Nikkor M-C 75/2.8 for Bronica S/EC

[Deleted member 88956]

Can anyone shed some light onto this one? Cannot find any reference to this particular M-C markings on this lens. This is Bronica S/EC mount.

 

[choiliefan]

There's no mention of this lens in Tony Hilton's early Bronica history and collectors guide book.
Somewhere on the web is a list of early Nikkor lens codes and their meaning.
Is this lens multi-coated?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Ok, when I asked about this lens it was on offer and had no way to feel it. Now I own it and it is puzzling. Crappy lighting in hotel room are preventing half decent photos, so need to wait for that.

What is it: as per label Nikkor MC 75/2.8 for Bronica S or EC. It ismmunlike any Nikkor made for Bronica nor any Zenza. It appears to be mutlicoated. I have Zenza Bronica Zenzanon MC 75/2.8 to compare here and differences are easy to spot in build and precision. Both have same filter ring thread though.

The lens has zebra style aperture ring, which right away pointed me to Carl Zeiss Jena DDR years. More than looks it is its imqprecise ring movement of again bringing me to those lenses. Even the acclaimed Pancolar had crappy feeling aperture ring. It works and it has half-stops (unlike the Zenza), but not smooth and just feels insubstantial. Glass elements are also somewhat larger in size on this Nikkor than on Zenza. Diaphragm pin for auto operation is also very small on this Nikkor, but engages with helicoid mechanism without problems.

So what the heck do I have here? What are the chances Nikon outsourced production at some point to Jena factory before breaking away for good? I have no doubts this lens was factory made for Bronica S mount. Yet it is puzzliing.

I have some film so will be shooting here tomorrow with both to see how this performs in general, no intention to run crazy tests. Other than aperture ring feel it looks good and also feels somehwat heavier than the Zenzanon and it looks like glass is not only larger in diameter but also thicker.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Couple of crappy pics

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I will add that lens came with front push on cap 70mm, no way to tell it was originally supplied like that. But it also looks awfully similar to Jena's plain no markings cap with same material etc. Threaded Zenza cap fits as it is same 67mm filter thread.

Diaphragm is 8-bladed.

 

[choiliefan]

774000 serial # would indicate a newer lens, no?
All my Bronica Nikkors are less than 200000.
As the king said, it's a puzzlement.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

774000 serial # would indicate a newer lens, no?
All my Bronica Nikkors are less than 200000.
As the king said, it's a puzzlement.

I don't know, but it is not newer than Zenzanons in fact the build is not even Nikon like. I have to check against some Nikkors I have for comparison when I return home, but the aperture ring itself and how it moves, I am all in it is made by Jena until proven otherwise.

When I first touched this zebra ring my head went into first zebra Pancolar I ever bought. Just exact same feeling, not that good BTW.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I shot a roll today with it and will hopefully get it developed in a couple of days. It looks good optically and focuses as expected.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

One more detail, the pin for auto aperture has a very short travel too, by design. On the Zenzanon it is like double the distance.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I wonder also if Nikon didn't lower its manufacturing qaulity at the end of collaboration with Bronica. Some conspiracy theories are out there that the Nikkor 135 was purposely crappy, not that I actually buy that story.

 

[gorbas]

It looks like Carl Zeiss Jena made, especially aperture ring! There is interesting picture for you!

 

[Lachlan Young]

I understand there was a shortfall of standard 75mm Nikkor lenses before Bronica's own Zenzanon lenses were in full production - and Zeiss Jena 80's were bought in to fill the gap - from what I've seen, most were in fairly standard Bronica style barrels, so you may have a prototype on your hands. Why it has acquired a Nikon branded front ring is an interesting conundrum.

 

[macfred]

774000 serial # would indicate a newer lens, no?
All my Bronica Nikkors are less than 200000.
As the king said, it's a puzzlement.

Yes, should be a newer one - the series number fits into the 75mm f/2.8 H-C range for Bronica (773131 - 776785 -/ date -1980).

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I understand there was a shortfall of standard 75mm Nikkor lenses before Bronica's own Zenzanon lenses were in full production - and Zeiss Jena 80's were bought in to fill the gap - from what I've seen, most were in fairly standard Bronica style barrels, so you may have a prototype on your hands. Why it has acquired a Nikon branded front ring is an interesting conundrum.

