vintage kinoptik lenses and serial numbers

[hrryxgg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

hey folks:

i have a kinoptik 40mm/f2 lens that was modified to M mount.  i love it.

the serial number is 48539.

does anyone know how i can search to find what year this was made?

thank you

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Ecar]

You can't. I have tried, to no avail.

A 5-digit s/n, however, suggests it was made in the 1950's. It's probably marked "Focale" as well?  

[hrryxgg]

mine is not marked focale.  it is apochromatic i think?

i did find this

• Mar 6, 2017

• #6

Chronology
A very useful table of serial numbers year-by-year is given by P-H Pont in his booklet "Chiffres Cles" for the
years 1953-1993, and this is a shortened version since these lenses are not often seen in the UK and the
number produced is relatively limited, which underlines that this is a really prestigious, desireable make. The
number given is the last for the year.
1952 13,000 1955 20,000 1960 35,000 1965 49,000
1970 64,000 1975 84,551 1980 98,515
Lenses made at serial numbers above 40,000 seem to be especially sought after, possibly due to improved
coating. In about 1962 this will not be multicoating in the modern sense but at that time improved coatings
were coming into use

[Ecar]

Many Kinoptik lenses from the 1940's onwards are marked "Apochromat", with or without the addition of "Foyer" (usually earlier) or "Focale" (usually later).

I had seen that chronology, but from my own experience, it doesn't make a lot of sense as it's conflicting with other factors (such as original cine mounts or documentation the lenses came with). For example, according to it, my Apochromat 35/2 s/n 111XXX would have been manufactured sometime in the 1980's, when it's obvious by just looking at it that it's a much earlier lens.

Perhaps the Pont chronology applies to only some lens types?

Other French sources (can't remember where I found them) seemed to indicate that, as a rough rule of thumb 3-4 digits serials spanned the 1930's and early 1940's, while 4-5 digits belonged to the late 1940's-1950's period. However, even this is not accurate: for example, although both my Fulgior 50/1.3 Foyer (but not Apochromat) and my 40/2 Foyer Apochromat have a 4-digit s/n, the former has a higher serial number than the latter, when I know for a fact that the Fulgior was manufactured at least a decade earlier...

Confused? So was I, but after looking for definitive information, I decided to give up on solving the Kinoptik serials mystery.. If you have better luck, please do post your findings here - I know a couple of people who'd be interested.

[JMF]

On 12/18/2023 at 6:03 PM, hrryxgg said:

Lenses made at serial numbers above 40,000 seem to be especially sought after, possibly due to improved
coating. In about 1962 this will not be multicoating in the modern sense but at that time improved coatings
were coming into use

According to some collectors, the earlier lenses are more desirable due to their lack of coating or early type of coating ...

I guess it depends on what look you're after !

40/2 Kinoptik on Sony A7S

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

40/2 Kinoptik on Leica CL

 

Edited December 19, 2023 by JMF

[Alex321]

What’s the difference between lenses marked 1/2 and lenses marked Focale? I’m looking at a 28mm in cameflex that says focale and one in arri s that says 1/2. They both cover super 35 and the same optically?

[Ecar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, Alex321 said:

What’s the difference between lenses marked 1/2 and lenses marked Focale? I’m looking at a 28mm in cameflex that says focale and one in arri s that says 1/2. They both cover super 35 and the same optically?

I suspect it's actually the same lens. Perhaps ask on a cine forum? In any event, they won't cover FF. They might not even cover APS-C.

[Carlos cruz]

On 5/10/2025 at 6:52 AM, Ecar said:

I suspect it's actually the same lens. Perhaps ask on a cine forum? In any event, they won't cover FF. They might not even cover APS-C.

I suspect that both could cover at least normal 35 (cine) format as cameflex was camera that was easily switchable between 16 & 35 mm it would be of no use to have lenses that cover only one format, it’s similar story with arri bayonet mount it served both formats and it was a common knowledge which lenses covered both formats, usually 28mm and up were ok on 35mm, and anything below was exclusively 16mm, and not necessarily s16.

s-35 and s-16 formats were both started much later in the 70’s. But I highly doubt they’ll cover full frame. There is way to expand coverage but usually optical boosters degrade quality so not worth it. 
 

i found only one lens with ½ marking on it an 18mm appchromat. Only explanation I can think of it’s for ½ inch sensor early tv cameras (so should be ok on 16mm)

[Ecar]

2 hours ago, Carlos cruz said:

I suspect that both could cover at least normal 35 (cine) format as cameflex was camera that was easily switchable between 16 & 35 mm it would be of no use to have lenses that cover only one format, it’s similar story with arri bayonet mount it served both formats and it was a common knowledge which lenses covered both formats, usually 28mm and up were ok on 35mm, and anything below was exclusively 16mm, and not necessarily s16.

s-35 and s-16 formats were both started much later in the 70’s. But I highly doubt they’ll cover full frame. There is way to expand coverage but usually optical boosters degrade quality so not worth it. 

You might well be right. I'm not very familiar with the subtleties of the various cine formats. All I know is that 35mm cameflex Kinoptiks do not quite cover FF, although they are OK on M8 and APS-C sensors. So there's no way a 28mm will unless, as you suggest, some optical wizardry comes into play...