Binopedia

Military Optics => Zeiss => Germany => Handheld Binoculars => Interbellum 1919-1938 => Magnification 8x => Topic started by: Frank Lagorio on August 12, 2018, 09:29:53 PM

Title: 1869457 Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Frank Lagorio on August 12, 2018, 09:29:53 PM
Seeger shows a CZJ GM D.F. 8 x 30 binocular with the same markings on page 272 of the green book stating at least 300 were believed to have been supplied to an unknown military user outside Germany. Several months ago I was fortunate to acquire one like it which had been sold at a Romanian army surplus auction. At the same time I was also able to see photographs of eight other similar CZJ GM 8x30’s sold at the same auction. Taking the serial numbers of the nine binoculars auctioned in Romania plus the serial number of Seeger’s green book example plus that of another recently sold by a Romanian seller on eBay and then correlating them with the Ziess Kontorbuch’s D.F. 8 x 30 order data (Seeger green book pages 883 – 884), it seems extremely likely that 2,100 of these binoculars were ordered in four batches between April 1938 – October 1938 under a Romanian contract. I have a attached a small database showing this.

I have also attached some pictures of its GM eyepiece build. These can be difficult to service because of dried lubricant, but once thoroughly cleaned and relubricated (a very heavy lubricant is required) they function smoothly and nicely.
Title: Re: Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Niall McLaren on August 12, 2018, 09:39:19 PM
Good work Frank - I wonder if my one's on your database? I bought it from Rumania if I remember rightly but sellers often list them as German used.
Title: Re: Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Peter De Laet on August 12, 2018, 10:43:05 PM
Great work Frank, thanks! No 492 has found a new home in Belgium. It would benefit from a good clean, but I haven't come round to it yet.
Title: Re: Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Thomas Antoniades on August 18, 2018, 02:58:16 PM
Congratulations to Frank L

I agree with the four groupings but for whatever it's worth I think that the highest secondary number is 1569 (out of 2100)

The highest secondary number for the first three groups is 1209 s/n 1878830 (1878651-1878850) (out of 1500 produced). This means that about 300 were sold elsewhere or used elsewhere.

Not that it matters but most likely 1600 went to Romania and 500 elsewhere.

Thomas
Title: Re: Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Frank Lagorio on August 18, 2018, 09:06:45 PM
Hello Thomas,

Thank you very much for the information.

When I compare Zeiss orders for the first three groupings of these binoculars with the Romanian army numbers for the same groupings, I find a 270 difference. So I agree that about 300 of these binoculars must have been sold or used elsewhere. The question, of course, which may never be answered is where - to another branch of the Romanian military, to a non-military Romanian service or to another country?

However, you conclude that it's likely a grand total of 500 went elsewhere, and I don't understand how the additional 200 binoculars were calculated. Is it because 1569 is the highest secondary number, and if so, why would this be the highest secondary number the Romanian Army could have assigned to these binoculars?

Frank
Title: Re: Romanian contract Carl Zeiss Jena gasmask D.F. 8 x 30
Post by: Thomas Antoniades on August 19, 2018, 01:18:23 PM
Hello Frank

I can only use the information I have. The 3rd series will have ended at No 1230. The fourth and last series started at 1890451 and I am sure that all the numbers including the one with 1569 as a secondary number were used in the same contract. The last 200 or so are a guess on my part. Statistically I would expect to have 1% in my list (this being the average). Unfortunately life is not so kind so for the moment this last part will remain yet another mystery.
There is no indication that the "missing" numbers were used elsewhere.

Regards

Thomas