Question for Contax I, II, II, IIA, IIIA owners

P

Pfreddee

Well-known
Local time
3:39 PM
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
528
How many of you who own one of the original Contax cameras, particularly the IIA and the IIIA, use them as a more or less regular shooter? Mine (Contax IIA) works almost flawlessly, and I've started carrying it as my go-to film camera for B/W photography. I've managed to adjust to the viewfinder, and some of the other quirks, viz., the take-up reel is an escape artist; gotta be on my toes when I load film. I really have bonded with the camera.

Also, how many of you regularly use a contrast filter when you shoot B/W?

Thanks to all who reply.

With best regards,

Pfreddee(Stephen)
 
I'm an ex-Contax owner, Stephen, now shooting film with Kiev II.
(Quite frankly the only difference I've found is in the lettering.)

No, I never use a filter. Shooting Tri-X and Arista.

There's a good solution to the dropped spool syndrome... I'll se d you a link when I get to my home computer.
 
I have several IIa's & II's that I use semi-regularly. They actually were my 1st real system RFs, but now they are part of a rotating lineup of Leicas & Nikons, etc. (my camera collection has grown considerably in the past 15 years). I used to routinely use filters for B&W, but while I still shoot plenty of B&W, I hardly ever shoot daytime landscape-type stuff, which is the only time I still use them.
 
The IIa is my main small format rangefinder camera these days - with a couple of Kievs as backups. I also have a II, but its shutter is too worn, it would probably tear after a film or two.
 
I use my lla regularly and love it--for its ergonomic quirks as much as for the superb Sonnar 1.5, 35mm Biotar and first class build quality. A lot of HP5 has passed through those combinations ( with and without yellow or orange filters).

It's just a terrible shame that the viewfinder is so...mediocre. I strongly suspect it was that weakness which mostly prevented its competing successfully with the Leica M after 1954.

Regards,
D.
 
I have a Contax I that I use on rare occasions when I am feeling masochistic...it is a lovely thing if somewhat flawed...
 
Dralowid said:
I have a Contax I that I use on rare occasions when I am feeling masochistic...it is a lovely thing if somewhat flawed...
Click to expand...

It is a strange thing that one of the best rangefinder cameras of all time, the Leica M5, is nowadays cheaper than the completely unreliable Contax I. Both cameras are made in the same quantity.

Erik.
 
I have shot a lot with the IIA, using the 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar. I got this camera and lens for only $150, so my expectations were not very high. But I was surprised, this camera produces astonishing images. It is not as quick to operate as a Leica M, but the images it produces give up nothing in quality.
 
People tend to forget that the Contax was designed to compete with Barnack Leicas, not M's. We would have neither Nikon nor Leica as we know them now without the Contax.

My IIa was something like $85 if memory serves, in 2009. I put a $50 collapsible 5cm f2 Sonnar on it, went on a trip to the Grand Canyon and came back with about 200 correctly exposed slides.
 
Erik van Straten said:
It is a strange thing that one of the best rangefinder cameras of all time, the Leica M5, is nowadays cheaper than the completely unreliable Contax I. Both cameras are made in the same quantity.

Erik.
Click to expand...

Where do you get a 200€ ratty M5? Or do you mean a I recently restored to perfect working order vs. any working M5? What you pay there is many hours of labour, not the camera.

The Contax I may be overpriced relative to the II and IIa, costing the same while being generally dysfunctional, but either tend to be priced like cheaper Barnacks, at least hereabouts.
 
I wouldn't touch an M5 with a 10ft pole myself, but I did pick up my Contax I w/ 5cm f/1.5 Sonnar for about $300, just for kicks since I think it's a beautiful camera. Comparatively, the Leica III is also a beautiful camera that costs very little. Mine was basically free. The Contax rangefinder/viewfinder is superior though IMO.
 
Old ground indeed...there will have been uncountable discussions comparing the products of Zeiss and Leitz, the first was probably in 1932...
 
I bought a IIa recently (after having wanted one since high school thanks to Capa, though he used a II) and it's been my go-to for the last few weeks. I had the shutter checked on a machine and its in perfect working order. The vf doesn't hold a candle to my M4, but its not supposed to and is perfectly serviceable/easy to use. Mine came with an Exakta spool, which rides high but doesn't fall out - I have an original Contax spool, though, and the camera works much more smoothly with it.

All and all, one of my new favorites - a good camera for one handed operation in the rain while holding an umbrella.
 
Former Contax Shooter

Former Contax Shooter

I've owned both a IIa and a IIIa. I loved the Zeiss lenses, but I ended up selling both cameras to purchase a Mamiya 7 II. The larger film area makes a huge difference.
 
Erik van Straten said:
I bought a like new perfectly working Leica M5 recently for EUR 600 at Photo Brell in Germany. The Contax I goes for more nowadays.
Click to expand...

That strange freakish Boris from Arsenal tries to sell them for 600€ (with lens) on ebay. Given that none of his I's has ever changed hands that way going by the completed auction list, that does only indicate that even a highly qualified snake oil salesman cannot sell a Contax I for 600€.

Two supposedly working cameras from the estate of well-known collectors sold for 275-350€ within the last year, with lens - that is a more realistic figure...
 
i wanted one badly so i got a IIIa off the Bay several years ago. Turned out the shutter is getting stuck every second-third exposure. I fixed it myself, shot a roll or two with it, then it got stolen :/
So i had to get another one. I found a cheaper IIa locally, from an old lady whos hubby used it for decades. Has even the name engraved. Works good, i have a jupi 50/2 and a sonnar 50/1.5 for it.
I shot a few rolls with it and the Sonnar, quite like the results still, however the WF is a bit annoyingly squinty and film loading is...well, not 2015 level:)
Lately it just sits in a drawer. Since i picked up the Bessa R3a, i just use that all the time for VF, loading and meter conveniences - or the hexar AF which is even easier.
When i want to use something cumbersome, i go for medium format... Even THAT is easier (fuji GW690ii) than the contax.

I still love the contax though, probably will never sell it.
I'll use it...
Tomorrow. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom