Jump to content

C 250/5.6 with TWO serial numbers...


WAn

Recommended Posts

Hello everybody!

 

 

I've recently bought quite old Sonnar 250/5.6 and tried to identify the lens age

using the utility at www.hasselbladhistorical.eu.

The problem that there are TWO serial numbers on the lens.

One is on the side of the barrel, close to the front: 1594800 (www says 1956)

Another one is on the back: 2911814 (www tells 1961).

How is it possible? Has the lens been produced in 1956 and later reassembled in

1961?

 

 

This is a silver (matte alluminium) version; single coating (no "T*" mark); no

DOF preview lever at all; the VXM selector and a synchro contact are present;

the focusing scale is in feets only, the min mark is 8.5 ft, but the lens

focuses a bit closer.

 

No marks inside the rear part of the lens.

 

Thanks

 

Andrey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrey

 

The number you find on the backside of your lens is most likely the serial number of the

shutter . The early C-Lenses all had the shutter serial engraved .

I have a C PLANAR 2,8/80 which was produced in 1956 , (Nr.1594923) . The 500C was not

even on the market in 1956 . My C-PLANAR 2,8/80 has the number 2955871 engraved on

the back .

J�rgen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My more recent 2,8/80 C-lens from 1959 has only one serial number (2663548).

 

But to present another mystery: I have a 4,0/50 mm FLE CF-lens. Inside the barrel it has two stampings in red ink: K98 (translating to November 1989) and E09 (translating to Mai 1990).

 

Ulrik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ulrik, take a look at the end of the page

http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HT/HTDating.aspx

According the quote: "Early lenses sometimes are stamped more than once. The date of manufacture will most likely be represented by the earliest date found, while later dates may represent the times the lens had returned to the factory for a (major) repair"

your Distagon may have visited the factory for repair twice, Nov-89 and May-90.

 

 

Jurgen,

thanks for the idea. If so, then it could be that my lens wasn't rebuild at all :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...