Carl Zeiss 50mm 1.4 for SLR systems

[das]

If you want to read all about it, join one of the Zeiss or Contax lens Facebook groups. 90% of the posts seem to be people seeking to buy C/Y lenses to convert to EF or some other cine mount, or asking questions about how to do it.

Although I am not really financially or emotionally invested in the Contax SLR system, the whole phenomenon is kind of depressing. Here are the reasons that people give for using C/Y lenses:

1. Real cine lenses are expensive. $1000 for a Contax C/Y 35mm f/1.4 is a fraction of the price of an equivalent cine lens.
2. Someone discovered that C/Y lenses often share very similar optical designs to their real Zeiss cine lens equivalents.
3. The Zeiss T coating provides consistent color balance across different lenses.
4. The "vintage" look of these lenses.

People remove the aperture pin and declick the aperture. Many mods also require complete replacement of the mount and then addition of "gears." There is a whole industry around these conversions and several companies make the parts to make it happen.

Why do cine people want to use Contax SLR lenses?

 

[raid]

I sold my SL2003 and a couple lenses (135 and 50) to scrounge up $$ for my M8. I think I did well even though I took a loss on the Rollei system. It was kind of neat even if rather finicky.

I know. The cost is 699 pounds.

 

[raid]

If you want to read all about it, join one of the Zeiss or Contax lens Facebook groups. 90% of the posts seem to be people seeking to buy C/Y lenses to convert to EF or some other cine mount, or asking questions about how to do it.

Although I am not really financially or emotionally invested in the Contax SLR system, the whole phenomenon is kind of depressing. Here are the reasons that people give for using C/Y lenses:

1. Real cine lenses are expensive. $1000 for a Contax C/Y 35mm f/1.4 is a fraction of the price of an equivalent cine lens.
2. Someone discovered that C/Y lenses often share very similar optical designs to their real Zeiss cine lens equivalents.
3. The Zeiss T coating provides consistent color balance across different lenses.
4. The "vintage" look of these lenses.

People remove the aperture pin and declick the aperture. Many mods also require complete replacement of the mount and then addition of "gears." There is a whole industry around these conversions and several companies make the parts to make it happen.

Thanks for this explanation.

 

[David Murphy]

Raid, the Schneider Kreuznach Xenon 50mm F1.8 in QBM is a little known gem that I can recommend from experience. I have one that I use on my Rollei SL35 and I find the images just amazing, particularly as the Rollei 35mm SLR system was really sort of a consumer grade 35mm SLR system. The image quality is similar to an early rigid Summicron. This lens tends to sell for about $100-$150 on eBay depending on the condition, which is not too expensive considering what it is.

I'm also curious about the Zeiss 50/1.4 in this system, but it is a fairly pricey lens and mainly available from Europe (through eBay on occasion). I've considered buying one, but it's not been so high on my list since the Xenon 50/1.8 has given me such wonderful results and is only a bit slower.

 

[rfaspen]

The Rollei SL35, even though made in Germany, is a very basic SLR. The 2000 and 3000 system cameras were 35mm versions of the Hasselblad 500 series. Bodies, film backs, lenses, accessories, all synonymous. Pretty cool except a lot of people thought it was overboard for 35mm.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Why do cine people want to use Contax SLR lenses?

Because a Zeiss 25mm CP2 is a $2500+ lens in used condition, and a Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 Distagon in CY mount is less than $500 used, for example.
The CY lens registration is also long, close to Nikon, so adaptation is easier. Same goes for Leica R lenses which are also popular with the motion picture folks.
Right now on shopgoodwill there is a well used Zeiss 18mm CP2 that is up to $650+ so far. With a day left in the auction, that lens will probably sell for more than $1000 sight unseen.
I prefer Schneider lenses myself, but that's just me. I thought I had really scored when I saw a Bell and Howell 70HR with a 2" Cooke Ivotal stuck on the front. My bid only lasted a day then someone else saw the jewel on that camera and bid well over what I might spend. Now that Kevin in HK has almost cornered the market on 16mm motion picture lenses and has been butchering them for folks to use on their Leicas, I thought I might get a chance to really shoot with one as it was originally intended. Nope. Hopefully it stays intact and exposes many more thousands of feet of 16mm film.
Phil Forrest

 

[raid]

The Rollei SL35, even though made in Germany, is a very basic SLR. The 2000 and 3000 system cameras were 35mm versions of the Hasselblad 500 series. Bodies, film backs, lenses, accessories, all synonymous. Pretty cool except a lot of people thought it was overboard for 35mm.

The Rollei SLR cameras were unreliable and prone to fail. The SL35 all mechanical models were the “most reliable “ in this line of cameras. Rollei was falling apart financially then, and pricing the SL2000 or SL3003 and accessories at Leica prices was the last straw for many. The TLR system was of very high quality.

