Advice for Getting Started with Contax II?

[steveyork]

Question-- so looking through the viewfinder it seems a little less clear than I would like-- is that dirt? Damage? Fungus? Age? Just wondering and if a cleaning would even address this? Sorry! As I said in my first post-- I am totally new at this! Thanks!

In my limited experience in having two pre-war con tax serviced, and handling a few others, a cleaning will brighten the viewfinder. Not surprising, after all, they're 80 year old cameras, and dirt and grime collects, but even cleaned they'll never be in the same league as a Leica M mount. Given the high contrast viewfinder of the Contax, however, with their great clarity, and long rangefinder base, they remain pretty easy to focus even with a relatively dimmer finder.

It's not the viewfinder, but probably the rangefinder mirrors that need cleaning. With most old rangefinders -- any brand -- do that and things dramatically improve.

 

[Highway 61]

It's not the viewfinder, but probably the rangefinder mirrors that need cleaning. With most old rangefinders -- any brand -- do that and things dramatically improve.

Every optical surface of the beamsplitter rangefinder unit must be cleaned and so do all the internal surfaces of the VF & RF windows and eyepiece unit.

On the Contax II, the signs of aging of the VF/RF unit are "golden droplets" (Canada balsam getting dry and brittle) visible in the main VF unit when looked at from the front.

The Contax II beamsplitter rangefinder unit can be replaced with one from a Kiev camera. They are 100% identical.

 

[contaxNewb]

Every optical surface of the beamsplitter rangefinder unit must be cleaned and so do all the internal surfaces of the VF & RF windows and eyepiece unit.

On the Contax II, the signs of aging of the VF/RF unit are "golden droplets" (Canada balsam getting dry and brittle) visible in the main VF unit when looked at from the front.

The Contax II beamsplitter rangefinder unit can be replaced with one from a Kiev camera. They are 100% identical.

Wow, okay, you guys are good!

So, uh oh...unfortunately, I am pretty certain it is the "golden droplets" (balsam separation), though mine aren't like droplets, but more like a kind of gold-wrinkle/foil looking effect on about 1/4-1/3 of the peripheral edge of the viewfinder when looked at from the front. It kind of matches some images on line.

So I have clearly read that this is bad, does it mean the camera is basically worthless, save some costly repair? Will the film I have in there not turn out at all or...? Unfortunately all the posts and things I can read about this online kind of stop with saying it's bad and will/is failure....

Just wondering, since I found a good person for a CLA, but I don't want to throw good money after bad or even waste shipping it there for inspection if it is irreparable or prohibitively so? Any advice or wisdom?

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Please don't think you have thrown good money away because you haven't. At the end of the day you have a classic Contax and are taking pictures with it and gaining experience. For a yardstick look at the cost of a new (or new-ish) film camera and a contemporary lens.

It might be that the camera needs a little attention to make it 100% perfect but there's a lot of them (and old Leicas) that are only 95% perfect and yet they turn out good pictures. My Contax is over 80 years old and I'd be delighted if I was in that state at 80+.

So finish the film and see what you have and then think about it for a bit and, perhaps, put another film through it. Then decide if you can live with it as it is or else sort out a few things.

I don't know where you stand with regard to photography but you may only have used a smart phone and some of the latest digital stuff; in that case you'll need to adjust mentally to use and understand the Contax. Luckily there's a lot of second-hand bookshops left with photography books and they can be a great help understanding film cameras and especially the historic and classic ones.

And there's something else you might have already discovered; you'll meet and greet a lot of film photographers when using it and some of them might offer you old film cameras and you'll have a lot of fun. And fun is what it should all be about.

There's another blessing that's seldom mentioned and that is that you'll find your understanding & appreciation of these new-fangled digital cameras increases. ;-)

Regards, David

PS If you want another yardstick for prices and value, look into buying a genuine lens hood, lens cap and instruction book from the 1930's to go with the camera and lens. You'll then see that the cameras and repairs are dirt cheap.

 

[Highway 61]

So, uh oh...unfortunately, I am pretty certain it is the "golden droplets" (balsam separation), though mine aren't like droplets, but more like a kind of gold-wrinkle/foil looking effect on about 1/4-1/3 of the peripheral edge of the viewfinder when looked at from the front. It kind of matches some images on line.

This isn't a difficult problem to solve out. For the price of three beers at the pub you will find a Kiev rangefinder donor body on eBay (get one from the 1970s so chances will be quite high, that the RF beamsplitter unit will be perfect and like new) and have your repair person swap the parts while he has the camera in his workshop for an overhaul.

There is someone on eBay UK selling a beamsplitter prism unit only (item 323257702383) but it shows the same problem as yours - don't buy it.

 

[RJ-]

So, uh oh...unfortunately, I am pretty certain it is the "golden droplets" (balsam separation), though mine aren't like droplets, but more like a kind of gold-wrinkle/foil looking effect on about 1/4-1/3 of the peripheral edge of the viewfinder when looked at from the front. It kind of matches some images on line.

Lovely to see this fantastic pre-war camera being reanimated with life.

I've been using a Contax II for 15 years - it's required one proper service (undertaking the rest on my own) during this time, whereas a Kiev IVa, hasn't required any. If you are in London, the Photographica Fair is on this weekend at Vincent's Square, and many of the stallholders who specialise in repairs can advise (for free) what you might need.

One way to test if it is your rangefinder unit, might be to tape yellow cellophane over the rangefinder window on the far right of the camera and observe if there is any difference in sharpening the double image rangefinder focussing.

I experienced a chemical immersive clean for a different camera viewfinder by a UK repairer which stunned me. For the first time, I could see clearly through the viewfinder and in 20 years had never noticed just how fogged the viewfinder was. Perhaps not all CLA's are done to the same standards, so it might be worth checking which technique for cleaning the viewfinder, resilvering the beam-splitter and so on, the technician might undertake after an appraisal of the repair requirements.

The Kiev, like the Jupiter lenses, are great back-ups when you find the right one; the right year. The frame spacing challenges on the Kiev IVa are very frustrating, losing approximately one frame per 36 exp roll, which might not seem a lot, however if it is a discontinued film, every frame counts.

Perhaps now, the Contax II is seen as more quirky and requires understanding (the Contax rangefinder book is a good place to start). With the Contax II, it's a pleasure obtaining on average 39 exposures per cassette, by loading completely in the dark. This is impossible to undertake on a Leica III series rangefinder due to its upside down loading.

Hope you get it working soon!

Kind regards,
RJ

 

[Pioneer]

Load it and shoot it. Don't be too picky at first. Plain old consumer color film is a great way to start because those films are usually pretty forgiving if the exposures are not exactly dead on because of a slightly sticky shutter. Try to work with the mid range shutter speeds at first since these are more likely to be working properly in the beginning. After time, with a bit of use, any hesitation caused by old lubricant will likely work itself out.

Show us what you get. We would love to see your photographs.

You might just be surprised how well it works as it is right now. Most old cameras just need a bit of attention and use and they preform pretty well.

My experience has been that using the camera will help you build some experience with how it works, and what parts seem to need help. That information will certainly help the repair tech when you do send it off for some work, and it will definitely help keep your costs down as well.

These old rangefinders all have viewfinders that are a little squinty but you will get used to it. Once you begin using it you will find it gets easier.

 

[David Hughes]

A PS to my earlier post; meaning the memory let me down...

Anyway, please could people think in terms of getting it repaired without zapping a Kiev. They are part of the Contax line, like Japanese cameras assembled in, say, China from Japanese parts and then finally made and assembled in China but for different reasons. And they are coming up to 65 or so years old and so a venerable classic camera in their own right. So we should be looking to preserve them.

Just my 2d worth and second thoughts, aimed at no one in particular.

Regards, David

 

[contaxNewb]

Update for anyone following along: midway through the roll of film, the shutter seemed to malfunction... bummer...



So off went the roll to developer to see what if anything took in the first half, and off goes the camera tomorrow for a repair/cla estimate...

 

[David Hughes]

We'll all keep our fingers crossed for you.

Regards, David

 

[contaxNewb]

Load it and shoot it.
Show us what you get. We would love to see your photographs.

Well, good news... or at least decent news. I just got the pictures back from developer, and the ones I did as a test before the shutter stopped functioning turned out decent enough (pleasantly surprised for my first pictures ever with a rangefinder!).

Plus, I shipped it off to service shop and estimate to service and the service doesn't break my bank, assuming it doesn't need major parts. Still crossing fingers on that one!!

Anyway, here's a couple test shots. The close up one of the limpets on the rock isn't the greatest but was the last to actually work on the roll and one of only two real attempts at a close up.

So, crossing the fingers once it's back from service it will be reliable enough for me to continue experimenting and actually improve my skills!

 

[Peter Browne]

They are a beautifully designed and made camera. I have a ‘37 Contax II, also with the Sonnar 50/2. Sadly my lens has a damaged rear element coating, which spoils it. But be aware you can use the post-war Sonnar 50/2 lens if you have a similar problem.

I am in WA too, with a '38 Contax II and a '35 Sonnar 50/2.

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2981456&postcount=98

The camera and lens both look in superb condition, and I would like to take some photos. However, should get it CLA'd first. Any ideas where I can get this done in WA, or Australia safely?

 

[mcfingon]

Hello Peter,
I would advise using it first and see how it works. It may not need a CLA. Mine has not in the five years or so years I have owned it. It will be obvious if the shutter speeds are off if you try high and low speeds, and also lens problems should be apparent if you try wide-open apertures and well shut-down. Because I've not needed to get mine serviced, I don't know who to recommend. I would think there is someone in Sydney who is still doing work on them, but I haven't been there to check for a while. I'll ask the Sydney RFF guys I know.
John Mc

 

[jgrainger]

I'm pretty sure most of these old Contaxes and Kievs would benefit from a service.. a slow or uneven shutter are signs of that, same for stiffness in winding, or if it's wound then feels noticeably rough when changing speeds - the design has some friction in that area but even a good and serviced 60's Kiev can feel much better than a rough and unserviced Contax.


People argue about how the Contax compares to other rangefinders, with some criticism of the shutter adjustability. While (for example) a Leica M3 is a later and more advanced camera, the Contax and Kiev are plenty good enough to produce great pictures if you gel with them.. Today I collected a 12x16 digital print of a test shot from my Opton 85mm Triotar with HP5 at 320 (to compare quality with a wet enlargement), suffice to say the lens is sharp by any standards.. stuff like this keeps me from doing more medium format.