Honu-Hugger
Well-known
Quoted by noted camera historian D. B. Tubbs, "Zeiss Ikon Cameras 1929-39" (page 88 and 89):
(DR. Nagel)...was beleieved to have been working on all-metal shutter-blinds for tropical applications being dissatisfied, it was said, with rubberised fabric. Zeiss had experience dating back to the earliest days of the focal plane shutter through their associated company, Goerz, for Carl Paul Goerz (1856-1923) had built cameras for Ottomar Anschutz in 1988. No one should have been surprised that the shutter in Contax moved vertically instead of horizontally as in the Leica, for Goerz-Anschutz and subsequently Nettel shutters had always done this, sliding across the shorter section of the negative. It was tradition rather than the need to evade Leitz patents (as is sometimes suggested) that dictated the design of Contax, and nowhere more so than in the provision of a vertical shutter with multible crossing speeds.
(DR. Nagel)...was beleieved to have been working on all-metal shutter-blinds for tropical applications being dissatisfied, it was said, with rubberised fabric. Zeiss had experience dating back to the earliest days of the focal plane shutter through their associated company, Goerz, for Carl Paul Goerz (1856-1923) had built cameras for Ottomar Anschutz in 1988. No one should have been surprised that the shutter in Contax moved vertically instead of horizontally as in the Leica, for Goerz-Anschutz and subsequently Nettel shutters had always done this, sliding across the shorter section of the negative. It was tradition rather than the need to evade Leitz patents (as is sometimes suggested) that dictated the design of Contax, and nowhere more so than in the provision of a vertical shutter with multible crossing speeds.
furcafe
Veteran
Hans-Jurgen Kuc, in "On the Trail of the Contax, Vol. 1," puts it this way:
[E]verything about the Contax shutter was different. This was because, on the one hand, the Leitz patents could not be infringed, & on the other hand, this restriction was seen as an opportunity to develop something completely new. Zeiss Ikon did its best to build on the success of its parent firms, Contessa-Nettel, Ernemann, Goerz & Ica.
. . .
As early as 1891, the Goerz Anschutz . . . had a vertical travel shutter with a 1/1000 second exposure time. The Contax's distinguishing shutter cocking knob is a descendant of large format curtain shutter cameras of the 1920s.
. . .
Kuppenbender said that, in his view, only a vertical motion shutter came into consideration because of the importance he attached to short travel & reliably constant speeds.
. . .
Practical experience had shown that rubberized cloth shutters easily burned through if the sun happened to focus directly through the lens, so another vital innovation was to make the shutter curtains out of metal. Rubberized cloth also became stiff and brittle in cold weather and sticky in the heat.
[E]verything about the Contax shutter was different. This was because, on the one hand, the Leitz patents could not be infringed, & on the other hand, this restriction was seen as an opportunity to develop something completely new. Zeiss Ikon did its best to build on the success of its parent firms, Contessa-Nettel, Ernemann, Goerz & Ica.
. . .
As early as 1891, the Goerz Anschutz . . . had a vertical travel shutter with a 1/1000 second exposure time. The Contax's distinguishing shutter cocking knob is a descendant of large format curtain shutter cameras of the 1920s.
. . .
Kuppenbender said that, in his view, only a vertical motion shutter came into consideration because of the importance he attached to short travel & reliably constant speeds.
. . .
Practical experience had shown that rubberized cloth shutters easily burned through if the sun happened to focus directly through the lens, so another vital innovation was to make the shutter curtains out of metal. Rubberized cloth also became stiff and brittle in cold weather and sticky in the heat.
Honu-Hugger
Well-known
furcafe said:
The knob that Furcafe's post refers to:
chendayuan
Established
He was only guessing had no evidance to prove it. Contax's shutter mechanism was not cloned by other manufactures (no Not KIEV, it is a continue production) and Leica's shutter mechanism was used on Nikon, Canon and others . James Lager is an expert on Leica history, unfortunately he did made mistake to claim the first version Summicron was the same optical formula as the rigid one. So an expert only can mast some things not all things. As to the burned shutter curtain I would like to know how many Leica user have had this problem in regular shooting condition? If you take apart a KIEV/Contax and a Leica look at the shutter mechanism, the simple Leica is easy to manufacture and repair.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
that's one ugly knob.
maybe a 'doctor' could remove it?
joe
maybe a 'doctor' could remove it?
joe
furcafe
Veteran
And you are only "guessing," too, & have no proof for your assertions. The fact that Nikon, Canon, & others chose to copy the Leica shutter only shows that it is "easy to manufacture & repair." That doesn't mean its better, unless by "better" you only mean "easy to manufacture & repair" (as opposed to "more durable" or "more accurate," etc). Simpler is not always better. Sure, nobody copied the Contax shutter, but most cameras today don't use a Leica-style cloth shutter, either. Note that many, if not most, modern cameras do use multi-bladed vertical-travel metal shutters, however, which are arguably closer in spirit to the Contax shutter than they are to the Leica. Seems to me that Zeiss Ikon was just ahead of its time.
