thought that Sevo must be right.
It's not an earlier lens according to the lans shape.
87366873678736887369

pierre506
15-Jan-2013, 05:43
I found it in this link: http://forum.mflenses.com/carl-zeiss-jena-aplanat-kollektor-t51333.html
873708737187372
Kollektor=Collector
I don't know the meaning of Ic.
I acquired it because it just is very familiar with Voigtlander All Metal Daguerreotype Camera.
http://historiccamera.com/cgi-bin/librarium2/pm.cgi?action=app_display&app=datasheet&app_id=225&
http://www.geh.org/fm/mees/htmlsrc/mV89100002_ful.html#topoftext

Sevo
15-Jan-2013, 06:03
That presumably is part of a microscope or projector, at any rate a segment of the illumination path of a optical instrument (a collector is used to feed lamp light into a condenser). That number may be a part rather than serial number - I have seen other two to four digit part numbers on components of Zeiss microscopes.

Looking it up on mflenses, yup, that is a segment of the illumination path of a optical bench rig (for science, education or production tests) - in the seventies/eighties we still had optical benches with exactly that type of foot in school and university.

Nathan Potter
15-Jan-2013, 09:02
I thought that Sevo must be right.
It's not an earlier lens according to the lans shape.
87366873678736887369

pierre506, The image on the left shows the lens + diaphragm on an optical bench stand suggesting the application was more modern and supplied by Zeiss as a piece of experimental optics. Any idea about the optical construction?

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

pierre506
15-Jan-2013, 18:01
Thank for all replies.
I used to wanna make a small Wet Plate by the gear.
It seems that it will a small decoration on my desk.

pierre506
15-Jan-2013, 18:04
That's the way how to used VOIGTLÄNDER All METAL CAMERA to make daguerreotype.

http://hem.bredband.net/tjmop/voigtlander.htm

Sevo
16-Jan-2013, 00:42
Not everything that looks vaguely similar fulfils the same purpose - that optical devices frequently have cylindrical elements is a side effect of round lenses being easiest to compute and grind. The Zeiss thing is a collector/condenser/iris illumination group taken from a 20th century (German school standard triangle/diamond-shaped rail) optical bench.

dionsees
30-Aug-2013, 11:18
The earliest Carl Zeiss Jena lens ever seen is #20, and it was sold recently on eBay by the esteemed historian and collector David Silver. Regarding "fdchen" seeing it on eBay "many years ago", I don't know what you actually saw because Silver has owned it for over thirty years, and it never left his home until last month! It can be seen here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/251308477608

And here's #36:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/251294847256

Silver somehow over the years accumulated the largest known chunk of the famous Zeiss lens collection from Jena (originally over 2000 pieces, basically a patent museum of their prototypes, and many lenses from their competitors...taken by the US military in 1945, later handed over to Burke & James in the 1950's for safe keeping, and when the collection was no longer deemed of military value Burleigh Brooks was allowed to break it up and sell it off...now scattered all over the world), he managed to gather up over 140 of the lenses, and this summer he finally realized he needed to sell them (through eBay and privately) to raise the money to pay off a major debt on his home. Unbelievable treasures! I hope many of you got to see some of the things he listed. Friggin' unbelievable! I don't know how many more he intends to sell, but the rumblings out of his camp suggest he has the very first Zeiss lens ever made, as well as #2, #4, and #7. The story is that after years of gathering all the papers and records, deep research, he was able to reverse engineer what Paul Rudolph was doing with the anastigmat design, and Silver now knows he's sitting on Zeiss lens #1. Anybody care to speculate how much THAT could sell for? Knowing Silver fairly well, I doubt he'll be offering it. Too precious to give up. Somebody would have to knock on his door with a mighty big boat load of cash. But in the meantime, I'd kill to see those four early Zeiss prototypes.

dionsees
30-Aug-2013, 11:34
Eh, forgot to mention, David Silver supposedly also has Zeiss lens #14, something called a Triplet Apochromat (I think), supposedly sitting on his desk. The rumor is he uses it as a paper weight! Remarkable!!

dionsees
30-Aug-2013, 13:08
Took some effort, but I knew there was a pic out there somewhere of that Carl Zeiss Jena lens #14, a Triplet Apochromat or something like that, in David Silver's collection, originally from the Zeiss collection. The pic was taken by Tommy Aaron, the Zeiss Ikon expert, on a day he visited Silver:

http://www.mindspring.com/~zeissnikon/CZJTripletApochromat14.jpg

So my earlier statement today that #20 was the oldest Zeiss lens ever seen is obviously now...history. There it is, #14 is now a matter or record!

fdchen
30-Aug-2013, 16:55
The earliest Carl Zeiss Jena lens ever seen is #20, and it was sold recently on eBay by the esteemed historian and collector David Silver. Regarding "fdchen" seeing it on eBay "many years ago", I don't know what you actually saw because Silver has owned it for over thirty years, and it never left his home until last month! It can be seen here:
The collection of Burleigh Brooks was auctioned in July 2009. Hundreds of Zeiss Jena prototypes and earliest lenses were shown. I got #40, #82 and some prototypes.

Steven Tribe
31-Aug-2013, 00:56
WOW!

