Robert Capa camera choices

[sandro]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Of quite a few of the most famous photographers it is known by and large which camera's they were using. Ilse Bing, Eisenstaedt and Cartier Bresson are a few examples of photographers who chose Leica.

Robert Capa seems to have worked with Leica camera's at first, I think during the Spanish Civil War. Later on apparently he used Contax camera's. I would be interested to know if anything is known about Capa's choice to switch from Leica to Contax.

If someone has any knowledge about this I'd be interested to hear.

Thanks, Lex

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Hiles]

I have seen pictures of Capa with a TLR - I assume a Rolleiflex.

[pico]

They were pragmatists who chose cameras that were cost-effective and produced images acceptable to publishers. It is that simple. If a photographer changed brands it was likely for economic reasons.

Edited May 4, 2018 by pico

[derleicaman]

Back in the days of Capa, there were no celebrity endorsements by well known photographers. The decision of what camera to use was very pragmatic and most likely came down to what worked well for them and what one could afford. I'm not sure when Capa made the switch to Contax, but am relatively certain he was using Contax when he took his famous Normandy landing photos. When he was killed while covering the war in Indochina (Viet Nam) I believe he was still using Contax.

 

Another famous war photographer was David Douglas Duncan. He was a Leica user, but famously switched to using Nikon lenses on his Leicas during the Korean War. Nikon made quite a big deal out of this and it literally put Nippon Kogaku on the map. It's interesting that I was poking around the Nikon.com website today and they were honoring DDD. Nikon would provide exceptional service to Duncan as Japan is very close to Korea, something that Leica and Zeiss did not bother to do for whatever reason. This exemplary service for pros by Nikon and later Canon continues to this day, something Leica has never been able to do on a widespread basis. 

 

I'm sure many of you know that Leica came out with the original MP camera with Leicavit exclusively for professionals. In fact, in order to be able to purchase one from Leica, you had to provide Leica with your bona fides as a pro before they would deign to sell you one. What is not well known is that Leica made several pre-MP cameras exclusively for DDD and Alfred Eisenstaedt. Duncan's MP cameras were labelled M3D and Eisie's were M3E! These cameras were identical to the later MP production cameras. One of Duncan's M3D cameras, M3D-2, was sold at the Westlicht auction in 2013.

[adan]

The Contax II (1936) was more technologically advanced - metal roller-blind shutter instead of rubberized cloth; longer-based, combined rangefinder/viewfinder (like the M Leicas, but 18 years earlier (but with viewing only for 50mm lens); "shutter-finger" rapid-focusing with a little wheel in front of the shutter release like today's DSLR "main control dials" - which meant it could be focused and fired one-handed (while holding on tight to a pitching boat or plane or skyscraper steel with the left hand); removable back for faster and more certain film loading; a razor-sharp 85mm f/2 when all Leica had was the "dreamy" Thambar 90 f/2.2, AND a rangefinder-coupled 180mm...

 

The list goes on and on.... https://www.cameraquest.com/zconrf2.htm

 

Always remember that Nikon copied the Contax (with an improved horizontal shutter, cloth then metal foil) while Canon copied the Leica "Barnack" design - and Canon never really caught up to Nikon in the Pro market until the early 1990s and the AF era.

 

OTOH - when the M3 finally came out with a combined (single-eyepiece) viewfinder AND 3 framelines (50, 90, 135) - the head of Zeiss walked over to Ernst Leitz II at the 1954 PhotoKina, shook his hand, and said "You win!" The Contax was dead by 1961 (but alas, so was Robert Capa... )

Edited May 5, 2018 by adan

[willeica]

LFI has a wonderful story about a British born soldier who used a Leica during the Korean War to take colour pictures.

 

https://lfi-online.de/ceemes/en/blog/interview-jack-cohen-1541.html

 

Jack Cohen's uncle gave him a loan of a Leica that had been bought in a pawn shop in Liverpool and asked Jack to document his tour of duty from 1950 to 1952. The uncle said that he would pay for the film development provided that there was at least one image of Jack on each roll. The Leica's shutter got damaged when Jack fell into a river. Jack air dried (reminded me of Capa's D-Day negatives) the camera and it continued to work apart from shutter light leaks and some damage to film stock. There appears to have been no restriction on Jack's use of the camera and some of the pictures show battle scenes and areas. 

