About TSVVS...
Printed from: USSRPhoto Forums
Topic URL: http://localhost:8088/modern/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2094
Printed on: 5/8/2026 6:56:17 PM
Topic
Topic author: Jacques M.
Posted on: 20120711110100
Hello!
About TSVVS, once more! But I have the chance to own two TSVVS and I would share some remarks and have your own...
My cameras are from 1949 (serial # 264)and 1950 (# 503). They both have postwar 2/5cm Sonnar lenses, T coated and made at Jena. Some rare first 1949 TSVVS were supplied with prewar 1,5/5cm uncoated Sonnars (all in the 226xxxx range by the wiki). Curious.
The two lenscaps read "Carl Zeiss Jena". They are very probably original: all the other caps mounted on lenses of the same period (for example on Jena Contaxes) are not black, but silvered. Lenscaps which read TSVVS (always black) are mounted on later 1950 cameras, as it seems. Alain Berry's 1950 TSVVS had such a cap (serial # 781).
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 005.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 005.jpg
Next post about the internal numbers.
Amitiés. Jacques.
Replies
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120711114007
The internal numbers are a mystery.
This number (the same for one camera, most of the time) is struck
- on the baseplate (inside),
- on the corner of the shutterbox,
- on the back, behind the filmplate, by DVD Technik. But I did not checked...
I thought first that the number was a "short" for the official serial number: my # 264 has "64" inside!
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 012.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 012.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 011.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 011.jpg
But my TSVVS # 503 has "89" as internal number:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 014.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1172012_TSVVS 014.jpg
Concerning the "64" inscription, the reengraving on the shutterbox is interesting. One hypothesis: this number could be the factory mark of the perfect adaptation for the three parts of the camera: back, bottom and shutterbox. On my # 264, the original shutterbox had to be replaced, a new one adapted which needed a reengraving.
Of course, other hypothesis are possible. Anyway, there were some 1000 samples of TSVVS, and this internal number only has two ciphers...
Next post about the rangefinder.
Jacques.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120711120405
Reply author: uwittehh
Replied on: 20120711124450
Jacques,
thanks for the thread and the pictures.
My 699 has the "Carl Zeiss Jena" lens cap as yours and the rounded corner as your 503. When I look through the rangefinder the spot in the middle is yellow with a bit light green in it, the rest is transparent.
On the shutter house there is a 85 stamped in and on the base plate there is only an 8 stamped in. Maybe the 5 was forgotten? I remember that there was a number behind the filmplate but I do not remember it...
Ulrich
http://fotos.cconin.deReply author: uwittehh
Replied on: 20120711152733
Reply author: AlexanderK
Replied on: 20120711163138
Well, Jacques,
I have just checked my cameras:
1) TSVVS 1949 Nr.292:
- 11 on the base plate and 90 (or 06 ?) on the shutter box
- stright corner
- rangefinder is transparent with yellow spot
2) TSVVS 1950 Nr.714:
- 100 on the base plate and on the shutter box. The two numbers are the same!
- rounded corner
- rangefinder is yellow with yellow spot, which is a little lighter
Both lenses are Sonnar 2/50 T Jena with similar numbers: 3059649 (Nr.292) and 3059762 (Nr.714)
Regards, Alexander
Reply author: RCCCUK
Replied on: 20120712035814
Hi Jacques,
I have just checked my 1950 TSVVS #650. The shutter box has number 36 on it and the base-plate number 2. The rangefinder is transparent with a central yellow spot. Mine also has the rounded corner like your #503. Incidentally, the shutter box and the inside of the base-plate are both black in my camera.
David.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120712071228
Thanks, Ulrich, Alexander and David!
So, the rangefinder could be yellow/transparent or yellow pale/yellow.
And it seems that the internal number is not always the same for a same camera, and that it can have three ciphers. The mystey is growing darker! Certainly, it could be useful to put in the wiki this (or these) number(s), so that we try and understand something.
I do that immediately for my two cameras:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?ContentID=58&ParentID=1&WikiCatID=17Amitiés. Jacques.
PS: the baseplate (internal) and shutterbox are black on my cameras too, for sure.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120712080452
Some remarks about the 2/5cm Sonnars.
After the war, as soon as possible, the Jena factory was put in order to make Sonars again. Two main reasons for that: three cameras needed lenses (Jena Contaxes, Contax IIa and TSVVS): Oberkochen /Stuttgart had problems to produce their own lenses.
The Sonnars on my TSVVS:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1272012_TSVVS 016.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1272012_TSVVS 016.jpg
On the left, the # 3089522 (on TSVVS # 264), on the right, the # 3090471 (on TSVVS # 503).
Of course, they are not the same: shorter aluminium body for the left one, complete chrome body for the other.
An hypothesis: CZJ could have had some problems with chrome at the beginning. Wartime Sonnar bodies were too made of aluminium. Idem for the first ZK coming from these wartime Sonnars...
A comparison with my two Jena Contaxes:
- Sonnar 2/5cm (short aluminium body)# 3009106 on the Jena Contax # 11826,
- Sonnar 1,5/5cm (long chrome body) # 3089445 on the Jena Contax # 30536.
These "chrome" Sonnars are probably the first real postwar Sonnars.
Jacques.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120712082355
Reply author: uwittehh
Replied on: 20120712135019
Jacques,
the lenses are interesting. My TSVVS also has the complete silver Sonnar, my Jena Contax has the black/silver one.
