Zeiss Opton 4/50 for Hasselblad, does anyone know this?

I'm close to buying an old C-lens for Hasselblad 500c/m. It's a Zeiss OPTON

50mm/f4 lens. I can't find any information about this anywhere, can somebody

help me? Is this a good lens, does it have something special about it?

And also, might it be worth 150e. it's in a bit scruffy shape.

AFAIK the "Zeiss Opton" name was used by W. German Zeiss in the late '40s, when ownership of the "Carl Zeiss" name was in doubt, and again in later years for lenses sold by Zeiss Oberkochen in East Bloc countries where Carl Zeiss Jena had the right to use the name. [Zeiss Jena lenses sold in the west were labeled "Aus Jena" for similar reasons].

After the end of WWII, the Zeiss factory in Jena was in German Democratic Republic. But another Zeiss factory was created by former engineers of Zeiss in Oberkochen, West Germany.<br>

The Zeiss trademark was property of Zeiss, Jena, in East Germany. Thus, no West German Zeiss lenses could be sold in eastern Europa under the Zeiss trademark. And all western Zeiss Distagon, Planar, Sonnar or Tessar had to be renamed "Opton Oberkochen".<br>

A 4/50 "Oberkochen Opton DI" (for DIstagon) is a 4/50 "Carl Zeiss Distagon". Maybe not with HFT multicoating. Otherwise, it is written in red letters on the front lens ring.

When I've read the question, there were no answer. Four minutes to type my answer... Too late. Sorry Robert.

I heard from the seller it is not multicoated. It reads ZEISS OPTON on it. So this would be a CZ distagon (single coated) 4/50 lens, sold in East-Germany? Is 150 euros ok to pay for it?

There are quite a lot of these C lenses for sale for friendly prices.

I would advise you to look for a clean well serviced example.

Expect to pay around 250 euro for a silver lens without T*.

The black ones have T* and will be around 350 euro.

Expect to pay 1.5-2 times these prices for near mint examples.

 

It is a very good lens. The design was not changed for 30 years.

This distagon was even transferred to the CF series.

At the end of the eighties this lens was superceded by the one with floating elements.

Jani,<br><br>As you can gather from Paul's post, 150 Euros would indeed be a very good price to pay, if (!) the lens is in good condition, and works (shutterspeeds and aperture) fine.

Yes, its a great lens. Got back home a few hours ago with it. In the end I paid 140 euros for it.

The problem is that all these Blad lenses have a leaf shutter (I think to the same on my Rolleiflexs which don't have one). And when the lens is old, the accuracy of the leaf shutter speeds is not guaranteed at all. And you cannot, only with your ears, notice if all speeds are accurate. When you have bought the lens, it is too late. I would prefer to wait for a better one, even if it is a bit more expensive. Don't forget that the price for a lens and shutter repair can be rather expensive.

Well... i'd say: Well done, Jani!<br>Running one test film will show whether the times are indeed off. They may be, but might as well not be.<br>If they are, the price payed is low enough to add the cost of a CLA and still have a cheap lens, or if you do not want to pay for the CLA, to sell the lens without a loss (because there are enough buyers out there who know that even with the added cost of an CLA, the lens is still cheap).<br>So my congratulations, Jani! Have fun with it!

"may as well", not "might as well". Sorry!

Leaf shutters generally require periodic CLAs anyway [although it might only be every 10--20 years]. If you buy a newer lens with accurate shutter speeds, it might still need a CLA in a year or two, so why not save the money?

Robert,

 

CLA every 10-20 years is a bit optimistic.

I would say with amateur, that is not heavy, use every 3-5 years is a safe margin.

Professionaly and heavily used lenses like a CLA every year.

Unless there is proof of a recent service I would have a C lens serviced after buying it.

Most camera repairmen know how to service a Carl Zeiss lens and enjoy working on a fine piece of equipment.

 

 

Paul