 

William 

Edited May 5, 2018 by willeica

[giordano]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Always remember that Nikon copied the Contax (with an improved horizontal shutter, cloth then metal foil) while Canon copied the Leica "Barnack" design - and Canon never really caught up to Nikon in the Pro market until the early 1990s and the AF era.

Nikon wisely started with the Contax body and its long-base rangefinder, whose other advantage was that all the high-precision cams and links were inside the body so the 1m to infinity range was transmitted to the lens with a 240 (?) degree rotation rather than a c. 4mm linear movement. And they equally wisely based their shutter on the Leica design, with improvements. 

 

I've always been in two minds about the Contax-style removable back. It makes it much easier to clean the film path, and surer to load in ideal conditions. But if you're changing films on horseback, up the rigging, or hanging on a cliff-face it's a lot easier to hold a Leica baseplate in your teeth than a Contax back.

[luigi bertolotti]

I have seen pictures of Capa with a TLR - I assume a Rolleiflex.

 

... and I recently saw a book of Capa (no war, Swiss tourism locations in the 50's), with most of pictures taken with  Linhof Technika 6x9 (both folding and "press" versions)

Right cameras for the right assignements I think was the main rule.... I wonder if his apparent prefernce of Contax over Leica was due to some detail in operations which he liked specifically (RF precision with wideopen luminous 50's ? The Contax RF had a much longer RF base than SM Leicas....)

Edited May 5, 2018 by luigi bertolotti

[sandro]

Thanks, you are all bringing up interesting elements. I think Robert Capa switched from Leica to Contax somewhere between the Spanish Civil War and his work during WWII, when he definately used a Contax. Indeed he has used other camera's as well, like Rolleiflex and Speed Graphic. The combined viewfinder and rangefinder of the Contax II certainly made a lot of sense for a war photographer like Capa was.

Lex

[harryzet]

They were pragmatists who chose cameras that were cost-effective and produced images acceptable to publishers. It is that simple. If a photographer changed brands it was likely for economic reasons.

 

the contax was way more expensive than the leica

[wlaidlaw]

The Contax is a lot more fragile than the Leica. My father gave up with his Contax IIA Colour Dial after about the 4th repair in as many years, put it in his dead camera drawer and reverted to his tried and trusty IIIa. I could not find anyone to repair the shutter of the Contax in the UK and sent it to the USA (not the well known, difficult and bad tempered repairer) but to a retired Contax employee in Phoenix Arizona. It took quite a long time (over a year) to come back, as he had to locate some parts and said unlike many folk, he was not prepared to bodge Kiev parts to fit. It seems to work OK now but I don't use it a lot, as the "wrong way round" focus is just too difficult for my elderly brain, which has been focusing "right way round" Leica cameras for over 60 years, to accommodate to. Also the coarse rasp textured and stiff geared roller focus, will wear a hole in my finger in one morning. The Opton 5cm/f1.5 Sonnar lens however, puts my contemporary Summarit and Summitar lenses to shame. It is far sharper and higher contrast than either, although the Summarit, which I got back from Alan Starkie yesterday, is now much improved with markedly reduced flare (clean, service, collimate and internal repaint). 

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

Ansel Adams was a Contax user as well.

[Ko.Fe.]

My last KIEV was from fifties, so it is direct copy of Contax, made on same equipment.

It was fully functiong camera with long history of use. It had brassed film advance knob.

I purchased it from EU user, who has it CLA'd in Russia and I send it for CLA to Kiev.

Nothing wrong was with it, just for CLA. I sold it to USA and it was sold again as working camera.

On RFF they published links about photographer from Poland who took thousands pictures across Africa before WWII with Contax.

Is it different in service? It is, but let's not downplay it in favour of Leica.

Winograd was resicling Leicas and brining them for service regularly.

Where is video of Fred Herzog telling how he was not able to use M3, because it was not relaible one he has.

Russian speaking RF enthusiasts pooled some info together and made on-line thread for how to service Contax II.

I just seen one photo enthusiast fixing his KIEV II at home.

He takes pictures with it every other day now.

The reason why Contax is less popular is because it has awkward and slow way to focus.

