Leica II or III /Contax I comparison

[Dralowid]

Anyone like to make a comparison between the Contax I and Leica II or III in actual regular use?

I know it's a bit like asking a biker to make a comparison between Triumph and Norton...!

Michael

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Aren't Contax I shutters rather unreliable compared to the Leica II or III shutters? A Contax II would be a fairer comparison in my opinion.


Contax II:

• Easier to load then a Barnack, no messing about with scissors or cards,
• Brighter Single viewfinder/rangefinder window,
• Longer rangefinder base allowing for longer focal length lenses
• And it was cheaper too at the time.
• No rotating shutter speed knob when firing the shutter.

The Leica plus-points are more of a personal opinion then actual hard facts.
Leica:

• Better ergonomics,
• Better looking

I don't have a Contax, but I do have a Kiev 2A, which in my humble opinion is the same camera.

*Puts on an asbestos suit and awaits the flaming commentaries* 😀

 

[furcafe]

Don't forget:

• Better, faster lenses.
• Single shutter speed dial.

However, you are wrong as to the Contax being cheaper @ the time. It was actually significantly more expensive, see Mr. Gandy's page here (he writes that the Contax II was "only" $20 more than a Leica IIIa (actually $15), but that was an 8% difference). Zeiss Ikon was not selling the Contax to bargain shoppers.

No asbestos needed. The Contax I was certainly a kludge & no Leica-killer. The Contax II changed the game . . . & prompted Leitz to develop the M series, as well as inspiring the Nikon RFs, so we're all winners in the end!

Aren't Contax I shutters rather unreliable compared to the Leica II or III shutters? A Contax II would be a fairer comparison in my opinion.


Contax II:

• Easier to load then a Barnack, no messing about with scissors or cards,
• Brighter Single viewfinder/rangefinder window,
• Longer rangefinder base allowing for longer focal length lenses
• And it was cheaper too at the time.
• No rotating shutter speed knob when firing the shutter.

The Leica plus-points are more of a personal opinion then actual hard facts.
Leica:

• Better ergonomics,
• Better looking

I don't have a Contax, but I do have a Kiev 2A, which in my opinion.

*Puts on an asbestos suit and awaits the flaming commentaries* 😀

 

[Dralowid]

Indeed the Contax I is complicated and unreliable, finding one that works, and likely to keep working, is proving to be a bit of a challenge but I think they are contemporary with Leica II and IIIs, hence the comparison. Contax II is a whole different ball game.

I also have a Kiev which gives an inking of what a Contax II would be all about.

I'm after the equivalent of a comparative 1932 road test.

Michael

 

[raid]

I have a Leica IIIf and a Contax IIa and IIIa. I favor the IIa and the IIIa for faster film loading and for looks. The Sonnar lenses are amazingly good for their time. This also plays a role in my favoring the IIa and IIIa over the IIIf.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Michael,

Having used/tried to use both in the 70s, before they were silly money and when they could still be regarded as (reasonably) recent cameras, albeit with uncoated lenses, there wasn't much contest. Next to a Leica II or III/IIIa, the Contax II and III are slow, heavy, overpriced, clumsy, over-engineered, under-thought-out cameras. The Contax I was a long way from being even that good.

With the lenses, too, it was a question of whether you wanted sharpness (Leica) or contrast (Contax).

As for loading, in those days, ready-loaded films came with the long tail you need for a Leica, so there was no faffing around with loading templates. If you loaded your own, you bought a loading template as a matter of course: either the real thing from Leica (ABLON, as far as I recall -- I have one somewhere) or a cheaper but equally efficacious knock-off.

(Dons flameproof overalls -- but you did ask, and I have used 'em both).

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[micromontenegro]

Dear Michael,

Having used/tried to use both in the 70s, before they were silly money and when they could still be regarded as (reasonably) recent cameras, albeit with uncoated lenses, there wasn't much contest. Next to a Leica II or III/IIIa, the Contax II and III are slow, heavy, overpriced, clumsy, over-engineered, under-thought-out cameras.

Evidently, you found the same "facts" as Capa 🙄

What a shame it is when people lose objectivity due to brand loyalty. I specially like the "slow" part. I'll get my coat.