 

[raid]

Raid, the Schneider Kreuznach Xenon 50mm F1.8 in QBM is a little known gem that I can recommend from experience. I have one that I use on my Rollei SL35 and I find the images just amazing, particularly as the Rollei 35mm SLR system was really sort of a consumer grade 35mm SLR system. The image quality is similar to an early rigid Summicron. This lens tends to sell for about $100-$150 on eBay depending on the condition, which is not too expensive considering what it is.

I'm also curious about the Zeiss 50/1.4 in this system, but it is a fairly pricey lens and mainly available from Europe (through eBay on occasion). I've considered buying one, but it's not been so high on my list since the Xenon 50/1.8 has given me such wonderful results and is only a bit slower.

Hi David. I have one of these Schneider 50/1.8 QBM lenses, and I also like the resulting images from it. Shutterbug magazine had an BBC article on how to buy into Zeiss lenses at a low cost. They discussed the QBM lensess.
I like also to use the Zeiss 50/1.4 on m4/3 cameras so far.

 

[raid]

Because a Zeiss 25mm CP2 is a $2500+ lens in used condition, and a Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 Distagon in CY mount is less than $500 used, for example.
The CY lens registration is also long, close to Nikon, so adaptation is easier. Same goes for Leica R lenses which are also popular with the motion picture folks.
Right now on shopgoodwill there is a well used Zeiss 18mm CP2 that is up to $650+ so far. With a day left in the auction, that lens will probably sell for more than $1000 sight unseen.
I prefer Schneider lenses myself, but that's just me. I thought I had really scored when I saw a Bell and Howell 70HR with a 2" Cooke Ivotal stuck on the front. My bid only lasted a day then someone else saw the jewel on that camera and bid well over what I might spend. Now that Kevin in HK has almost cornered the market on 16mm motion picture lenses and has been butchering them for folks to use on their Leicas, I thought I might get a chance to really shoot with one as it was originally intended. Nope. Hopefully it stays intact and exposes many more thousands of feet of 16mm film.
Phil Forrest

I should have bought some wide angle lenses!

 

[raid]

I own also a couple of Rolleinar normal lenses and a Zeiss 50/1.8 QMB. I may also have a Tessar 135/4.

 

[Greyscale]

Voigtlander VSL-1, Rollei SL-Planar 50/1.8 QBM, Orwo UN54+, orange filter, HC110 dilution H 7:30 20C. by Mike Novak, on Flickr

It seems that I have not yet used the HFT version on film yet, but here is a digital shot.


Rollei SL 50/1.8 Planar HFT, Sony A7ii by Mike Novak, on Flickr

I am sure that I have the Zeiss lens around here somewhere...

 

[Greyscale]

The Rollei SLR cameras were unreliable and prone to fail. The SL35 all mechanical models were the “most reliable “ in this line of cameras. Rollei was falling apart financially then, and pricing the SL2000 or SL3003 and accessories at Leica prices was the last straw for many. The TLR system was of very high quality.

The Voigtlander VSL-1 and the Rolleiflex SL35M have both been good users for me. The "most unreliable" by far was the SL2000f, which was plagued by electronic problems since it was introduced.

 

[raid]

The Voigtlander VSL-1 and the Rolleiflex SL35M have both been good users for me. The "most unreliable" by far was the SL2000f, which was plagued by electronic problems since it was introduced.

Yes, the SL2000 had problems with the board. I had two boards crashing .
The shutter release in the SL35M sounded like a sledgehammer. The Sl35E had automatic shutter that failed in many cameras.

 

[Greyscale]

Yes, the SL2000 had problems with the board. I had two boards crashing .
The shutter release in the SL35M sounded like a sledgehammer. The Sl35E had automatic shutter that failed in many cameras.

The VSL-1 is the same camera as the SL35M, but built less like a squeaky toy.

 

[raid]

I read somewhere that the VSL-1 is the most reliable model. Is it easy to use such lenses on mirrorless cameras like the SONY?

 

[Greyscale]

I read somewhere that the VSL-1 is the most reliable model.

It was intended to be the final Zeiss Ikon Icarex.

 

[raid]

Was the VSL-2 any better?

 

[ACullen]

As a committed Contax SLR user I find the conversion of Zeiss glass more than a little sad. I'd doubt these lenses were sold in anything like the numbers of Nikon or Canon glass, so their availability for C/Y use will only diminish further.

I've had the Zeiss 50mm f1.7 C/Y for nearly forty years. Only recently did I start to think it'd be cool to have the 50 1.4 but the prices have really soared. A Yashica 50 1.4 ML gives me F1.4 for a fraction of the cost. Nice little lens as are quite a number of MLs.

 

[Greyscale]

Was the VSL-2 any better?

I have no experience with the VSL-2.

 

[das]

I read somewhere that the VSL-1 is the most reliable model. Is it easy to use such lenses on mirrorless cameras like the SONY?

Amen. What makes it even more sad is that in ten years, people may not be even using EF or whatever cine mount is in fashion today, or newer cheaper OEM lenses will exist, and all of these lenses would have been permanently modified and difficult/impossible to get back to original spec. Just the sheer number of DIY people stripping out the original mount screws to replace the mount gets me down.