Let's see your vintage Contax

boojum said:
I like the looks of the II's ad III's better but I understand that the IIa's and IIIa's are more competent. They are just lovely.
Click to expand...
Comparing the two in terms of use, I think it's swings and roundabouts.

I was surprised by how much smaller the IIa was over the II. They feel much nicer in the hand, and the shutter speed selector is nicer to use.

The problem is the focus wheel is reversed in direction (which I just couldn't get used to), and the RF patch isn't central (it's lower than you expect in the VF - you can get an idea of how far the offset is by looking at the position of the RF window from the front).
 
boojum said:
Is "covet" truly a sin? LOL You guys are killing me with all that gorgeous gear. They look just as if the were bought yesterday. The Leica film M bodies are great cameras but for me the Contax II and III series define 35mm film cameras on the top shelf. Yeah, there are a lot of really good 35mm cameras and some wonderful ones. Maybe it was that fellow student's II back in '53 or '54 that set me off. Maybe. But no camera has ever defined 35mm to me as much as those old Contax cameras. The only other camera with that kind of gravitas, for me, is the old Hasselblad 500 series with some honkin' big Zeiss or Schneider hanging off the front of it. Those two cameras were machines to convert light into images. Not to look cute or stylish, these were just image creating machines. And they were just plain gorgeous.
Click to expand...
I should point out to you that I have been doing product photography for a long time and have had to turn many a sow's ear (prototypes) into a silk purse. My cameras and lenses aren't always that pretty if you see them up close and in person. I have had better luck with equipment that was obviously used rather than things that look like they just came out of the factory. Fifty+ year old lubricants are usually not a good thing. I definitely haven't bought lenses that had trashed front and rear elements, but if the barrel is a bit marked up from use I usually regard that as a good sign--that the previous owner was satisfied with the results he/she got.
 
Coldkennels said:
Comparing the two in terms of use, I think it's swings and roundabouts.

I was surprised by how much smaller the IIa was over the II. They feel much nicer in the hand, and the shutter speed selector is nicer to use.

The problem is the focus wheel is reversed in direction (which I just couldn't get used to), and the RF patch isn't central (it's lower than you expect in the VF - you can get an idea of how far the offset is by looking at the position of the RF window from the front).
Click to expand...

Yes. It is difficult, the prettier or the more functional. But as I am not going to shoot film it is all academic. Unchanged is that they are gorgeous cameras. A week ago I was looking at one and handling it. I had no rational reason to not but own one, or at least steal the one I was handling. ;o) The owner was such a nice guy, though. And he had a Glock. LOL No, he did not. Is there a 12 Step program for Contax addiction?
 
Cascadilla said:
I should point out to you that I have been doing product photography for a long time and have had to turn many a sow's ear (prototypes) into a silk purse. My cameras and lenses aren't always that pretty if you see them up close and in person. I have had better luck with equipment that was obviously used rather than things that look like they just came out of the factory. Fifty+ year old lubricants are usually not a good thing. I definitely haven't bought lenses that had trashed front and rear elements, but if the barrel is a bit marked up from use I usually regard that as a good sign--that the previous owner was satisfied with the results he/she got.
Click to expand...

Yes, you do shoot beautifully. The condition and arrangement speaks to your skills. And as ragged as you might think your gear is it is a lot better than mine which is non-existent. ;o) If this were twenty years earlier I would think about starting a classic Contax collection. Now it is pleasure enough to enjoy what others have.

But it was a close call for the fellow who had that Contax II last Saturday. ;o) If Miles were just an inch less of a good fellow I would have dashed out of that coffee shop with the camera and been gone. LOL Not really. But it is a beaut, cosmetically and mechanically right. It made the round-trip to Oleg (?) in the Czech Republic to be made whole and happy.
 
Coldkennels said:
Yes... using one!

I love the glass, but the bodies drive me insane. Thank Christ that Amedeo exists...
Click to expand...


What Step are you on? LMAO

The Amadeo is so tempting. It makes great sense for access to reasonably priced FSU Sonnars. OTOH it was possible to scoop up some LTM's for ~US$100. I have a '57 J8 that I always rave about because it is just such a good lens. And I dragged out an old and rarely used '58 non-KMZ Jupiter 11 135mm tele. And it is a good lens with good IQ and color. How droll it is that WW II Soviet war prizes included CZJ, guts and all, and the FSU started building CZJ lenses. At first with the CZJ formulas and glass and then drifted off. But the early ones of the FSU wound up benefiting the Western Capitalist photographers, we running dogs of capitalism. And at the same time it is benefiting many in the FSU who can gather up these lenses, give them a good CLA, and sell them to us. I've dealt mostly with Ukrainians and always done well.

Anyway, Amadeo or not there are still some good buys called Jupiter out there. Sonnars through the back door. ;o)
 
boojum said:
What Step are you on? LMAO
Click to expand...
I'm not even going to the meetings. Pour me another, will ya?

Oh wait, you meant Contaxes! Ah.

Every so often I think about buying another. But considering I have a Contax II, a IIa, a Kiev 4, and a Kiev 4AM and none of them quite work correctly (plus a pile of Kievs that don't work at all), I think I am very, very much out of that game. Beautiful things, but absolutely insanely designed.

But the Amedeo? Highly recommended.

Something to consider: not only are Contax mount lenses a lot cheaper than their LTM (whether real LTM or Soviet Thread Mount) equivalents, they also focus correctly with no hassle. And some Kiev-mount lenses are actively better than their Zorki-bound brethren; for instance, the Kiev Jupiter 11 and Jupiter 9 both focus closer in Kiev mount (1.5m vs 2.5m for the Jupiter 11, 1.15m vs 1.8m for the Jupiter 9), and the Jupiter 8M has click stops and is smaller than the Zorki's Jupiter 8 (although Brian says the optics aren't as good, I've not noticed any issues with my two J8Ms). Plus you get the Helios-103. Only way you can put one on a Leica body, and it's worth it. That thing is such a good lens.
 
Coldkennels said:
I'm not even going to the meetings. Pour me another, will ya?

Oh wait, you meant Contaxes! Ah.

Every so often I think about buying another. But considering I have a Contax II, a IIa, a Kiev 4, and a Kiev 4AM and none of them quite work correctly (plus a pile of Kievs that don't work at all), I think I am very, very much out of that game. Beautiful things, but absolutely insanely designed.

But the Amedeo? Highly recommended.

Something to consider: not only are Contax mount lenses a lot cheaper than their LTM (whether real LTM or Soviet Thread Mount) equivalents, they also focus correctly with no hassle. And some Kiev-mount lenses are actively better than their Zorki-bound brethren; for instance, the Kiev Jupiter 11 and Jupiter 9 both focus closer in Kiev mount (1.5m vs 2.5m for the Jupiter 11, 1.15m vs 1.8m for the Jupiter 9), and the Jupiter 8M has click stops and is smaller than the Zorki's Jupiter 8 (although Brian says the optics aren't as good, I've not noticed any issues with my two J8Ms). Plus you get the Helios-103. Only way you can put one on a Leica body, and it's worth it. That thing is such a good lens.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that all you say is true. But I have more than enough lenses and cameras. Getting deeper into the gear fray will just add more nosebleed.

There are cameras I covet. Some an awfully lot. And I am running out of time so there is that. I do not want my heirs to get too fat. So I will indulge myself a bit when I lose resolve. And it usually is a free ride. I draw from a brokerage account which grows to replace my foolishness. It is not a big account but it can cover the occasional loss of sanity. Well, let me be more correct, the occasional loss of more sanity. I have been especially lucky. I have also been especially prudent.
 
Mr_Flibble said:
View attachment 4846478
View attachment 4846479

Hello group, I am Rick and I am a Contax Addict.
Click to expand...


Unlike with the old dope peddler the first one is not free. Sheesh. That is one wonderful collection. The downside is that I have broken out in a cold sweat and have begun to shake. I may have to lie down with a cool cloth across my forehead. You have to have been collecting that gear over a long period. Just beautiful to look at. Wow. You guys are killing me.

But thanks for posting the collection. I'll recover in a bit. ;o)
 
Coldkennels said:
...this is bringing back the totally irrational desire to own a Contax I again. Dammit.

NURSE!
Click to expand...
Calm yourself. They are indeed very lovely and black nickel lenses are works of art but before you get too excited best read all this thread, that is all 36 pages of it.

Contax I ribbons

(I have put this post in this section and not repairs etc because it follows on from others) OK, so using Erik's excellent instructions I have arrived at the following point without incident or loss. You'll notice that I put screws back in their holes so that I know where they should go on...
rangefinderforum.com rangefinderforum.com

Having made one work another more or less work I sold the lot and have now been rehabilitated. I have even sold my Super Nettel which is a super camera. I am content with those so simple little Leicas.

Maybe
 
Coldkennels said:
I was surprised by how much smaller the IIa was over the II. They feel much nicer in the hand, and the shutter speed selector is nicer to use.
Click to expand...
Maybe the shutter noise might be important as well: The post-war shutter is much more quiet than the pre-war (y). My Contax IIIa is even more quiet than a friend's Leica M2 :cool:.
 
Dralowid said:
Calm yourself. They are indeed very lovely and black nickel lenses are works of art but before you get too excited best read all this thread, that is all 36 pages of it.

Contax I ribbons

(I have put this post in this section and not repairs etc because it follows on from others) OK, so using Erik's excellent instructions I have arrived at the following point without incident or loss. You'll notice that I put screws back in their holes so that I know where they should go on...
rangefinderforum.com rangefinderforum.com
Click to expand...
I read all of that ages ago. That's precisely the reason I haven't had a wild swing at obtaining a Contax I.

Well, that and the fact every other Contax I've touched hasn't worked properly, too.
 
Mr_Flibble said:
Only some 20 odd years.
And it's a good thing I'm a little handy at taking them apart and replacing shutter straps, so it sometimes pays off buying the cheap deals.
Click to expand...
I am not adventurous enough to try a shutter curtain or ribbon replacement. You must have some skill
 
A little puzzle. Rick's pictures show three Contax I. Two don't have shutter release guards and one does. Was this little guard (which from memory screws on) part of the camera when sold or an 'extra' available from Zeiss.

Of course...shutter release guards and rings are everyday issues of great importance for ltm Leica owners, they never go out without one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom