Any love for Ziess Ikon Contaflex?

That does it. Taking my Contaflex Beta for a walk tomorrow. Hope you guys are happy :).

Regards

Marcelo
 
All right, all right. I just loaded a roll of Portra 160 in my little Contaflex II. I don't know how Zeiss did it but that little 45mm Tessar does a beautiful job with color film.


EDIT - By the way, Chris Sherlock in New Zealand did a marvelous job of rescuing my little Contaflex. He is better known for his work on the Kodak Retina but he can be talked into working on the older Contaflex 1 and II. Unlike Brett, bless his soul, some of us come equipped with a full set of 10 thumbs and should not be allowed to approach any camera with a screwdriver in our hands.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
That's exactly the issue with mine.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned above it is likely the basic cause is simply that outgassed lubricant residues have made the shutter blades sticky, and this has overpowered the ability of the shutter main spring to cycle them. In some cases it can be impossible to look through the finder because the shutter will not open for viewing during wind on, either. But bear in mind that just like a Hasselblad, when the release is depressed the shutter blades must first close (so that the mirror and capping plate can get out of the way) and then, open and close. So even if the blades open correctly when the camera is wound they won't necessarily be making the exposure correctly. If servicing is needed they can simply snap shut when the release is depressed, and stay shut--no exposure! Cleaning the shutter would probably fix this but the actuating rings behind the shutter would appreciate a clean too, so, really, the shutter should come out for this.

As I understand you are in the US, why don't you try asking Frank if he can sort this out for you? He knows his way around the Contaflexes very well indeed, and our own Vince (Lupo) has always rated him very highly for his work on all sorts of unusual designs (Exaktas and ALPAs IIRC). So it might be worth asking him for a quote?
Cheers
Brett
 
I see my name being bandied about again, Colonel (thanks, Brett), and thought I'd chime in.



The Contaflex II I repaired had been worked on before, and the following photo shows the spring tail that had been over extended so it created too much back pressure for it to be able to release the B lever to let the shutter open.



DSCN0727_2 by P F McFarland, on Flickr


Now this is not a common problem, as it was caused by whomever worked on the camera before me. But it sounds like your issue is just a run-of-the-mill sticky shutter. It's easy enough to fix, but who knows what other issues might crop up once it's been opened up. Zeiss over engineered their cameras back then, and while they usually don't break, things can get out of adjustment. And the gearing set for coordinating the aperture and shutter workings is a complex thing to behold. It's for this reason repair folks didn't like working on them. A lot of time was involved in the tear down and reassembly, and folks balked at the bills they got after the job was done. So it was easier to tell people you didn't work on them, than to lose money over a costly billing.


I don't do much camera work now, just the occasional tune-up or cleaning on a recent acquisition. But it was interesting to do that Conti II. So much so that when the gent I repaired it for asked me one day which camera he had that I might want as he was de-cluttering the place, I jumped on getting the Contaflex back.



Sample photo after the last of the repairs

River Rubble In The Shade by P F McFarland, on Flickr


Lovely camera, good lens, built like a limousine.



Zeiss Ikon Contaflex II by P F McFarland, on Flickr



Here is a listing of all the albums from the repairs and testing:


https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGwBS2D
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGGUAkw
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGFzN9G
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGGUAkw
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGJDajj
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGLoPrN
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGMGJA7
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGNUCUC
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjGNnbpP


Someone also mentioned a Prima:



Zeiss Contaflex Prima Group Photo by P F McFarland, on Flickr


https://flic.kr/s/aHskarnWae


I like Zeiss



Zeiss Ikon Cousins by P F McFarland, on Flickr


PF
 
@ Brett, Thank you!
I was hoping ("please point me to a starting point") for a few pointers, and I see you took the time to produce this long and informative text. And, yes, I have the "Contaflex I-IV service manual".

Good pictures in the link you provided. Also informative discussion in the link provided by Mike Connealy. I'm going to print hardcopies of all that, just to be safe. Gives me an incentive to tackle the ContaflexII (as a starter) as soon as... I finish what is on my table: the 9x12cm folder and a Rollei 35XF.

Hmm, thylacine, Sarcophilus Harrisii, would you reside in Tasmania, by any chance?

Lest we should forget what these metal machines are made for, I attach two pictures taken with the ailing Contaflex; at the small size allowed for attachments on this forum, the problem is not apparent.

Contaflex love. Forgot to mention I have gathered (amassed??) the 35/3.2, 85/3.2 pro-Tessars, the set of proxars, and Zeiss filters yellow, green, orange in 27mm and 60mm diameters. A nice kit, even if a little... dense.
 