Silver somehow over the years accumulated the largest known chunk of the famous Zeiss lens collection from Jena (originally over 2000 pieces, basically a patent museum of their prototypes, and many lenses from their competitors...taken by the US military in 1945, later handed over to Burke & James in the 1950's for safe keeping, and when the collection was no longer deemed of military value Burleigh Brooks was allowed to break it up and sell it off...now scattered all over the world), he managed to gather up over 140 of the lenses, and this summer he finally realized he needed to sell them (through eBay and privately) to raise the money to pay off a major debt on his home. Unbelievable treasures! I hope many of you got to see some of the things he listed. Friggin' unbelievable! I don't know how many more he intends to sell, but the rumblings out of his camp suggest he has the very first Zeiss lens ever made, as well as #2, #4, and #7. The story is that after years of gathering all the papers and records, deep research, he was able to reverse engineer what Paul Rudolph was doing with the anastigmat design, and Silver now knows he's sitting on Zeiss lens #1. Anybody care to speculate how much THAT could sell for? Knowing Silver fairly well, I doubt he'll be offering it. Too precious to give up. Somebody would have to knock on his door with a mighty big boat load of cash. But in the meantime, I'd kill to see those four early Zeiss prototypes.

Am I the only person who gets an unpleasant feeling from this contribution? Perhaps too much like advertising copy and the text used in recent Ebay items.
I remember seeing the previous clearout from the B&J lens bank and wondered then about the real facts behind the Zeiss seizure by the military/transfer to private ownship.
Does anyone (alive!) know the real story?

Louis Pacilla
31-Aug-2013, 06:19
I absolutely agree with you Steven. I was going to post the same fact that Davids Zeiss facts don't seem to hold water.

schneideritis
8-Jan-2015, 16:43
I absolutely agree with you Steven. I was going to post the same fact that Davids Zeiss facts don't seem to hold water.

Saw this old thread while surfing down old posts looking for interesting stuff. Louis and Steve, I started a new thread yesterday about David Silver's research. The whole story is trending in Facebook and some photo forums. If you have doubts about what Silver has or what he researched, go look for the thread here titled "Rare early Carl Zeiss Jena lenses". I can't comment on what he sold a couple years ago because I don't know the man that well and I don't buy on eBay either. Sometimes a mans got to do what he must and I guess he needed the money. But I've heard about his ongoing research for awhile and he's on record that its done now. He made a pretty nice web page to share some of the highlights he collected, linked below. Its just a sample, but worth a visit. Silver doesn't blow smoke. He's a straight shooter. I'm looking forward to the book or whatever he writes from all this. Go have a look at the page. Come back and say what you think, or maybe say soemthing in the new thread I started.

http://www.photographyhistory.com/zeisslenscollection.html

Steven Tribe
8-Jan-2015, 17:30
Since I last contributed to this thread, my attitude to fate of the Carl Zeiss collection as regards:

1. original confiscation.
2. transfer from military to private ownership.
3. further sale.

has hardened!

I could make a very good argument for the return of these to Germany, but that might be considered politics.

schneideritis
8-Jan-2015, 17:54
Steven, here's an article from the Zeiss Historical group about Ed Kaprelian and the handling of the Zeiss collection after it was appropriated from Germany.

http://www.zeisshistorica.org/kaprelian.html

There's a mistake I think. It suggests Burke and James sold off the collection, but it was Burleigh Brooks by the time of the sale. Note the collection was originally over 2000 lenses. A large remaining piece of the collection was sold off on eBay in 2009 by I think the grandson of old Burleigh and that was some really rare items, but I remember that was only about 100 pieces. I have no idea how he did it, but Silver managed to find and preserve I think 140 of the original lenses. This thread seems to have gotten off track. The question was about the oldest Zeiss lens. Silver has it and others that are from Zeiss' beginning. That is a huge discovery for the photography world. To preserve and research such treasures is a gift for us and future generations. You're right about the politics thing. That was never the point, and none of it is enforceable anymore. If you can leave behind the politics, can't you see the fantastic discovery for its historical value?

Steven Tribe
8-Jan-2015, 19:38
I think you are guilty of automatically giving all early numbered lenses a status they probably don't deserve.

I think Zeiss was probably playing around with other makers known designs (triple achromat sounds familiar!) in this early period.
What would have some "importance" are lenses that are approaches to the various anastigmat series. That is, importance based on significance, rather than engraving.

schneideritis
9-Jan-2015, 08:33
I think you are guilty of automatically giving all early numbered lenses a status they probably don't deserve.

I think Zeiss was probably playing around with other makers known designs (triple achromat sounds familiar!) in this early period.
What would have some "importance" are lenses that are approaches to the various anastigmat series. That is, importance based on significance, rather than engraving.

I'm utterly baffled by your response. What you're describing as significant and importnat is EXACTLY what's been revealed in this research! Don't you see that? The lost pieces of the Zeiss puzzle have been discovered and put back in their places. How can you shrug your shoulders and act like "so what"? I think you are guilty of ignorance of the value of historical discovery. You obviously don't appreciate it.

Dan Fromm
9-Jan-2015, 08:58
Sorry to be dense, but I don't see a puzzle. What am I missing?