Ikon VS Nikon S (mounts)

[richardHaw]

http://zeisscamera.com/articles_cnrfdr.shtml

worth reading

 

[Scrambler]

Thanks for the link, very interesting. Hard to see why you would do it that way, but it seems Nikon did. More samples would help get a better picture, though. n=1 for each camera isnt really proving a point.

And my little niggle - Contax would be better to use in the post name rather than Ikon. Zeiss Ikon was the company name (Zeiss Imaging if you like) while Contax is the family name for the RF cameras.

 

[richardHaw]

Thanks for the link, very interesting. Hard to see why you would do it that way, but it seems Nikon did. More samples would help get a better picture, though. n=1 for each camera isnt really proving a point.

And my little niggle - Contax would be better to use in the post name rather than Ikon. Zeiss Ikon was the company name (Zeiss Imaging if you like) while Contax is the family name for the RF cameras.

thanks for pointing that out:bang:

i am unable to change the title 😱😱😱

 

[enasniearth]

mix up

mix up

his website is perhaps not as accurate as his reputation suggests


the German standard for thread pitch is based on a microscope , which is 26 threads per inch (English standard)
Japanese manufacturers assumed leitz and Zeiss mounts were metric (25.4 threads per inch )this appears to be the mount difference .
the leitz standard focal length differs from Zeiss , Nikon was using the leitz standard focal length, so this adds to the difference .


please correct if I am wrong

 

[Scrambler]

his website is perhaps not as accurate as his reputation suggests


the German standard for thread pitch is based on a microscope , which is 26 threads per inch (English standard)
Japanese manufacturers assumed leitz and Zeiss mounts were metric (25.4 threads per inch )this appears to be the mount difference .
the leitz standard focal length differs from Zeiss , Nikon was using the leitz standard focal length, so this adds to the difference .


please correct if I am wrong

I think just confusing two issues. Contax and Nikon lenses are regarded as being able to mount to either camera but previously said to have different focus thread pitch. This testing suggests identical thread but different, fixed distance between mount and film.

 

[CameraQuest]

http://zeisscamera.com/articles_cnrfdr.shtml

worth reading

hmm. not so much.

check the other threads on this subject at RFF.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

More samples would help get a better picture, though. n=1 for each camera isnt really proving a point.

Correct. That was common knowledge already in ancient China, ancient Egypt, ancient Greece — apparently not so much in certain «great again» areas of our planet!

 

[Highway 61]

http://zeisscamera.com/articles_cnrfdr.shtml

worth reading

As Stephen wrote, using the RFF advanced search engine before sending us on that very website once and again would be a good idea.

 

[richardHaw]

Thanks! not sure who the guy is but I sense some negativity towards him. 😱😱😱

would it be better if we just delete this instead since his info is wrong? Sorry about that

 

[Elmar Lang]

Hello,

as a matter of interest, back in 2013, I've posted a paper from Nippon Kogaku, informing about the difference in focusing of their lenses, vs. Contax Zeiss ones:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=98212&d=1386767166

Best wishes,

Enzo (E.L.)

 

[richardHaw]

Hello,

as a matter of interest, back in 2013, I've posted a paper from Nippon Kogaku, informing about the difference in focusing of their lenses, vs. Contax Zeiss ones:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=98212&d=1386767166

Best wishes,

Enzo (E.L.)

Thank you, Elmar.