Ulrich
http://fotos.cconin.deReply author: AlexanderK
Replied on: 20120712153129
Jacques,
my both lenses are in black/silver (short body): Nr.292 - aluminium und Nr.714 - chrom.
"Stop-lever" of the lens are the same as yours.
Regards, Alexander
Reply author: AlexanderK
Replied on: 20120712164342
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120713085527
Yes and thanks, Alexander. It's on this site that I have known about the internal number on the back, under the filmplate. I never dismounted any TSVVS, contrarily to Ulrich![;)]
On this site, there are too beautiful pictures of TSVVS covered with mother-of pearl. Perhaps Aidas would accept to post a picture of his own?[:)]
And there is too an exceptional TSVVS with a LTM 39mm mount... Perhaps the only one ever made?
Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20120717081937
Well, if I try to sum up...
There are some variable original features:
- the corner of the cover: sharp or rounded,
- the lens cap (always black)reads "Carl Zeiss Jena" or "TSVVS",
- the rangefinder: yellow/transparent or pale yellow/yellow,
- the lens can be a prewar Sonnar 1,5/5cm non coated (serial # 226xxxx) or a postwar coated 2/5cm (serial # 30xxxxx). These last Sonnars can have a "long" or "short" body.
As repair, the original lens stop can be replaced by a Contax part.
About the internal number(s), I have opened a column more in the TSVVS entry of the wiki. It would be useful that everybody puts his number(s): it is probably the only way to know more about this inscription.
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=17&ParentID=1&ContentID=58&Item=TSVVS+%2F+VTS%2DVSAmitiés. Jacques.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140516080453
Hello,
I dig out this thread...
About the stop lever of the lens, I have pointed the original one (very thin and weak) which could heve been replaced by the Contax one as repairs.
But it seems that (all? many?) 1950 TSVVS have this Contax stop. So, this stop could be original too...
A reason more to think that there is a close relationship between TSVVS and Contax.
Jacques.
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20140818085127
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140818121009
Hi Juhani!
Yes... But the camera is not completely convincing: the viewfinder is a Fed's one and the body and the shutter box are made of alloy, not brass.
But the general quality of all that is amazing...
Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20140818142323
So it may be non-genuine TSVVS, and possibly staying at a price level which could be affordable [:D]
Best regards,
Juhani
Reply author: Fred_L
Replied on: 20140818160615
The seller has noticed it is a TSVVS copy... Not an original...
Fred
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140818230728
Yes it's just a very good copy. Wrong lens from 1957, Fed viewfinder, gap between mount and top, wrong covering.
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20140819005036
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="MS Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Fred_L</i>
<br />The seller has noticed it is a TSVVS copy... Not an original...
Fred
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes and no... The short confusing text can be understood both ways. It says "copy camera" and not "camera copy" or "TSVVS copy" or "replica" which would be best? Any way, I will be watching.
Best regards,
Juhani
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140819010508
It's sold as a "copy", the seller consulted with me before listing it.
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140819032735
Really, I had not understand at first reading that the camera was declared as a copy.
Probably my English: sellers should beware of old foreign collectors and be more clear!
Anyway, it's a beautiful fake. The lensplate is particularly convincing.
Amitiés. Jacques.
PS: lens of 1937.
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140819085301
I can pass on to seller to adjust description. The lens is Jupiter-8M on it. If my memory serves me right prototype for Jupiter-8 was developed by GOI in 1948 and the later Jupiter-8M modification in 1957. That makes the lens 10 years later than camera.
Cheers,
Vlad
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140819110723
About the lens, I see a 2/5cm Sonnar, non T and collapsible...
The serial number corresponds to the year 1937.
That time, it's not my English![;)]
Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140820072659
Oh! It seems that have switched the lens out on it. I was shown this model with Jupiter 8m before the auction. It's a large collection so they may have found a lens to go with it.
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140820094555
hmm.. so I talked to the seller, it seems that the previous owner of the camera had switched the lens out and not the seller, because before it was tried to be auctioned off as a real TSVVS with Jupiter-8M. Looks like that lot was pulled from the auction because it wasn't a real one. And the collector whose camera the seller is selling must have bought it right after. The guys who are selling it just acquired a whole collection they are liquidating. Here's the previous auction:
http://bid.igavelauctions.com/Bidding.taf?_function=detail&Auction_uid1=2967216Reply author: Luiz Paracampo
Replied on: 20140820203627
At least body cover or tube came from leica the curtain screws are not original and top cover have wider window
a "blended" fake!
Regards
LP
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140822094339
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20140826074017
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="MS Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by cedricfan</i>
<br />So it may be non-genuine TSVVS, and possibly staying at a price level which could be affordable [:D]
Best regards,
Juhani
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
1.400 US-$ = 1.000 €uros, for a replica [V]
Best regards,
Juhani
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140826080556
Hi Juhani,
Yes, even for a well made fake...
All the rare cameras are expensive.
Now a fake TSVVS is much rarer than a geruine TSVVS,
Therefore a fake TSVVS is much more expensive than a genuine one.[:D]
We have a lot of chance: it's not the case!
Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20140829061559
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20140829102802
Yes. And that time, the description is much more clear.
Reply author: Vlad
Replied on: 20140829103010
I spoke to seller. They guy who won that auction said "I don't have funds to pay for it." He had to relist it. Why would you even bid if you can't pay for it...
Cheers,
Vlad.
Reply author: cedricfan
Replied on: 20160622142745
Reply author: Jacques M.
Replied on: 20160622161817
Yes, Juhani.
At that price, it's not so astonishing...
Hope another member has got it.
Jacques.
