Nicht immer nur Kaviar ... (English Version)

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have my father's near mint 1954 Contax IIA, which I had fully serviced in the USA around 10 years ago. I very rarely use it even though it has an excellent lens (the 50mm f1.5 Opton Sonnar). After 65 years of focusing Leica's since I was old enough to hold a camera, my brain cannot cope with the "wrong way round" focusing and the stiff remote focusing roller with its very aggressive knurling, will wear a hole in my finger after less than an hour. The combined viewfinder/rangefinder is small, dim and dingy compare with the by then contemporary Leica M3. Yes it was revolutionary when it came out in 1933 but sadly Contax and Zeiss then sat on their laurels for the next 25 years and barely updated it at all. Zeiss rarely demonstrate staying power when it comes to their cameras. The Contax G3-D APS-C digital auto focus rangefinder could have taken the world by storm in 2004/5, if they had not confected a row with their Kyocera partners and got cold feet. Cosina together with Epson, could have developed a digital version of the excellent Ikon rangefinder, if only someone had taken some brave pills. Their ZM lenses are superb for the price but looking for an alternative to the digital Leicas to be used on. So many missed opportunities. 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

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

[sandro]

Wilson, you are right about Zeiss and their strange policy in following up their own products. I read some books by Kuc, like Auf den Spuren der Contax and Contaflex Contarex since a friend gave me the Contaflex Super BC with lenses. I am amazed by the ingenuity of this camera and the ideas behind it, and on the other hand the not so easy way to handle this camera. My friend also gave me the Pentax Spotmatic which was bought to replace the Contaflex Super BC and that shows such a world of differences. Once Zeiss was on the track of SLR´s it seems there was no barrier in inventing new elements which all apparently had to lead to yet another camera and camera system.

I won´t be using the Contaflex Super BC, but I am thinking about using the Pentax Spotmatic, so I can at least use the lenses which are in no way to be used on a Leica camera, unfortunately.

Lex

[pippy]

19 hours ago, Al Brown said:

Here is my Contax III and its particularly hazy lens...

Crikey, Al! It looks more like one of Rollei's 'mirror-finish' lens-caps! Please keep this snap handy so that the next time anyone posts a question as to whether use of a UVa lens filter is useful or not you can post this image by way of a reply...

I couldn't remeber if I had posted my own Contax II and, for once(!), the 'Search' functioned worked for me. It turns out I had (post#17 page 1).

My front element is in slightly better condition............although as it's (probably!) spent more time in an ERC than has Al's the (very thin) chrome-plating has worn-off right down to the brass where, when closed, the leather of the front edge has rubbed against the body;

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/318752-nicht-immer-nur-kaviar-english-version/#comment-4158254

EDIT : Regarding Wilson's observation about how using the 'fingertip-shredder' focus-wheel is concerned; I realised quite early on that the most comfortable method for me is to use the wheel solely to unlock the lens; afterwards I use the lens' body as is my usual practice. The 'Contax Grip', however, takes quite a bit of familiarity to become second-nature!

Philip.

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by pippy

[UliWer]

19 hours ago, Al Brown said:

And it was cheaper.

Was it in $ ?

In Germany the Contax  III with Tessar 1:3.5 was 470 RM, with Tessar 1:2.8 495 RM, with Sonnar 1:2 560 RM and with Sonnar 1:1.5 695 RM. 

At the same time the Leica IIIa with Elmar was 307 RM, with Summar 387 RM.

Of course a comparison of a camera with light meter to one without is not fair. The  Contax II without metering was 110 RM less in all different lens combinations. You could upgrade a Contax II to a III for 120 RM.

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by UliWer

[romanus53]

some more Contax, wanted to surpass Leica and had to respect other's patentings - you know the end

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!

there was even a rangfinder-coupled 6.3/18 cm Tele-Tessar

[wlaidlaw]

.....and of course there was the spectacular RF coupled Olympia Sonnar lens 180/f2.8 for the Contaxes, although I think this image is of the Contax Panflex version. 

Wilson

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!

Edited January 18, 2022 by wlaidlaw

[romanus53]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

shure the Olympia-Sonnar was offered first with rf-coupling but they soon switched to a mirror-housing because precise focus could not been achived with the rf - and very few were build, even the Tele-Tessar didn't make up over a few hundred, offered for the Kine-Exakta too.

[wlaidlaw]

Given that I struggle to focus the 50/1.5 accurately when wide open with my IIa, I can well imagine the near impossibility of focusing the 180/2.8, especially of fast moving competitors at the 1936 Olympics. 

Wilson

[romanus53]

and don't forget that focus-shift on the Sonnar, a heritage you can enjoy even with the C-Sonnar nowadays. The Tele-Tessar is still a decent performer and pretty light-weight, so I use it from time to time.