Well, by the feel of aperture ring and the tiny aperture engagement pin it sure fits into "prototype" spin of things.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

It looks like Carl Zeiss Jena made, especially aperture ring! There is interesting picture for you!
View attachment 240696

If you don"t mind could you post more pics of this lens, dismounted, back and side?

 

[gorbas]

Sorry Witold, I got just this picture years ago when I was looking into conversion of some P6 CZJ lenses. Never owned one single piece of Bronica gear.

 

[choiliefan]

^^ The CZJ barrel appears to be of Bronica design -- including that infernal grip on the aperture ring which is near impossible to use with the lens hood attached.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

^^ The CZJ barrel appears to be of Bronica design -- including that infernal grip on the aperture ring which is near impossible to use with the lens hood attached.

Not sure what you ar e referring to, but not to lens in question. And I have no issues using aperturering on Bronica MC lenses. But lens in question has zebra ring below outer diameter so much, it is difficult with hood on.

 

[choiliefan]

I was referring the the lens shown in post 11, not yours.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I was referring the the lens shown in post 11, not yours.

That "grip" you speak of is far easier with hood than the zebra on this odd one.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I can say that a roll of film I shot through this lens came out quite good, so no indications this lens is inferior to the Zenzanon 75/2.8 I also used on same day. Exposures were all fine so aperture also appears to be working as intended, even with its seemingly weak pin arrangement. When I get a chance to scan it, I'll post some pics.

 

[itsdoable]

My Nikkor lenses have a shorter diaphragm pin than my Zenzanons (but I don't have the 75mm Zenzanon)

My 75mm Nikkor-P.C has a smaller rear element that sits farther back from the diaphragm pin that your M-C. The front is also shorter than your M-C.

My Biometar (80mm P6) has the same semi-circle rear light baffle as your M-C (different from the Nikkor), and similar sized front and rear elements, and the identical zebra style aperture ring with the same slotted screw (that engages the aperture setting mechanism).

The vanity ring on your M-C does not match any Nikkor in that s/n range, Nikkor vanity rings have a distinct look to the lettering, like they were pressed instead of machined or stamped. Early S/EC Nikkor vanity rings did have a machined look, but that changed way back in the 200xxx numbers.

My guess right now, is that your M-C is a Jena Biometar with a non-nikon made "Nikkor" vanity ring. When you switch between your Zenzanon, is the FOV the same, or is the M-C closer to a 80mm?

Please keep us updated, it's a very curious lens!

 

[Deleted member 88956]

My Nikkor lenses have a shorter diaphragm pin than my Zenzanons (but I don't have the 75mm Zenzanon)

My 75mm Nikkor-P.C has a smaller rear element that sits farther back from the diaphragm pin that your M-C. The front is also shorter than your M-C.

My Biometar (80mm P6) has the same semi-circle rear light baffle as your M-C (different from the Nikkor), and similar sized front and rear elements, and the identical zebra style aperture ring with the same slotted screw (that engages the aperture setting mechanism).

The vanity ring on your M-C does not match any Nikkor in that s/n range, Nikkor vanity rings have a distinct look to the lettering, like they were pressed instead of machined or stamped. Early S/EC Nikkor vanity rings did have a machined look, but that changed way back in the 200xxx numbers.

My guess right now, is that your M-C is a Jena Biometar with a non-nikon made "Nikkor" vanity ring. When you switch between your Zenzanon, is the FOV the same, or is the M-C closer to a 80mm?

Please keep us updated, it's a very curious lens!

Thanks, great suporting info. The lettering style sure looks like one-off engraving, matches nothing I can check, from all Nikkors, through Zenzanons and even Jena lenses, which I think leads us into prototype/transitional territory.

FoV I have to set this up to double check, handheld seemed quite close to Zenzanon but I did not really go for that when shooting, have only one frame of same subject with both lenses. But after testin it might further help with identification.

The lens came with helical, and I need to run some comparisons between the two as they sre not exact same, although very close. Distance scale is overall the same but lettering has different colors. Minor differences of some elements too.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

few pics from this lens (Q&D scans) perhaps not a test for its optical quality, but I do like the negatives