julianphotoart
No likey digital-phooey
Yes, I know this getting seriously off-topic. But we have so much Zeiss Ikon action on this site these days but we need to share the love with old Zeiss Ikon SLR brethren. I apologize in advance for this being a long-winded post -- but this camera is just sooooooo wild.
Anyway, in a previously reported bad case of GAS, I laid out for a Zeiss Ikon Contarex. Ivor Matanle in his SLR classics book says you gotta hold one of these babies to really appreciate it.
On the other hand, Henry Scherer, at his zeisscamera.com web-site, says of the Contarex: "after having studied the Contarex for a few years I have come to the conclusion that the root cause of its peculiar personality is that it was the first of the line of modern 35 mm SLR's. The situation with the design of the first of anything is that there is no experience upon which to rely when considering design ideas. It's impossible to prove that any idea is wrong. Anyone who tries to edit the design is quickly attacked and becomes an enemy of the whole. Consequently, jjust about every designer's pet idea gets incorporated and the product is very quirky. It seems to me the main reason the Contarex is so large and so heavy is that it wasn't possible for anyone on the design team to live without their big idea being incorporated into it, so it had to be very large to hold the fruit of so many very talented people."
So I got the camera today. Unreal. Indeed, every possible idea was thrown into this complex big jewel. Wildest lens mount known to man first of all. Why on earth have a wheel as the ONLY means of controlling aperture? I have no idea how well this camera works; it might be the most elegant paperweight I ever buy. The shutter seems fine, the light-meter is beautiful and utterly unworkable, and the myriad mechanical parts wheeze, clang, buzz, clink, pfft and whirr like a little symphony.
Attached are photos. I also throw in a photo of a Zeiss Ikon Icarex, which was the mid-range SLR at about the same time as the Contarex range (albeit later than this Cyclops model). This Cyclops dates from sometime prior to 1964 and the Icarex from roughly 1970 or so. The two cameras are utterly different. My understanding is that the Icarex heavily incorporates a lot of designs taken over from Voigtlander. The Contarex is unique.
Interestingly, though the comparative size of the various parts of the Icarex makes it seem smaller than a Contarex, it actually isn't. The main body of the Icarex is a little less wide but the main body is a little higher and the overall height of the two cameras is the same.
One of the photos is a close-up of the Contarex film advance lever and attendant dial. This shows the workmanship. The dial is so weird though. First, it has film speed labeling unlike any other camera. Second, the film counter goes down from 36. Third, on a camera like this you have to manually re-set the counter. Fourth, despite the lever and dial components being so big, the actual shutter release button is small, rudimentary and insignificant. You'll also notice the famous aperture wheel. Another shot shows the lens mount. It's so convoluted that I won't even bother.
The one problem with the camera, which I have to ask Mr. Scherer about (and perhaps ship it to him), is the fact that the lens, though an f4 lens, doesn't open up wider than f5.6. The ring at the rear of the lens that controls aperture can be manually moved to f4 but when attached to the camera it just won't do it. The lens may have to go in; I don't know yet.
I guess we'll shoot some photos first and then get the camera and/or lens CLA'd. I don't think it's ever had a cleaning, though cosmetically it's beautiful. I won't even bother to try to fix the light-meter--even if it got fixed I'd never trust it.
Can you imagine actually going out in public and trying to inconspicuously take some street photos? If someone here has done so, I'd like to hear about it.
Thanks for reading.
Julian
Anyway, in a previously reported bad case of GAS, I laid out for a Zeiss Ikon Contarex. Ivor Matanle in his SLR classics book says you gotta hold one of these babies to really appreciate it.
On the other hand, Henry Scherer, at his zeisscamera.com web-site, says of the Contarex: "after having studied the Contarex for a few years I have come to the conclusion that the root cause of its peculiar personality is that it was the first of the line of modern 35 mm SLR's. The situation with the design of the first of anything is that there is no experience upon which to rely when considering design ideas. It's impossible to prove that any idea is wrong. Anyone who tries to edit the design is quickly attacked and becomes an enemy of the whole. Consequently, jjust about every designer's pet idea gets incorporated and the product is very quirky. It seems to me the main reason the Contarex is so large and so heavy is that it wasn't possible for anyone on the design team to live without their big idea being incorporated into it, so it had to be very large to hold the fruit of so many very talented people."
So I got the camera today. Unreal. Indeed, every possible idea was thrown into this complex big jewel. Wildest lens mount known to man first of all. Why on earth have a wheel as the ONLY means of controlling aperture? I have no idea how well this camera works; it might be the most elegant paperweight I ever buy. The shutter seems fine, the light-meter is beautiful and utterly unworkable, and the myriad mechanical parts wheeze, clang, buzz, clink, pfft and whirr like a little symphony.
Attached are photos. I also throw in a photo of a Zeiss Ikon Icarex, which was the mid-range SLR at about the same time as the Contarex range (albeit later than this Cyclops model). This Cyclops dates from sometime prior to 1964 and the Icarex from roughly 1970 or so. The two cameras are utterly different. My understanding is that the Icarex heavily incorporates a lot of designs taken over from Voigtlander. The Contarex is unique.
Interestingly, though the comparative size of the various parts of the Icarex makes it seem smaller than a Contarex, it actually isn't. The main body of the Icarex is a little less wide but the main body is a little higher and the overall height of the two cameras is the same.
One of the photos is a close-up of the Contarex film advance lever and attendant dial. This shows the workmanship. The dial is so weird though. First, it has film speed labeling unlike any other camera. Second, the film counter goes down from 36. Third, on a camera like this you have to manually re-set the counter. Fourth, despite the lever and dial components being so big, the actual shutter release button is small, rudimentary and insignificant. You'll also notice the famous aperture wheel. Another shot shows the lens mount. It's so convoluted that I won't even bother.
The one problem with the camera, which I have to ask Mr. Scherer about (and perhaps ship it to him), is the fact that the lens, though an f4 lens, doesn't open up wider than f5.6. The ring at the rear of the lens that controls aperture can be manually moved to f4 but when attached to the camera it just won't do it. The lens may have to go in; I don't know yet.
I guess we'll shoot some photos first and then get the camera and/or lens CLA'd. I don't think it's ever had a cleaning, though cosmetically it's beautiful. I won't even bother to try to fix the light-meter--even if it got fixed I'd never trust it.
Can you imagine actually going out in public and trying to inconspicuously take some street photos? If someone here has done so, I'd like to hear about it.
Thanks for reading.
Julian
