Jena Contax

Your Jena Contax is one of first samples, the archive of Zeiss Historica reported...

I have #14659 with lens 3051152 (listed on Zeiss Historica Society archive); #18059 with lens 3094259; another sample without serial nuber on accessory shoe and numbers erased on body and back cover (logo Contax is very early) with lenses 3003137. Also, I have two Jena-Kiev III.
Ciao, Claudio,
Happy new year for your family and you!
Many thanks for your precious help. You have an astounding expertise and an incredibly rich collection in the field. A would ask some more things for exploiting your competence.
1. The archive of Zeiss Historica Society is accessible for members only, isn't it?
2. How many Jena Contax' were made according to you? I know the estimations only quoted in Minoru Sasaki's book, pp. 11--15.
3. What is your opinion about the no. 11807 Jena Contax I'm seeing on Ebay since 2006? Is it an early specimen? Is it a fake?
4. What a Jena Kiev III does exactly mean? Until now I have seen Jena Kiev II's only.
Grazie ancor'una volta per la Sua gentillezza.
Cordiali saluti,
 
Last edited:
Ciao, Claudio,
Happy new year for your family and you!
Many thanks for your precious help. You have an astounding expertise and an incredibly rich collection in the field. A would ask some more things for exploiting your competence.
1. The archive of Zeiss Historica Society is accessible for members only, isn't it?
2. How many Jena Contax' were made according to you? I know the estimations only quoted in Minoru Sasaki's book, pp. 11--15.
3. What is your opinion about the no. 11807 Jena Contax I'm seeing on Ebay since 2006? Is it an early specimen? Is it a fake?
4. What a Jena Kiev III does exactly mean? Until now I have seen Jena Kiev II's only.
Grazie ancor'una volta per la Sua gentillezza.
Cordiali saluti,

Ciao Ivan,
thank you for your reply.
1) Zeiss Historica archive is accessible by members:
http://www.zeisshistorica.org/membership.html
2) It is more difficult give a number of production. There are firstly with 4 digit, 60xx, then 11xxx to 27xxx. This could be means about 15000 samples, but nobody surely knows if some numbers was jumped or simply lost... In the archive redacted by Kurt Juttner in 2001 for Zeiss Historica there are present about 150 models. Only one of three models in my collection are reported. In Minoru Sasaki book there are other... Really I don't know, personally I think more than 1200, but less than 8000.
3) the #11807 selling by Arsenal-Photo on Ebay appears ok. Why you say is a fake?
4) Here you find a picture of two models in my collection.
There are all features of Jena-Contaxes II and Jena-Kievs II (black selftimer ring, squared accessory shoe...) but are marked Kiev. There are NOT serial number on accessory shoe, only a two digit number on shutter body. And, as you can see, there is light meter, so I called Jena Kiev III.

That's all, Ivan, many compliments again for you rare bird. About Peter Hennig, I could send you in private his mail address, if you desire.

Ciao! (I can't try to speak Hungarian language!!!!)
 

Attachments

  • jena kiev.jpg
    jena kiev.jpg
    26.7 KB · Views: 0
First, heartly congratulations to the OP! An amazing find!

This camera, IMHO, is significant enough to warrant extreme caution. My own IIIa came from HS with incorrect screws holding the front plate. It was irking to me, but I happen to repair most of my cameras myself (the IIIa was the first and probably the last to be farmed out), and I know sometimes screwheads do break, or screwdrivers slip and damage the heads. So, while it bothers me, it is not such a big deal-in my humble IIIa. In a Jena Contax it would be catastrophic, again in my humble opinion.

I must again, as I've done lots of times here, side with those that are amazed by the idolatry towards that repairman. Maybe I was very unlucky, but my experience has been... less than satisfactory, perhaps? You be the judge:

I've been using my Contax for over 30 years. Before me, my dad used it since new. In 51 long years, travelling in five continents, many times in harsh conditions, it never malfunctioned in any way at all. It went to the Sahara, to the top of the Matterhorn, many times to the rainforest without missing one beat. I trusted my camera blindly, and it is my sole system. Spare bodies seemed an abusrd idea for me.

Then, a few years ago I had the brilliant idea of having it serviced by who appeared to be the most reputed repairman. When it arrived, I was bothered by small details- the incorrect screws, the red lens-mounting dot paint that peeled at the first use.
With time, it came a second, more serious problem: the new meter cell was dead, and I had to replace it. The 51 year old one never went west- I just had it changed out of "precaution". And now, the shutter is capping at all high speeds. In a camera that worked perfectly during more than 50 years, and was "overhauled" only a few years ago.