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!

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by romanus53

[Ambro51]

To get a handle on those 1936 dollar prices, it’s safe to multiply by 20, for current dollars. 

[zeitz]

1 hour ago, wlaidlaw said:

.....and of course there was the spectacular RF coupled Olympia Sonnar lens 180/f2.8 for the Contaxes, although I think this image is of the Contax Panflex version. 

Wilson

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!

This Carl Zeiss Jenna Olympia Sonnar was made in 1936.  Thus it predates the pre-war Zeiss Ikon Panflex.  (The Panflex never really got into production before WWII; there were only prototype or very limited production lenses made for it.)  You can envision the Flektoskop version of the lens as the front unscrewed at the tripod ring.  This is a direct mount Sonnar; the Flektoskop reflex housing had its own tripod ring.  The brass appendage at the rear is not original.  You could speculate it was custom made for direct mount on a Leica.

[UliWer]

4 hours ago, romanus53 said:

and don't forget that focus-shift on the Sonnar, ...

Yes, there was some... 😏

Though the lens design of the 1:1.5/5cm Sonnar was tweeked by Bertele several times and the last "Carl Zeiss"- version for the Contax after the war showed less and it was clearly better at short distances. Though if I look at results from longer distance the older version seems a little bit sharper and even more contrasty than the newer one - clear sign that the older version was overcorrected. But Bertele never got rid of the Sonnar's massive distortion.

I think Bertele  would have loved  the modern aids of floating element and electronic in-camera "correction" of lenses. He would have been the ideal designer of lenses for the Q and the L-mount systems...

 

 

 

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by UliWer

[luigi bertolotti]

On 1/18/2022 at 5:28 PM, wlaidlaw said:

.....and of course there was the spectacular RF coupled Olympia Sonnar lens 180/f2.8 for the Contaxes, although I think this image is of the Contax Panflex version. 

Wilson

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!

Less spectacular, less shiny, less legendary...  but its post WW nephew can be still fairly usable 🙂

(not on THIS body, of course... )

Edited January 19, 2022 by luigi bertolotti

[UliWer]

Focussing by an extra wheel on the lenses side must have been a Zeiss speciality, or does anybody know other producers who used this system?

P.S. Luigi, I hope we'll see the results with this lens from an M11 soon...

[zeitz]

7 minutes ago, UliWer said:

does anybody know other producers who used this system?

There were many examples of lenses that used rack and pinion focusing with knobs and shaft running under the bottom of the lens.  Examples include the 800mm Telyt and the Sport Kilar lenses (300mm, 400mm, and 600mm).  Zeiss' invention here was for the photographer who had two right hands and no left hand.  For those of us who focus with the left hand and work the shutter release with the right hand, the arrangement is odd.  The traditional rack and pinion lenses have knobs on both sides.

[Michael Geschlecht]

On 1/19/2022 at 5:08 PM, UliWer said:

Focussing by an extra wheel on the lenses side must have been a Zeiss speciality, or does anybody know other producers who used this system?

P.S. Luigi, I hope we'll see the results with this lens from an M11 soon...

Hello Uliwer,

Minolta made a 40mm - 80mm zoom in the 1970's or 1980's that hade a sidewheel.

Best Regards,

Michael

[zeitz]

12 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Minolta made a 40mm - 80mm zoom in the 1970's or 1980's that hade a sidewheel.

That knob controlled both zoom and focus.  And the knob was more conveniently placed on the left side of the lens.

[pippy]

14 hours ago, Al Brown said:

...Zenit/Krasnogorsk Photosniper used it on a 300mm lens (see pic)...

Interesting, Al!

I knew of the Photosniper when I was a kid but hadn't appreciated that the front-most knob could adjust the focus mechanism. How, exactly, does it work? Is there some sort of physical gearing point of contact between the 'gun-stock' and the focus-ring of the Tair lens?

Philip.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[romanus53]

While Kilfitt as already mentioned made this, in case of the Pan-Tele-Kilar both focusing mechanism were used to get really close from a distant point of view

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!

Piesker also had this feature, seen here on 250 mm lens, left a Picon, in front the Tele-Picon, late versions with f 4.5; as the Picon is missing some lever I think this feature was made for continous focusing with movie or film camera.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, Al Brown said:

It had to be Soviet Russia's best kept secret 😉....The giant lens block hidden inside the housing has a focusing rail bottom side that travels along the lens barrel...

Wow! Thanks for both the explanation and the link, Al; pretty fascinating stuff! Interesting to see how older ideas were being adapted and put into use with modern (at the time) lenses.

Thanks again.

Philip.