 

[furcafe]

Maybe we're all wrong. I've decided that the greatest pre-WIII 35mm camera was the Kodak Ektra, which put all of the annoying aspects of the screw-mount Leica & Contax into 1, made-in-America, system w/the addition of an even more unreliable shutter (along w/a few technological improvements, See Brian Wallen's excellent overview http://www.bnphoto.org/bnphoto/KodakEktraIndex.htm.). U! S! A! U! S! A! 😛

It has the "backwards" focus direction & focus wheel of the Contax, the squinty separate RF & VF of the Leica, a breech mount that somehow manages to combine the slowness of the Leica screw w/the finickyness of the Contax bayonet, & puts all the main controls on the left side just to confuse things further.

But seriously . . . I finally bought an Ektra w/50/1.9 Ektar (described as "in working condition") off eBay. It came in a box w/almost no packing so my expectations were low. However, I put a test roll through it &, miracle of miracles, the shutter works, the magazine back is light-tight, the VF/RF are spot-on, & lens is a fine performer.

Evidently, you found the same "facts" as Capa 🙄

What a shame it is when people lose objectivity due to brand loyalty. I specially like the "slow" part. I'll get my coat.

 

[Dralowid]

My question is a symptom of itchy feet. I've had a Leica since 1965. I've got a cupboardful of the things now including M6, SL (sorry) and all sorts of ltms and lenses. I know where I am with them. I have a hankering to have a bad time with an an unfamiliar and unpopular piece of quality kit. I think a Paxette or a Retina are just too good, I think the Contax I fits the bill!!!

 

[furcafe]

Well, if you're seeking a hairshirt experience 😉 , I would recommend a Voigtlander Prominent, though it's not a 1930s camera, of course. The Ektra would also do, but they're a bit thin on the ground.

My question is a symptom of itchy feet. I've had a Leica since 1965. I've got a cupboardful of the things now including M6, SL (sorry) and all sorts of ltms and lenses. I know where I am with them. I have a hankering to have a bad time with an an unfamiliar and unpopular piece of quality kit. I think a Paxette or a Retina are just too good, I think the Contax I fits the bill!!!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Yes, the Voigtlander Prominent is probably on the Finicky, hard to use, side of things. I like the lever advance version even more then the knob advance. Just try to calibrate the RF. The Nokton 50/1.5, 35/3.5 Skopar, and even 100/4 Dynaret are extremely good. And for a nice "kick-around" camera, the Vitessa T. Make sure you really learn how to get that film on the spool before using the Plunger Film advance. Nice lenses, though.

Makes a Contax II look like a point and shoot and makes a Leica III look like an Instamatic.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Contax II:

• Easier to load then a Barnack, no messing about with scissors or cards,
  😀

• 
  
  How to Load a Contax:
  
  1. Twist two latches on the bottom, and slide back off.
  2. Hit the floor, and on all fours, look for the take-up spool which fell out when the back slid off.
  3. When found, insert film leader on take-up. Insert both cassette and take up to their respective winding forks and pray that they stay.
  4. Whilst precariously balancing the bare-backed camera, turn the winding knob carefully so that the take-up isn't dislodged during film threading.
  5. Look for the back which you forgot where you placed before crawling on the floor looking for the delinquent spool. Or more likely, the cat took it away while you were looking for the spool.
  6. Slide back (after finding it semi-buried in the garden) on camera, close latches.
  7. Set counter to zero after two firing two blanks. All set.
  
  How to Load a Leica:
  1. Twist single lock on baseplate. Place baseplate in shirt pocket. Pants pockets are also suitable.
  2. Pull out takeup spool. Pull out the leader (pre-cut to proper Leica tongue) and insert tip in take-up spring flange.
  3. Insert both cassette and take-up simulataneously. Takeup will fit snugly. Turn the windknob slightly whilst peeping through the bottom to observe how the film sprockets and
  4. Replace bottom plate, then lock.
  5. Fire two blanks, then set counter to zero. All set.
  
  😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀
  
  I think Leica II/III are more compact, and more suited in the streets than the average Contax.

 

[ZeissFan]

I like the question about comparing the two systems, although I also agree that a fair comparison would be the second generation of each camera.

Certainly, both systems have their benefits and drawbacks and fans and detractors. It's the old Leica vs. Contax debate that raged well before Canon vs. Nikon.

The Contax I wasn't a brilliant camera. It had a number of shortcomings, and its biggest asset was the fantastic Carl Zeiss Jena optics that outperformed the Leitz offerings.

The Contax I body is boxy, and its front-mounted film advance and very stout rewind knob are not spectacular in any way. On top of this, there are the separate windows for viewing and composing (also a shortcoming in the Leica LTM bodies).

I've never had a problem loading film in a Contax (I, II or IIa), but I've always paid extra attention to the film spool, especially around storm drains!

The Contax I gave Zeiss Ikon a foothold in the 35mm rangefinder market.

I'll always take a Contax IIa or Contax II before I reach for a Contax I.

 

[LeicaTom]

A prewar Contax is coming in the mail, together with a prewar Rollei, both were the WW2 "BRINGBACK" cameras of US Army/Black Star/Life Magazine Photographer who formerly owned my 43' IIIC K Grey. (the estate was going to throw out the cameras and the camera bag , so I gladly advised them to send it to me....)

I`ll see if the Contax is working.......I know absolutely NOTHING about them, I hope it`s a Black one or maybe if I`m lucky it`s a Kriegsmarine *Navy* Contax?

Who`s the prewar Contax and Rollei expert here at RFF? ~ I might need to figure out how to work the Contax, I`m familiar with Rollei`s, and I`ll be keeping these two, their both going to go sit next to the IIIC K on the shelf. 🙂

Tom

 

[Vince Lupo]

I had my Contax I (a) overhauled a few months back and I think it's one of the prettiest cameras around.

I'm not really sure what you guys mean by 'complicated' - it's certainly easier to use than my Contaflex TLR, but one can get used to anything once they've used it a few times. One of the nice things about the Contax I is that is has a slide out 85mm mask, for whatever that's worth.

The only 'drawback' that I've found with mine is that the black paint finish is a bit fragile. Other than that, I can't really see them being any worse to use than a Leica II -- once you've found a good one, that is! A Contax II would probably be an easier (and cheaper) find, but even good examples of those are getting scarce.

 

[ZeissFan]

Hey Vince -- that's interesting about the slide-out mask. Your camera has the 8.5cm mask, while mine has one for a 13.5cm lens.

Last year, I used it with a nickel and black 13,5cm Sonnar, and I was very pleased with the results.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Hmm, the 135 mask must be really teeny indeed!

Michael - I'd say that if you're itching for an unpopular quality piece of kit, then I'd definitely suggest a Contaflex TLR. Very heavy, 35mm interchangeable twin lens camera, broken ones can go for $ 1500, and overhauling can run about $ 600.00. Plus, extra lenses are as much as the camera.

I think you're cutting yourself some slack by wanting to get only a Contax I -- if you're gonna do it, go all the way!

 

[Dralowid]

Contax I acquired during recent trip to Northern Italy. Tessar. It makes appropriate clicking and whirring noises and even has a spool. Have yet to fathom how to set shutter speeds (has slow speeds) but will run some junk film through it and see what happens.

As a Leica ltm user for many years it seems counter-intuitive.

The comparison starts...

Michael

 

[ZeissFan]

I've never found the Contax I to be counterintuitive. I just don't think it's a great camera, and many first efforts aren't always the best product.

To its benefit, it has a single shutter speed dial, which you lift and turn to select speeds.

It has a wide-base rangefinder, which provides for very accurate focusing. The bayonet mount, introduced in 1932, makes for quick lens changes.

The shutter speed dial doesn't spin when you release the shutter. If you've ever used a Leica LTM camera in the winter with gloves, the dial invariably will get slowed by your gloves or your hat, which affects the selected shutter speed. As well, novice LTM users must first learn how to use the slow-speed dial.

I think that Zeiss Ikon learned from the shortcomings of the Contax I when it created the Contax II. The designers apparently didn't feel a need to continue with the body design and instead created an all-new camera in the Contax II that kept only the shutter design and lens mount.

But I can't see any reason why a seasoned photographer can't figure out a Contax I. It's not that complex of a camera.

 

[Charles Woodhouse]

I have a Ie, II and III Contax and although all of them work, they are purely for display.Unless any of your prewar working Contaxes have new shutter tapes, you would be wise to only demonstrate the shutter's workings to visiting aunts at Christmas. The much touted metal shutter curtains (or just one curtain), actually slides over rayon tapes and it does wear the tape. And replacing the tapes correctly is an absolute bitch of a job. I believe the shutter was designed this way to get around Leitz patents, and yet to get a Zeiss 35mm camera onto the market. Also the incredibly complicated Zeiss shutter relies on built in ramps in the shutter way to disconnect the curtains to obtain the correct opening, and these ramps wear.
The Leica shutter especially in the Leica II is elegant simplicity itself, and with regular 20 year servicing and possibly 50 year curtain replacement should continue functioning for centuries.
The Contax IIa and IIIa have completely different shutters to their prewar brethren and seem to be extremely reliable, with only a tiny amoount of lubrication in the right place every ten years or so necessary to keep them working.