I sold mine KIEV II because it has more parallax error than my LTM RF cameras and because it is basically one focal length camera.

If I would be 50mm user, I would get Contax IIa.

Just for practical reason. In 2016 I seen CLA'd at home Contax IIa.

Owner has to deal with DAG for his M, but Contax IIa was CLA'd by him at home.

It is known what Contax II inner parts are better made than M parts, BTW.

They lasts longer, but Contax is watch ideology based. It needs to be lubricated more often.

[UliWer]

The Contax II (1936) was more technologically advanced - metal roller-blind shutter instead of rubberized cloth; longer-based, combined rangefinder/viewfinder (like the M Leicas, but 18 years earlier (but with viewing only for 50mm lens); "shutter-finger" rapid-focusing with a little wheel in front of the shutter release like today's DSLR "main control dials" - which meant it could be focused and fired one-handed (while holding on tight to a pitching boat or plane or skyscraper steel with the left hand); removable back for faster and more certain film loading; a razor-sharp 85mm f/2 when all Leica had was the "dreamy" Thambar 90 f/2.2, AND a rangefinder-coupled 180mm...

 

The list goes on and on.... https://www.cameraquest.com/zconrf2.htm

 

...

 

 

In another thread there was an interesting link to an article about the reasons why many of Capa's photos from the Normandy landing seemed spoiled: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255938-filca-a-b-and-c-wheres-d/?p=3395733

The Contax like the Leicas before the IIIf was not meant to use "modern" film cartridges as they were too short for the body so that the film moved out of  the position in front of the window where it is supposed to be. The handbooks for the Contax cameras recommended to use only the specially designed containers for "Contax film" though I am sure that Capa couldn't get any of them during wartimes.

 

When it comes to practical use one may differ about the advantages of a Contax. Whoever held one before his eye will notice that almost automatically a finger of the left hand will blind the little window of the rangefinder. Using gloves which may be mandatory in extreme cold makes the Contax rangefinder almost unusable (I tried it this winter). Even without gloves you have to hold a Contax in a very specific way to avoid this - sometimes we know this problem with the M, but never with a screwmount Leica.

 

Yes - the little wheel for focussing allowed very precise movements which are hard to achieve by moving the lens - but it is extremely s l o o o o w and only to be used for 50mm lenses. Your "focussing" finger won't like it if you practize this way of focussing too often - and its position adds to the risks of another finger being in front of the rangefinder window. I would not recommend to use it for quick action.

 

Yes - the measuring base of the Contax was huge, much, much bigger than the tiny one of a screwmount Leica. But this advantage was lost by the low "magnification" of the viewfinder which is 0.5 or even less. The rangefinder window of a screwomunt body is very small but has a large magnification. The Contax viewfinder is not brighter and even less contrasty than the rangefinder window of the LTM Leica. From my experience it is easier to focus precisely with the high magnification small base of the Leica than the opposite concept of the Contax.

 

Yes - the metal shutter was much more advanced, a real piece of art by Dr. Kückenbender who had written his doctoral thesis about shutters. Though there were reasons why they changed the construction for the postwar models, making it much lighter and more stabile (the shutter of my Contax IIa from 1955 still works, so I hope that Wlaidlaw's description doesn't become true for it as well). One will have to search very very long to find a pre-war Contax with a working shutter.

 

Yes - loading the film is much easier than for a Leica, no cutting etc, just fixing it. But if one tries to replace the back, one will loose much of the time one gained by loading the film compared to a Leica. Some weeks ago I managed for the first time to fix the back in one single attempt and felt proud for it, since usually it takes me at last three attempts.

 

Yes - Zeiss lenses for the Contax were generally more advanced than their Leitz counterparts - if you neglect distortion. 

 

Perhaps this is no appropriate standard: but the German army ordered Zeiss lenses for Leica bodies - never the other way round. 

 

Nonetheless I like the Contax System - as an alternative to what I know and as a reminder what could have been but what was never achieved. 

 

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!

[sandro]

UliWer, thank you for your interesting contribution, makes a lot of sense what you mention about the Contax. Apparently there was something that Capa liked about the Contax; when later he was working and got killed in Indo-China, he was working with a Contax and a Nikon, which makes sense if you like Contax.

Lex