Steve M.
Veteran
You have the right idea. Shoot a roll through the Leicaflex before you decide. In fact I would suggest shooting two rolls just to give you more information, because once it's gone it's gone. While the Leica R lenses are probably not as super sharp as the Contarex lenses, they have a more 3D sort of roundness to their imageing that I prefer.
I went through a similar decision recently trying to decide whether to keep my M3 w/ 50 Summicron Rigid or my Leicaflex SL w/ 50 R Summicron. Based solely on the images from the cameras I went w/ the R glass. There's just something magical about those lenses, but that's a subjective assessment. The Rigid shots were technically sharper, but lacked something in comparison to the R shots.
One thing about the R lenses that's been mentioned: you can fit them to other cameras. Just for kicks I bought an adapter and put my 90 2.8 R Elmarit on my Nikon N6006. What a nice surprise! The focus confirmation light works, metering is perfect in Aperture Priority (and now I have spot, center weighted, and matrix), and the viewfinder is brighter, though not bigger, than my Leicaflex. W/ the motor drive you can take shots much faster than the Leicaflex too, so it's bye bye Leicaflex. Never thought I'd do that as I love the camera, but it's just easier and more fun to shoot the Leicon.
I went through a similar decision recently trying to decide whether to keep my M3 w/ 50 Summicron Rigid or my Leicaflex SL w/ 50 R Summicron. Based solely on the images from the cameras I went w/ the R glass. There's just something magical about those lenses, but that's a subjective assessment. The Rigid shots were technically sharper, but lacked something in comparison to the R shots.
One thing about the R lenses that's been mentioned: you can fit them to other cameras. Just for kicks I bought an adapter and put my 90 2.8 R Elmarit on my Nikon N6006. What a nice surprise! The focus confirmation light works, metering is perfect in Aperture Priority (and now I have spot, center weighted, and matrix), and the viewfinder is brighter, though not bigger, than my Leicaflex. W/ the motor drive you can take shots much faster than the Leicaflex too, so it's bye bye Leicaflex. Never thought I'd do that as I love the camera, but it's just easier and more fun to shoot the Leicon.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
A Contarex kit such as you have would be a lot harder to replace if you sold it. I've never used one; not sure I've ever even seen one. The Leicaflexes are great cameras and so are the lenses, and I'm sure a lot easier to repair than the Contarex.
So I guess you should hang onto the Contarex. You should be able to find another Leicaflex and lenses if you change your mind later.
So I guess you should hang onto the Contarex. You should be able to find another Leicaflex and lenses if you change your mind later.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Wow - thanks for all the input! I'm going to try to shoot both cameras this weekend to see which one I prefer, but definitely good points for both systems.
I did try the interchangeable back route on the Contarex for a very short time and, while the concept sounds great, the backs tend to have light leaks at the bottom (they pretty well all leak!). So that option/feature is more or less negated.
As far as simply holding onto both systems, I really don't want both. One thing I've been doing over the past year is reducing my camera collection -- it seemed that the more cameras I had, the less I used, and I don't want to go back down that road. My goal is to just have a few core systems beyond my digital setup (Leica screw mount, Leica M, Contaflex TLR, Hasselblad, Contax I/II/III, Nikon S, Exakta, Robot Royal 36, plus one of these SLR systems) and be done with it. Even looking at this list, it seems like I still have way too much!
Hopefully I'll have an answer sometime next week, and after I consider everyone's thoughts on both sides. Many many thanks!
I did try the interchangeable back route on the Contarex for a very short time and, while the concept sounds great, the backs tend to have light leaks at the bottom (they pretty well all leak!). So that option/feature is more or less negated.
As far as simply holding onto both systems, I really don't want both. One thing I've been doing over the past year is reducing my camera collection -- it seemed that the more cameras I had, the less I used, and I don't want to go back down that road. My goal is to just have a few core systems beyond my digital setup (Leica screw mount, Leica M, Contaflex TLR, Hasselblad, Contax I/II/III, Nikon S, Exakta, Robot Royal 36, plus one of these SLR systems) and be done with it. Even looking at this list, it seems like I still have way too much!
Hopefully I'll have an answer sometime next week, and after I consider everyone's thoughts on both sides. Many many thanks!
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Well here's a surprise -- I pulled out my Contarex this morning and guess what - the meter works! Very strange, as I was pretty certain that it didn't work, but maybe that just shows how long it's been since I've used it.
Here's some interesting initial comparisons: With the 50/2 lens attacned, the Contarex weighs 42.55 oz, the Leicaflex weighs 38.60 oz. The 50/2 Planar focuses to just under 15", while the 50/2 Summicron focuses to just under 20". Shutter speeds on the Leicaflex are 1-2000, Contarex is 1-1000. The Contarex is slightly larger than the Leicaflex, but the viewfinder of the Leicaflex is larger.
Here's some interesting initial comparisons: With the 50/2 lens attacned, the Contarex weighs 42.55 oz, the Leicaflex weighs 38.60 oz. The 50/2 Planar focuses to just under 15", while the 50/2 Summicron focuses to just under 20". Shutter speeds on the Leicaflex are 1-2000, Contarex is 1-1000. The Contarex is slightly larger than the Leicaflex, but the viewfinder of the Leicaflex is larger.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Not to mention the fact that SL has a large TTL spot meter and the Contarex a non-TTL selineum meter. I really don't have much to recommend in the Contarex "bullseye" over the Leicaflex SL unless you have a thing for Zeiss optics. The later Contarex models were more desirable with their spot meter, electonic shutter timing and AE. Also I think that due to it's smaller prism, the finder shows slightly less of the actual image than the Leicaflex SL.
Dralowid
Michael
I still have a SL MOT. All I can say is that once serviced (and meter modified to take available batteries) it has proved to be hugely reliable and entirely dependable. No question. The service cost around £100 a few years ago.
The fault to watch out for apart from the lens release catch is de-silvering of the pentaprism. One of the real plusses of this camera is its viewfinder so if it is starting to grow spots this can spoil the pleasure. Can be rectified but I hear this is expensive.
To me the Contarex is something of a holy grail and I would worry about taking it around with me. Also there are plenty of people happy to work on a Leica...not sure about Zeiss. SLs are cheap by comparison and 2 cam lenses not too expensive either.
Michael
The fault to watch out for apart from the lens release catch is de-silvering of the pentaprism. One of the real plusses of this camera is its viewfinder so if it is starting to grow spots this can spoil the pleasure. Can be rectified but I hear this is expensive.
To me the Contarex is something of a holy grail and I would worry about taking it around with me. Also there are plenty of people happy to work on a Leica...not sure about Zeiss. SLs are cheap by comparison and 2 cam lenses not too expensive either.
Michael
Vince Lupo
Whatever
All good points, and I'm definitely taking them into consideration as I weigh the pros and cons. Who knows - I may end up selling both systems.
I'll do my darndest this weekend to run a roll of film through each camera, post some of the shots, and go from there.
Funnily enough, as far as the metering systems go, neither one of them really matters to me very much. I'd probably even prefer if they were without meters, but I do understand your point about a selenium/non-TTL versus a battery/TTL meter. However, I may change my mind about the metering this weekend when I use the Leicaflex.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Yeah the prices of the 2 cam lenses is really reasonable! I think if I kept the Leicaflex, I'd probably add a 90/2.8 Elmarit and maybe a 35/2 or 2.8 and be done with it.
I don't really worry about carrying around the Contarex -- I have a Contaflex TLR system that I took to Austria with me in December, and for me that's much more of a holy grail camera set.
Now look -- don't you guys try and talk me into keeping both systems -- I know your subtle methods!
ZeissFan
Veteran
Oh yeah -- the Contaflex TLR is really a different beast altogether and very much a collectible first and a user second and one that you worry about constantly.
Vince, one note about the Carl Zeiss lenses for the Contarex. Some (85/2 Sonnar, 135/4 Sonnar, 50/3.5 Tessar and 21/4.5 Biogon) came directly from the Contax lens line. Some of the later lenses reappeared after the demise of Zeiss Ikon and the return of the Contax name via Yashica and then later Kyocera.
Still others were available for the Rolleiflex SL 35 QBM system.
Either way, sounds like you have a fun weekend ahead, unless you get caught up in the weekend storm that's supposed to hit much of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and parts of Maryland.
Vince, one note about the Carl Zeiss lenses for the Contarex. Some (85/2 Sonnar, 135/4 Sonnar, 50/3.5 Tessar and 21/4.5 Biogon) came directly from the Contax lens line. Some of the later lenses reappeared after the demise of Zeiss Ikon and the return of the Contax name via Yashica and then later Kyocera.
Still others were available for the Rolleiflex SL 35 QBM system.
Either way, sounds like you have a fun weekend ahead, unless you get caught up in the weekend storm that's supposed to hit much of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and parts of Maryland.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Yeah, the big snowstorm will be interesting, particularly since the Baltimore people are hyper-paranoid about the least little bit of snow, or even the threat of snow.
Just got off the phone with Frank Marshman (Camera Wiz), and I asked him: "Frank, if you had to choose between the Leicaflex and the Contarex, which would you choose?"
His choice? Contarex. Interesting.
Just got off the phone with Frank Marshman (Camera Wiz), and I asked him: "Frank, if you had to choose between the Leicaflex and the Contarex, which would you choose?"
His choice? Contarex. Interesting.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Vince, I'm in Baltimore too. Send me a pm. There's a great camera club (Baltimore Camera Club) that meets every Thursday evening in Mt. Washington if you'd like to stop by. I'd be curious to see your gear as I'm sure some of those not totally into digital.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Okay, I just loaded a roll of bulk-loaded Tri-X into each camera, and noticed a couple of things: The Leicaflex is pretty easy and quick to load, the Contarex is a bit more of a pain (the entire back comes off, and the spool comes out). Plus - and this is something I forgot about - the Contarex frame counter counts DOWN (36-0), as opposed to the Leicaflex, which counts up (0-36).
So off the bat, the Leicaflex is winning.
So off the bat, the Leicaflex is winning.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Here's one really cool thing about the Leicflex SL I just rembered when you mentioned the frame counter. It actually counts down frame by frame, as you rewind, not all at once when you open the back like every other camera. Very neat if you like to fool with multiple exposures. I can't for the moment think of any other camera that does that.
Beemermark
Veteran
That's too drastic. Keep them both or sell one, but don't sell both!
scottgee1
RF renegade
Vince, I'm looking forward to reading your impressions . . . next week? 
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Vince, I'm looking forward to reading your impressions . . . next week?
Yup - next week it is. I have the Tri-X ready to go. It's a date.
What I might try to do is a bit of a side-by-side for a couple of shots to see how they compare that way.
As a total un-scientific aside, I showed both of the cameras to my wife (who could really care less about cameras) and asked her which one she'd choose if she had to. Her answer? Contarex.
scottgee1
RF renegade
Speaking from the perspective of someone who has done a number of comparisons over the years, I'd say this is essential.
I found it useful to make some duplicate shots on a tripod. It may seem clinical but that removes the vibration variable and will give you a true standard for comparison. It essentially allows each camera to perform at its best. Otherwise, you may find yourself wondering if differences you see in the results are due to not holding a camera steady enough.
In any case, you have two splendid kits and it sounds like you're going to have fun; enjoy!
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Let the testing begin!
Dfin
Well-known
Vince, Ivor Matanle wrote an excellent article on the Contarex ,in Amateur Photographer dated 25th. January 2003. He mentions all its faults and foibles, as well as those glorious Zeiss lenses. Not so much out engineered, but out marketed by Japan Camera Inc. Also lists some repairers in the UK, and yes they are exspensive. Good luck with the testing and the decision making, not one I`d relish making. Anyone for a game of two -up ?
Pentax LX does that cute trick too; handy for changing types of film and then reloading the partly-used rolls if you note what exposure it was at...
On the selenium meter, if you do find yours is weak from age... Steve Serota of CameraCare (http://camera-care.com/) has a source of meter material to cut to fit the application... He put a new selenium cell in my Contax IIIa when he CLA'd it. I should mention some folks are seriously upset with him, but everything went well for me.
Also, it's possible that Quality Light Metric Co. in L.A. (323/467-2265 or 323/850-5300; georgepmilton@worldnet.att.net) might work on the Contarex meter, as they put a new selenium cell in my old Weston Master II.