Contax lenses for Nikon Rangefinders

[ljsegil]

I am thoroughly confused. I would like to try a Zeiss-Contax 21mm lens on my Nikon rangefinder. However, there are two lenses, one a 21mm f/2.8 Biogon and the other a 21mm f/4.5 Biogon, both made by Zeiss. Which one (or both?) will fit a Nikon rangefinder mount? How does the performance of the two lenses compare (aside from the obvious speed difference)? Any illumination that may be shed on this issue will leave me most grateful.
Thanks,
LJSegil

 

[dexdog]

I concur with Brian- the 21/4.5 for the classic Contax rangefinder is the one that will fit on a Nikon RF.

 

[xayraa33]

the Biogon 21mm f4.5 was a favorite of Nikon rf users in the 1950s.
it was the widest lens for the Nikon rf camera and was only matched in 1959 by Nippon Kogaku's own offering.

 

[VinceC]

I believe Zeiss plans to reissue the famed 21/4.5 Biogon in M-mount. The chrome version for Contax RF fits nicely on the Nikon RF. As others have said, the new Contax G lenses don't fit Nikons. (Contax and Zeiss can be pretty difficult to keep straight over the years).

 

[VinceC]

Here's a link to Stephen Gandy's article about the Biogon 21/4.5 ...

http://www.cameraquest.com/zeissbio.htm

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

Here's a shot of the 21mm Biogon F4.5 on a Nikon rangefinder.

This is a great lens!

 

[ljsegil]

Compare 21mm Contax Biogon with 21mm Cosina Voigtlander lens

Compare 21mm Contax Biogon with 21mm Cosina Voigtlander lens

Can anyone offer a performance comparison between the Contax 21mm f/4.5 lens and the Cosina Voigtlander 21mm SC lens? I am interested in how they perform on the Nikon rangefinder cameras. I am most interested in image quality but also in ease of handling. Is the VC 21mm rangefinder coupled?
Thanks for your experience,
Larry Segil

 

[VinceC]

The VC 21/4 is rangefinder coupled in both LTM and Contax mounts.

 

[xayraa33]

I thought that tha VC 21/4 was not rf coupled in the LTM version?

 

[ljsegil]

pardon the bump

pardon the bump

Please forgive my bumping, but I am wondering if anyone on the forum has any experience comparing the historic Zeiss/Contax 21mm f/4.5 lens with the contemporary Cosina Voigtlander 21mm f/4 lens? I am obviously weighing the pros and cons of each for use on my Nikon rangefinder, so I would be most appreciative if anyone can help illuminate my quest for wideness.
Thanks very much for your collective wisdom,
LJ Segil

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

LJ,

I do not have the Cosina Voightlander 21mm, but I do have the Zeiss 21mm Biogon f4.5.

Here are my thoughts based on the fact that I have a VC 35mm f2.5 and a VC Heliar 75mm f2.5. I find both of these VC lens great value for the money.

The Zeiss is just a gem, heavy and very well built. It does not have a lens hood available, at least to the best of my knowledge. I am not a wide angle person and only use it maybe 2% of the time.

I think that the VC would be a great choice based on a cost/performance ratio. You could buy two VC 21mm, a brick of film, and a couple of tanks of gas for what you will pay for the Biogon 21mm.

I have often toyed with the idea of selling mine and buying the VC and using the money difference to buy another Lieca M body. But, the idea of selling something is very foreign to me🙂.


My avataar was shot with the Biogon 21mm for what it is worth.

Wayne

 

[VinceC]

I am not certain you're going to find a user with both lenses. The Zeiss is fairly rare and not cheap. People bought it if they were a Nikon/Contax shooter and needed that focal length. The Cosina lenses in Nikon RF mount were introduced just a few years ago, in one small production run. They were not strong sellers because every CV lens duplicates duplicates an exisiting Nikkor or Zeiss lens for comparable money or less (the exception being the CV 25/4, which is considerably cheaper than a Nikkor or Zeiss original).

With the CV lens, you're going to have excellent quality and perhaps a bit less light falloff, light weight and modern, smooth operation, click stops and easier-to-find filters. With the Zeiss, you get a historic lens of incomparable quality, a little heavier. No click stops. Hard to find the very thin Zeiss 40.5 filters. Some people give the latest Leitz 2w1mm lenses a slight nod in image quality. Some don't.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

Wayne

The filters for the 21 Biogon are fairly common on that big auction site....they are the same filter for Nikkor 50mm F2...40.5. Get one with preferably damaged glass and remove the glass from the filter. The filter ring screwed on to your 21mm Biogon will act in a limited manner as a shade. It will give better results than nothing at all on the lens.

 

[VinceC]

40.5 is a common filter size, but they need to be super-thin to avoid vignetting. I use a Zeiss thin UV filter, then a 40.5-43mm step-up ring as a lens shade, which also allows me to use one of my Nikkor lens caps on it.

 

[furcafe]

I'm not sure that you need super-thin filters for the Biogon. I have used regular modern B+W 40.5mm filters on my 21/4.5 Biogon & have not experienced any additional vignetting when compared to shooting "nekkid" (filterless). The Biogon has plenty of light fall-off in the corners as is, particularly visible @ f/4.5, which I understand is 1 of the drawbacks to the non-retrofocus design (offset by lack of distortion); the W. German 35/2.8 Biogon for Contax RF displays similar, if not as radical, fall-off @ f/2.8.

I also have many original Zeiss Ikon 40.5mm filters from the '50s & they don't appear to be significantly thinner than my modern filters, perhaps your UV is a special model (I know they made specialized graduated density & other filters for the 16mm Hologon for the Contarex)?

40.5 is a common filter size, but they need to be super-thin to avoid vignetting. I use a Zeiss thin UV filter, then a 40.5-43mm step-up ring as a lens shade, which also allows me to use one of my Nikkor lens caps on it.

 

[VinceC]

>>perhaps your UV is a special model?<<

It might be. I picked it up at a photo flea market in Germany about 15 - 18 years ago, along with a yellow one. Both had excellent anti-reflective coatings, so I just leave the UV filter on. They are both about as thick as a coin. Before that, I seem to recall that I had trouble with other filters intruding on the edge fo the frame corners -- not vignetting so much as a bit of rounded-ness in the extreme corners. I could be remembering wrong (it's been known to happen).

Light falloff from the Zeiss Biogn lens is noticeable. And I tend so shoot slow lenses wide open most of the time.

 

[dexdog]

I concur with Furcafe's assessment of filters for the Zeiss 21/4.5. I have used regular thickness UV filters with this lens, and have not seen any vignetting.

 

[VinceC]

It is a great lens. Sharper than I've ever needed, and excellent contrast, especially for a 1950s design.

 

[VinceC]

The finder could also be a consideration. I don't have a Zeiss finder and so can't judge its quality. Instead I use a Leitz 21mm finder. The price of the CV lens includes a finder.

 

[dexdog]

The finder could also be a consideration. I don't have a Zeiss finder and so can't judge its quality. Instead I use a Leitz 21mm finder. The price of the CV lens includes a finder.

I have the original Zeiss finder, and while it is pretty good, the CV finder that came with my CV 21/4.5 in LTM is significantly brighter. Often, the Zeiss finders will be fairly expensive, about $200 or so on eBay