It seems to me that I lost a considerable amount of money and time. But more importantly, I lost the confidence in my primary 35mm camera, the one I loved to use during decades.

You posted similar comments a while back, and I asked if you had contacted Henry about your alleged problems. You never did respond. But here you are again, back on your soap box. Have you contacted Henry yet? He guarantees his work for a full year.
 
3) the #11807 selling by Arsenal-Photo on Ebay appears ok. Why you say is a fake?
4) Here you find a picture of two models in my collection.
Ciao, Claudio, many thanks for your help. I try to became a member of the Zeiss HS. (It is an off-line process, I am afraid.)
Your Jena Kiev III's are really fantastic. I never heard about. If I know well there is only one single proven Jena Contax III, kept in a Jena Museum. And there are no Kiev Kiev III's before 1950 or something.
I don't think the #11807 Jena Contax is a fake. I have no opinion about. It seems to be original. But I asked them two times for the serial number of the lens, and they didn't answer.
Thanks, one more times, and ciao.
 
Ciao, Claudio, many thanks for your help. I try to became a member of the Zeiss HS. (It is an off-line process, I am afraid.)
Your Jena Kiev III's are really fantastic. I never heard about. If I know well there is only one single proven Jena Contax III, kept in a Jena Museum. And there are no Kiev Kiev III's before 1950 or something.
I don't think the #11807 Jena Contax is a fake. I have no opinion about. It seems to be original. But I asked them two times for the serial number of the lens, and they didn't answer.
Thanks, one more times, and ciao.

Ivan,
thank you for your appreciation about my Jena kievs.
During a vacation in Germany few years ago I made a loooong deviation to visit Jena's Zeiss Museum. Not only for see Jena Contax III, but.... I arrived late in the night. Day after in the morning I presented in front of Museum, but was CLOSED! The running order of my travel did not allow to wait until afternoon opening and I'm still waiting an occasion to come back in Jena!!!

About Kiev III before 1950, I have a #490033 with lens 3OKPNN #4905216... Even t wo Kiev III '50, the #50298 with lens 3OPKNN 3K#5000605 and #50367 with lens IUPITER (not Industar!!!)#51110659...

Yes, Mr. Boris of Photo Arsenal is not more friendly... I asked several years ago information about a Fed-Zorki listed on his webpage. I sent e-mails for about one year (ONE YEAR!!!) without any answer.

Please note, in the future if you would become tired of your Jena Contax, please let me know!!!:rolleyes:

Ciaooooo
Claudio
 
Last edited:
You posted similar comments a while back, and I asked if you had contacted Henry about your alleged problems. You never did respond. But here you are again, back on your soap box. Have you contacted Henry yet? He guarantees his work for a full year.

Sorry, I do not live here and I don't follow every thread to its end. I also sometimes don't bother to answer some questions.

To answer yours: no, I didn't. Shipping in and out- mainly out- of my country is so expensive and risky that it makes garantees illusory at best. Also, if you read my post you will notice that the failures happened after the one year mark- even in the States I wouldn't send it back for incorrect screws and peeling paint.

But most important: I don't want him to touch my camera again-ever. Once bitten, twice shy.

Now it is my turn to ask: why do you take such pains to belittle my opinion about someone? are you his long lost brother? an uncle perhaps?
or something else enterily?:angel:
 
"Now it is my turn to ask: why do you take such pains to belittle my opinion about someone? are you his long lost brother? an uncle perhaps?
or something else enterily?"

No relation. Just a happy client. I've had two different Contax cameras that Henry serviced, and they both performed flawlessly.

I do find it odd, even with your shipping issues, that you didn't contact Henry. I always talk to folks directly if I'm unhappy with their service. It seems that you, on the other hand, prefer to make remarks behind people's backs (I know he doesn't read online forums).
 
About Kiev III before 1950, I have a #490033 with lens 3OKPNN #4905216... Even two Kiev III '50, the #50298 with lens 3OPKNN 3K#5000605 and #50367 with lens Industar#51110659...
Fantastic, sensational, marvelous. I can't express my happy astonishment.
Congratulations, Claudio. And you don't live in a former communist country! In Hungary, I think, it could be easier to find exotic Soviet products than in Italy.
(Soviet? Products of the Soviet Occupied Zone, later products of the GDR? Who knows it?)
Buona notte.
 
Last edited:
He writes a lot of palaver on his website which may convince you that he's "insanely good", but you can also read lots of things on websites.

Another insane expression you hear here is "CLA". Every time something goes wrong, even preposterous things, someone says "CLA" as if it were a mantra.


I second that......the wait is long but he insanely good.

Ray
 
Thanks Willy, but I have had excellent results with Henry personally or I would not make a statement like that.

As for CLA's, well if your using a 50 year old camera thats never been serviced then I guess a service would make sense. No mantra here. ;)

Ray
 
"Now it is my turn to ask: why do you take such pains to belittle my opinion about someone? are you his long lost brother? an uncle perhaps?
or something else enterily?"

No relation. Just a happy client. I've had two different Contax cameras that Henry serviced, and they both performed flawlessly.

I do find it odd, even with your shipping issues, that you didn't contact Henry. I always talk to folks directly if I'm unhappy with their service. It seems that you, on the other hand, prefer to make remarks behind people's backs (I know he doesn't read online forums).


I am not talking behind anybody's back! This is a public forum- anyone can choose to read it or not. Your statement that I am doing so is both offensive and a lie.

I find very odd that you, whose only relation to Henry is that of a satisfied customer, know what he reads and what he does not. Very strange. Not very plausible.
 
You claim there was a problem with the way your camera was serviced, and yet you did not contact Henry to try to rectify the problem. Instead, you choose to trash him regularly on this forum. You, sir, are a coward.

FYI - Henry has old me that he does not waste time reading online forums.

I am not talking behind anybody's back! This is a public forum- anyone can choose to read it or not. Your statement that I am doing so is both offensive and a lie.

I find very odd that you, whose only relation to Henry is that of a satisfied customer, know what he reads and what he does not. Very strange. Not very plausible.
 
Last edited:
You claim there was a problem with the way your camera was serviced, and yet you did not contact Henry to try to rectify the problem. Instead, you choose to trash him regularly on this forum. You, sir, are a coward.

FYI - Henry has old me that he does not waste time reading online forums.

I wonder why you do read them, being his number one fan!

By your very strange definition, I am a coward because I dare say things as they are. By mine, you are suffer form some kind of infatuation towards HS. Love makes you blind. But I think the time has come to refrain to expose such opinions in public, so I will no longer answer to your nonsense. Enjoy your love affair in peace- I will use the "ignore" function, and suggest you to do likewise.
 
Rent a safety deposit box!

Rent a safety deposit box!

Yes, and yes.

My opinion is that a "Jena Contax" should NOT be dissassembled if it's working.

It's a HIGHLY collectable camera, probably the RAREST German 35mm camera ever, and so, there is no need to send it from Hungary to California just for the sake of it and for a >2 years trip with no guarantee that the camera would come back safe and sound. Two many parameters here.....

But, as you wrote it with good common sense, this is an Internet forum.....

First rule of any collectible is to keep it as "factory fresh" as possible. That includes, but not limited to do not disassemble. Use it if you must (I must use my most treasured possessions), but remember that it is a few decades old and will break or just wear out at some point at which time it will become less valuable as it is now. The irony of having a valuable, collectible camera is that you can't use it without jeopardizing its value! Congrats on your coup and good luck with whatever decision you make regarding using or not, CLA or not, putting it under lock and key or not, etc....
 
Carissimo Claudio,
since our conversation I became a modest connoisseur of the field. This fall I published an article on the Jena Contax (in Hungarian!).
Thank you one more times for your precious advices.
Regards,
Ivan
 
If this turns out to be an authentic collectible Jena Contax, it is far better to leave it alone and not send it off anywhere. You will possibly destroy "her" value. Leave everything the way it is.

You could possibly sell it for a huge profit and buy a perfectly serviced user Contax.

Let me say two things....one I don't like your insinuation that I am somehow a shill for anyone.....like your irresponsible comments above..... if you accuse people of something you better have proof or the balls to say it to a mans face.

Two, this is a forum where opinions are expressed. My opinion is that a fine historical camera like this one should have a chance to be used reliably and my own experience with HS has been very good.

Ray
 
LOL. I am looking forward to see a years old thread being revived and loaded with new useful advices on what to do with the camera :D:D:D
 
When the Smithsonian puts an airplane on display, it has been restored to working condition. Not just a pretty paint job. The technology is being preserved, as well as the object.

Photographic equipment is designed to make photographs.

I've picked up some unusual pieces, never a Jena Contax like this. If I did- it would be restored to working condition and get a couple of rolls through it. Will that lower the value for someone else? That does not matter unless they get the chance to buy it, and that would probably be over my dead body. But everyone is different.

Latest experience: a coated 1936 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5 lens, not marked "T", from a test batch at the factory. don't take it apart, paperweight. Take it apart, clean all the surfaces, flood clean the aperture, clean out the old grease, relube, use the lens. Easy choice. Good thing I have a Weber Spanner.

Ivan- any chance of translating the article into English and posting it?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom