Russian Army Officer + Contax ll

[Jimbo035]

.. has he pulled the lens out far enough ?

http://albumwar2.com/camera-contax-ii-in-the-hands-of-a-soviet-officer/

 

[sevo]

I think so. Looking at mine from the same angle I can see the same amount of barrel.

 

[Highway 61]

Yes, absolutely. If you compare it with the collapsible Leitz lenses of the same era, the CZJ Sonnar 50/2 has a larger front cell and a shorter collapsing tube, because 1/it's a f:2 lens with an optical formula demanding a wide front element 2/the focusing helical is in the camera body, not at the end of the lens barrel.

Nice photo BTW ! Judging by the Contax logo this is a 1936-37 camera.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Yes, absolutely. If you compare it with the collapsible Leitz lenses of the same era, the CZJ Sonnar 50/2 has a larger front cell and a shorter collapsing tube, because 1/it's a f:2 lens with an optical formula demanding a wide front element 2/the focusing helical is in the camera body, not at the end of the lens barrel.

Nice photo BTW ! Judging by the Contax logo this is a 1936-37 camera.

Could I ask please, what distinguishes these from later examples, externally?
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Sid836]

The lens has been pulled out indeed as far as it should. Great photo!
A quick, fair enough, but not foolproof way of identifying a pre-war Contax II is the serial on its lens. Providing that the lens has not been swapped:
Serial, Year of make
137,418-200,520 1912
208,473-249,350 1913
249,886-282,739 1914
282,800-284,500 1915
285,200-288,100 1916
289,087-298,157 1917
298,215-322,748 1918
322,799-351,611 1919
375,194-419,823 1920
433,273-438,361 1921
422,899-498,006 1922
561,270-578,297 1923
578,297–631,501 1924
631,500-648,500 1925
666,790-703,198 1926
722,196-798,251 1927
903,100-908,150 1928
919,794-1,016,885 1929
922,488-1,239,697 1930
1,239,699-1,365,582 1931
1,364,483-1,389,279 1932
1,436,671-1,456,003 1933
1,500,474-1,590,000 1934
1,615,764-1,752,303 1935
1,674,882-1,942,806 1936
1,930,150-2,219,775 1937
2,267,991-2,527,984 1938
2,527,999-2,651,211 1939
2,652,000-c2,678,000 1940
2,678,326-2,790,346 1941
2,800,000- ? 1942

In that photo, it is hard to tell, but most likely is a pre-war one.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Early Contax II cameras had their "CONTAX" engraving filled in with black paint.

It might have been acquired pre-war and not captured. I've seen a number of photos of Soviet war photographers during World War 2 with Leica III cameras (Not FEDs cameras as one might expect).

 

[Jacques M.]

Highway is right: the position of the stroke of the "t", in Contax, is high on these 1936-37 models, and lower after.
Compare with this one, probably a wartime camera: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contax_II#/media/File:Contax_II_img_1875.jpg

Jacques.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

OK, thanks, all. Unless it's my imagination working overtime I believe I've noticed that there is be some variation in the shape of the "a" in various images I have seen online, and maybe even the symmetry of the "x".

I actually acquired one myself recently. It has a serial number beginning with "B".

 

[Mr_Flibble]

The B indicates it's from 1936.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

The B indicates it's from 1936.

Thanks, yes, that is what I understood to be the case also.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Mr_Flibble]

As coincidence would have it, I have my 1936 Contax II sitting on my desk here. Loaded with some Superpan 200 and a 8,5cm f/2 Sonnar attached.

 

[Elmar Lang]

It can be interesting to remember that Field Marshal von Paulus, commander of the German 6th Army, at his surrender to the Soviets had his own Contax-II "liberated" from his property, by a young, Soviet officer. Soon, this officer presented the camera to Dmitrij Baltermants, the famous reporter: he used this camera through the war and after and was proud of it.

E.L.

 

[Highway 61]

It can be interesting to remember that Field Marshal von Paulus, commander of the German 6th Army, at his surrender to the Soviets had his own Contax-II "liberated" from his property, by a young, Soviet officer. Soon, this officer presented the camera to Dmitrij Baltermants, the famous reporter: he used this camera through the war and after and was proud of it.

Very interesting, thanks for this note. The surrender of the German 6th Army after Stalingrad was one of the decisive points of the war.

Don't forget that the Soviets were regularly informed in real time of the Germans' strategy thanks to Rudolf Roessler's "Lucy" network located in Switzerland and who was getting highly sensitive data from the OKW. This is how they managed to win the battle of Koursk during the summer of 1943, which may be the real decisive point of the war on the Eastern front.

And Baltermants shot many pictures at the battle of Koursk... so, probably with Von Paulus' Contax II.

 

[bobby_novatron]

In Soviet Russia, camera takes picture of photographer!

Like this one:

 

[Elmar Lang]

Hello, I knew about von Paulus's Contax-II many years ago (1986 0r 1987), when I was a student at Venice's University.

Baltermants, who was in the editorial staff of a famous Soviet newspaper, took a lecture on photojournalism at the dept. of Russian Language: it was a highly interesting event. Of course, he had a photo outfit with him, but I remained highly impressed, when he took out a worn, but working Contax-II and narrated how he had it. He also quoted the name of the officer who took the camera from von Paulus's belongings (I forgot that name); this officer, died later during the war. What he said, about the Contax, was someting like: "it's good, because it always works, no matter if it rains, or wind blows, or one's lying in the mud". It appears that Mr. Baltermants had no fear of Contax's (in-)famous shutter's strips...

I'd love to know the whereabouts of this little piece of history...

E.L.