Re: burned shutters, that's a very good question: why don't you ask the Leica repairpersons in HK or elsewhere as to how many burned shutters they've encountered over the years. It must have happened often enough, because Leica warned users about it in their instruction manuals.
Re: burned shutters, that's a very good question: why don't you ask the Leica repairpersons in HK or elsewhere as to how many burned shutters they've encountered over the years. It must have happened often enough, because Leica warned users about it in their instruction manuals.
chendayuan said:
As to burned shutters, it did indeed happen. I encountered two during a couple years' time when I worked at a camera shop. One was brought in for repair by a customer, and I don't recall the camera brand. The other was a Nikon S2 that had been on display in the shop, and upon borrowing it I discovered several pinholes in the shutter, first revealed on the negs. It must not be a particularly rare ocurrence.
Honu-Hugger
Well-known
furcafe said:(snip)...Seems to me that Zeiss Ikon was just ahead of its time.
In so many more ways than most people realize. The history is there and it speaks for itself.
P
pshinkaw
Guest
It's quite easy to burn a hole in a cloth shutter. Just follow my example...
I burned a Zorki-4 shutter in December. I set the camera outside to photograph it on top of a camera gadget bag, not thinking about the shutter. I removed the lens cap, positioned myself so my shadow in the bright sunlight would not appear in the picture, and took three quick shots with a Canon Pellix. Altogether, the camera was exposed to direct sunlight about 1.5 minutes. That evening I started to load a roll into it and found a nice neat round hole measuring 2 mm across which had not been there previously.
I did learn how to patch a shutter out of that exercise.
I burned a Zorki-4 shutter in December. I set the camera outside to photograph it on top of a camera gadget bag, not thinking about the shutter. I removed the lens cap, positioned myself so my shadow in the bright sunlight would not appear in the picture, and took three quick shots with a Canon Pellix. Altogether, the camera was exposed to direct sunlight about 1.5 minutes. That evening I started to load a roll into it and found a nice neat round hole measuring 2 mm across which had not been there previously.
I did learn how to patch a shutter out of that exercise.
Wow, Paul, that's pretty direct experience!
chendayuan
Established
Leica put its first 35mm on the market around 1925, Contax I on the market around 1932, and Contax's Rf is about 20-30% higher than leica's due to high manufacture cost, the high price does not make Contax a durable, more accurate camera. Leica's first 50/3.5 Anastigmat/Elmax use 1-1-3 optical formula instead of Zeiss Tessar 1-1-2, because the patent infringe. It is the same as to Leica's shutter design. The Contax shutter is not more accurate than leica’s they are both mechanical controlled, the Contax 1/1250 is only around 1/1000, most leica's 1/1000 is also around 1/900. As to the durability, up to today there are still lots of working Leica II/III but not Contax I/II, Zeiss lens and Leica outlast these Contax. During the World War II military selected Leica not Contax as their main photography tools, is this mean some thing? Burned hole on LEica shutter curtain can happen, but very rare, face strong sun for a while even the titanium on SP can not survive. My point is the the cloth shutter curtain is easy to replace even today at reasonable cost, it is impossible to replace Contax/Canon/Nikon metal shutter curtain at reasonable cost. if you replace leica shutter curtain yourself, it only cost few dollars at most. So all in all Leica's shutter design is simple durable relaible and reasonable accurate, easy to repair even toady. unfortunately Leica's shutter also has its own limitation, it difficult to reach 1/2000 due to short travel distance and braking problem, slow travel speed (less noisy). Cloth curtain is not as durable as metal one but when you push your finger through the shutter curtain you do not leave a wrinkled shutter curtain behind you.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
ok boys, i want everyone to step forward and pull IT out.
i'll measure and we can announce who has the biggest ONE.
joe
i'll measure and we can announce who has the biggest ONE.
joe
chendayuan
Established
Does Your Forum Allow To Debate Or Not?
chendayuan
Established
backalley photo said:
insult people instead of insult camera, last post on this
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
debate is ok, the post is still here.
just wanted everyone to know i'm watching...
i apologize if you feel insulted by my little joke, it was not meant to harm but lighten up this debate.
joe
just wanted everyone to know i'm watching...
i apologize if you feel insulted by my little joke, it was not meant to harm but lighten up this debate.
joe
Honu-Hugger
Well-known
I enjoyed your joke, Joe -- no apology necessary. Depending upon the outcome of this menaingful and enlightening discussion I may have to consider selling my Contax collection for scrap iron.
back alley
IMAGES
lol
joe
joe
RObert Budding
D'oh!
Seems like there is more than one way to build a reliable shutter. My Contax IIIa works great - the speeds are very close to spec and it always works. I don't own a Leica, but it seems that folks are able to get pretty decent results from them critters, too. So debate all you want on this point., if you like.
Robert
Robert
P
Peter
Guest
Pardon my intrusion, I thought the salient point in photography is about capturing images?
furcafe
Veteran
I'll keep things civil & respond to each of your points below.
Your analogy to the Elmar & Tessar is appropriate. However, you can only assert, not prove, that each company made its decision *entirely* based on avoiding patent infringement. Of course patents influenced Leitz's decision to not copy the Tessar & of course patents influenced Zeiss Ikon's decision to develop a different shutter for the Contax. What you can't do is prove that the patent was the main motivation & inspiration behind each decision. Shutters aside, you ignore the obvious fact that the Contax had a superior RF to the TM Leicas, which accounts for part of the higher manufacture cost for the Contax.
This is a wash as I've heard different things from different camera technicians, & no one out there has tested enough shutters to make any other than an educated guess.
I'll repeat the points I made in the previous (deleted) thread & in my previous response on this thread: (1) many, many more Leicas were made than Contaxes; & (2) the fact that the Leica shutter is simpler & requires less maintenance does not in & of itself make it a better design unless simplicity & ease of maintenance are your only criteria--the Contax was made w/the expectation that it would be maintained by skilled technicians.
Another wash. The German Air Force & Army used Leicas, but the Navy used Contaxes. From my knowledge of gov't procurement, you can't assume that such decisions are made solely on technical superiority. Moreover, outside Germany, the Contax, not the Leica, was the system of choice for most photojournalistic establishments (e.g., Time-Life) & many famed photographers (e.g., Ansel Adams, Robert Capa) notwithstanding Leica's "1st mover advantage" (greater installed base) & lower prices.
In the absence of statistics you can only assert, not prove, that burned shutter curtains are "very rare." Folks on this forum alone, hardly a large sample, have provided real life examples of it happening.
1st, to repeat another response from the earlier deleted thread, you ignore the simple fact that, unlike Leicas, the Contax/Canon/Nikon metal shutter curtains rarely have to be replaced. That's a bit like saying that's its better to make clothes out of paper because you can just throw them away rather than having to wash them; they may work in the doctor's office, but doesn't generally hold true for going out in the street. 2nd, it is not unreasonably expensive to get a Contax/Canon/Nikon shutter curtain replaced & while you can get away w/using an old sock or whatever to serve as a Leica shutter, the technically-correct rubberized cloth is not something you buy @ the corner hardware store.
chendayuan said:
Your analogy to the Elmar & Tessar is appropriate. However, you can only assert, not prove, that each company made its decision *entirely* based on avoiding patent infringement. Of course patents influenced Leitz's decision to not copy the Tessar & of course patents influenced Zeiss Ikon's decision to develop a different shutter for the Contax. What you can't do is prove that the patent was the main motivation & inspiration behind each decision. Shutters aside, you ignore the obvious fact that the Contax had a superior RF to the TM Leicas, which accounts for part of the higher manufacture cost for the Contax.
This is a wash as I've heard different things from different camera technicians, & no one out there has tested enough shutters to make any other than an educated guess.
I'll repeat the points I made in the previous (deleted) thread & in my previous response on this thread: (1) many, many more Leicas were made than Contaxes; & (2) the fact that the Leica shutter is simpler & requires less maintenance does not in & of itself make it a better design unless simplicity & ease of maintenance are your only criteria--the Contax was made w/the expectation that it would be maintained by skilled technicians.
Another wash. The German Air Force & Army used Leicas, but the Navy used Contaxes. From my knowledge of gov't procurement, you can't assume that such decisions are made solely on technical superiority. Moreover, outside Germany, the Contax, not the Leica, was the system of choice for most photojournalistic establishments (e.g., Time-Life) & many famed photographers (e.g., Ansel Adams, Robert Capa) notwithstanding Leica's "1st mover advantage" (greater installed base) & lower prices.
In the absence of statistics you can only assert, not prove, that burned shutter curtains are "very rare." Folks on this forum alone, hardly a large sample, have provided real life examples of it happening.
1st, to repeat another response from the earlier deleted thread, you ignore the simple fact that, unlike Leicas, the Contax/Canon/Nikon metal shutter curtains rarely have to be replaced. That's a bit like saying that's its better to make clothes out of paper because you can just throw them away rather than having to wash them; they may work in the doctor's office, but doesn't generally hold true for going out in the street. 2nd, it is not unreasonably expensive to get a Contax/Canon/Nikon shutter curtain replaced & while you can get away w/using an old sock or whatever to serve as a Leica shutter, the technically-correct rubberized cloth is not something you buy @ the corner hardware store.