Zeiss Ikon Contessa LKE

[johnnyrod]

I actually bought this camera (with 50mm f2.8 Tessar) as it came in a case I wanted for my still-not-fixed Contessamat, but it's turned out to be quiet a nice camera. It was generally pretty grubby but the selenium meter works (meters about 1 stop over up to 2 stops in bright light) and the rings were a bit stiff (fixed). I still have some cleaning to do, annoyingly on the rear lens element, as it's hard to get to (will take it out I think) and probably will have the greatest negative impact on pictures. Shutter speeds are there or thereabouts so for £12 (US$18-ish) it was a good find - it was cheaper than just buying the case.

Anyway I also tried out Poundland (67 cents in the US) Fujifilm 200 ISO, which seems to benefit from under- rather than over-exposure, but a few scans of the prints anyway:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/133726087@N08/sets/72157657126557645
I was experimenting with fill flash, but the outdoor, hallway and garage ones are all ambient light. One question, does the haziness in the bright areas (e.g. garage floor) look like the film being overexposed or might a grubby rear lens look like this? The prints are a bit better than the scans but I must look into a negative scanner, Christmas is coming!

 

[NeeZee]

Hard to tell the reason tbh. Some look overexposed, others like lens flare. From my experience with a lot of old cameras single specks of dust, single scratches or even dirt on the lens elements (no matter if front or rear or in between) usually does not affect IQ too much. On the other hand, even the slightest amount of haze can worsen the performance of a lens significantly. The same is true for so called 'cleaning marks' (small scratches covering the whole front element). In both cases the lens will become more prone to flare, less contrasty and 'softer'.

 

[Huss]

The shots look over exposed and hazy. Your lens most probably needs to be cleaned.
The overexposure most prob is due to the camera's shutter running slow, which is why it seems like the Fuji 200 benefits from underexposure.

I use Fuji 200 a lot, and like other C41 films it is fine with a little overexposure, not so fine with underexposure. There are a few threads on this site for Fuji C200 whch have lots of examples.

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147318

 

[johnnyrod]

I shot a previous roll of Superia but results weren't great as the rangefinder was way off, but exposure was more or less okay - I overdid it this time though. Thanks for the link Huss, some good pics there. I got this roll developed at Asda (Walmart UK) with no corrections in printing.

Yep the back element has some haze, I can't get a picture of it to show you (tried), but am going to have a go at it, or get a pro to check it out - thanks NeeZee, it's hard sometimes to know what is or isn't going to be a problem.

 

[johnnyrod]

Question: would this camera have the exact same lens as the Contessa LK non-rangefinder model? If a cheap one came up I could swap the glass over, if they are the same.

 

[johnnyrod]

Not sure if anyone still cares but I picked up a cheap Contessa LK (non-rangefinder) from fleabay. It was described as having some fungus on the front element but the others were clear, and the seller was right. Swapped the rear one into mine after checking the focal length was the same, and finally collimated the front element (focus) accurately. I don't have a piece of ground glass but I took the focus screen out of my Pentax MX SLR. Turns out the split circle in the middle is ideal for this sort of thing. Set up at 2m and checked it at 3m and all looks good - it was too far on both previous attempts. Have got some film out of the fridge warming up, will try it again, but this time it all appears to be working.

The donor camera was only £6.50 (about $9 I guess) and aside from a little fungus (and now an etched rear element) seems in very good nick. And it came with a Zeiss case, so my costs are covered. Also the viewfinder has most of the same bits as a rangefinder, the only thing missing is the moving prism - the mirrors are all there. Plus a working selenium meter. My lucky day.

 

[johnnyrod]

Well changing the rear element did the trick, got my first film back yesterday. My scanner is crap so not doing justice to the pics but I am really surprised at the sharpness that is possible. A few pics:

Autumn by John Rodriguez, on Flickr
Duck race by John Rodriguez, on Flickr
Ana bike by John Rodriguez, on Flickr

 

[titrisol]

I've been trying to get one working for a while, as I have some other non-folding ones. (LK, Contessamat, Contessamatic)
Finally I ended up with 3 non-working/pieces, and that allowed me to make a franken-camera that works.

The hardest part was to adjust the RF as the focusing ring is not flat in the back and pushes a pin that moves the RF mirrors.
I had to move the focusing ring "front" and "back" until the RF patch was in the right place.
I haven't yet figured out how to adjust the lightmeter.

Other than that this is a good camera, Tessar is very nice and plenty sharp and has a great color rendition.

Zeiss Ikon Contessa LKE ~1964

 

[titrisol]

Took the camera for a spin in a car show last weekend.
Double X film, developed in Rodinal 1+50 and guesstimating exposures.

Mustang GT350 '66