Attachments

  • 2017-09-34_S.jpg
    2017-09-34_S.jpg
    31.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 2017-09-33_S.jpg
    2017-09-33_S.jpg
    27.3 KB · Views: 0
Someday I would like to shoot a Contarex. I dream everyday of owning a set of Contarex lenses converted to f mount. Sorry for going ot just wanted to remind everyone there is an even higher level which some say the very best glass ever made for any camera exists.
 
farlymac said:
I like Zeiss
Click to expand...

I do too. Zeiss is Neiss.

When I was a kid my father, who was an optical engineer (he is retired now), did a lot of work for Zeiss Australia. My brother got one of these shirts

il_794xN.1607711255_4drq.jpg


I always wanted it, but it was very comfortable and my brother totally wore it out. I have looked for one since but they are pretty rare. There is one on eBay now for $US495 (!!!).

In 1983 I thought it was so cool.

Marty
 
Last edited:
Browsing my files, I came across a illustrated write-up for (partial?) servicing of a Super-B shutter. I had saved it as a local html file; the site does not exist any more, but can be found thanks to the marvelous Wayback Machine. There https://web.archive.org/web/20110901061428/http://www.monopix.co.uk/articles.shtml you can find the Articles section, look down the list for https://web.archive.org/web/20110901061428/http://www.monopix.co.uk/contaflexshutter.shtml

Edit. Should have checked. The archived page on archive.org is without the pictures. If you would like to have that document, please send me a PM.
 
BernardL said:
@ Brett, Thank you!
I was hoping ("please point me to a starting point") for a few pointers, and I see you took the time to produce this long and informative text. And, yes, I have the "Contaflex I-IV service manual".

Good pictures in the link you provided. Also informative discussion in the link provided by Mike Connealy. I'm going to print hardcopies of all that, just to be safe. Gives me an incentive to tackle the ContaflexII (as a starter) as soon as... I finish what is on my table: the 9x12cm folder and a Rollei 35XF.

Hmm, thylacine, Sarcophilus Harrisii, would you reside in Tasmania, by any chance?

Lest we should forget what these metal machines are made for, I attach two pictures taken with the ailing Contaflex; at the small size allowed for attachments on this forum, the problem is not apparent.

Contaflex love. Forgot to mention I have gathered (amassed??) the 35/3.2, 85/3.2 pro-Tessars, the set of proxars, and Zeiss filters yellow, green, orange in 27mm and 60mm diameters. A nice kit, even if a little... dense.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm a mainlander but have been residing in Tassie on a few acres just out of Hobart for many years.

The Contaflex system is still fairly affordable. I've found that wide open the 115mm Pro Tessar can have some distortion but it's quite usable closed down a bit. On the other hand the 35mm and 85mm are surprisingly good. I don't have the M1:1 Macro Tessar yet, or a Monocular, but I'd like these eventually, because I have most of the other accessories including the magazine backs and the tripod adaptor bracket needed when shooting with these, as well as the copy stand Zeiss made for the Contarex and Contaflex. I've got at least one example of all the Tessar Contaflexes too, although if a black Super BC presented itself at the right price I'd be happy to add that to my chrome one.

Re: the Contaflex II. Keep an eye out at discount or hardware stores for some inexpensive small slotted screwdrivers. The securing screw for the aperture stop down tensioning spring and its locking screw are in an inconvenient position inside the back of the camera. It's impossible to get a conventional driver right into their slots. So adding a bend near the tips of a couple of drivers at different angles makes the job of re-tensioning the spring after shutter installation that much more bearable. In fact you may not be able to do it without modifying a driver or two. Cheap ones are usually fine because they obviously won't get a lot of use—as long as they are not made of cheese.
Cheers
Brett
 
Freakscene said:
I do too. Zeiss is Neiss.

When I was a kid my father, who was an optical engineer (he is retired now), did a lot of work for Zeiss Australia. My brother got one of these shirts

il_794xN.1607711255_4drq.jpg


I always wanted it, but it was very comfortable and my brother pretty much wore it out. I have looked for one since but they are pretty rare. There is one on eBay now for $US495 (!!!).

In 1983 I thought it was so cool.

Marty
Click to expand...
That's still cool, Marty. I love it. Not enough to pay $500 US for it, though.
 
I'll add my $.02 worth to the discussion. A couple of years ago I was in Pro Camera in Charlottesville, Virginia, and I spotted a camera with the words "Zeiss Ikon" stamped on the front. I asked to handle it, and it worked (as do all of the film cameras in the display case). So, I bought it based largely on the "Zeiss Ikon" label and the promise of a real, live Zeiss lens. The one quirk of the camera is the non-return mirror, which has confused one or two people who asked to try it, and promptly handed it back with profuse apologies for having broken it. :p

It's the Contaflex Super BC model. The battery chamber was corroded, and I never asked the staff to fix it, since the shutter is mechanical. I use Sunny 16 (or Sunny 11 for B/W film), and sometimes a handheld light meter. Everything works beautifully, it's fun to use and takes very good pictures with the 50mm Tessar lens. I've never had any problems with it. It's like my 1911 45ACP: sometimes I miss. The camera never does.

BTW, I learned later that the name "Zeiss Ikon" has been applied to many cameras in years gone by, so my camera isn't something extra special, except for the fact that it is my only film SLR in my collection. And it runs and is paid for...

With best regards, Pfreddee(Stephen)
 
Pfreddee said:
I'll add my $.02 worth to the discussion. A couple of years ago I was in Pro Camera in Charlottesville, Virginia, and I spotted a camera with the words "Zeiss Ikon" stamped on the front. I asked to handle it, and it worked (as do all of the film cameras in the display case). So, I bought it based largely on the "Zeiss Ikon" label and the promise of a real, live Zeiss lens. The one quirk of the camera is the non-return mirror, which has confused one or two people who asked to try it, and promptly handed it back with profuse apologies for having broken it. :p

It's the Contaflex Super BC model. The battery chamber was corroded, and I never asked the staff to fix it, since the shutter is mechanical. I use Sunny 16 (or Sunny 11 for B/W film), and sometimes a handheld light meter. Everything works beautifully, it's fun to use and takes very good pictures with the 50mm Tessar lens. I've never had any problems with it. It's like my 1911 45ACP: sometimes I miss. The camera never does.

BTW, I learned later that the name "Zeiss Ikon" has been applied to many cameras in years gone by, so my camera isn't something extra special, except for the fact that it is my only film SLR in my collection. And it runs and is paid for...

With best regards, Pfreddee(Stephen)
Click to expand...


I used to take my film to Pro Camera, but the round trip from Roanoke once a month was getting a bit wearing. I still like to go there every once in a while to see what Bill has in the front case. Last time I bought a Trioplan 100mm for my Contax IIa, and some gaffer tape for my Soviet cameras.


PF
 
Just to show that I do actually use a Contaflex occasionally, and not just talk about what ails them, here's a shot I made a couple of years back that is slightly unusual, given that it was made with the Zeiss Teleskop additional lens for the Contaflex I and Contaflex II. The Teleskop in this case was fitted to my immaculate early type Contaflex II with dual range light meter (still in perfect working order in my own example). Film was Fuji Acros 100 processed, as usual for me, in Ilford ID-11 1 + 3 dilution. I don't typically bother recording shutter/aperture settings, but considering the ample depth of field evident, it was stopped down a bit for this image, at which apertures, the Teleskop can be surprisingly sharp.

46637353564_4d1eb0b46a_b.jpg


The subject is SY Preana, a 19th Century steam yacht that is especially beautiful. You can read about it here if you have an interest in such things.
Cheers,
Brett
 
Arbitrarium said:
They're really well made and look great on a shelf, but in use the viewfinder is awful. Combined with the big depth of field of a 45mm 2.8, it sort of negates the point of it being an SLR altogether. I'd rather use a plain viewfinder model like the Contina.
Click to expand...

Why judge the usefulness of an interchangeable len SLR system based on a single lense. there are short telephotos in the system, too (85/4 and 115/4).

I did own a Contaflex that had been serviced. It worked well, and the lenses were very good, but I do prefer rangefinders, so I sold it.
 
Arbitrarium said:
They're really well made and look great on a shelf, but in use the viewfinder is awful. Combined with the big depth of field of a 45mm 2.8, it sort of negates the point of it being an SLR altogether. I'd rather use a plain viewfinder model like the Contina.
Click to expand...


You must have owned something different than I do. The viewfinder in my Contaflex II is very nice. Certainly bright enough for easy focusing even indoors.

And I could be wrong but I was never aware that the Contina had anything faster then a 45/2.8 lens.
 
Brett, very nice shot!

In an apparent gas attack, I ended up buying a Contaflex Super B w/2.8 50mm Tessar but haven't shot with it yet. It's been back a few times for repair and I think it's working ok now but just need to find some time to shoot.

I also purchased the supplementary lenses (all in their original lens bubbles):
  • Pro-Tessar 35mm f3.2
  • Pro-Tessar 85mm f3.2
  • Pro-Tessar 115mm f4
All in beautiful condition and exquisite build quality.

During my gas attack I also purchased a Zeiss Contina-matic III w/removable 45mm f2.8 Pantar lens, and a Zeiss Contessa (45mm f2.8 Tessar).

The engineering in these cameras is very admirable.

I also bought some accessories; hoods, filters, and really need to stop now! ....and go out and shoot... :)
 
Ty for sharing the Preana with us sir.. when I come across stories like this I sometimes wonder if we are missing something better nowadays
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom