Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

[Nick Morrison]

Apart the vanished ninja stars what are the other improvement?

Brice, allegedly the edge performance WO is improved on the MM. The MM, in particular, has become quite popular in the stills forums...I believe for this reason.

When I get my EPIC, I'll try and compare the 28 2.8 MM head to head against my 28 f2 AE "Hollywood". Curious myself how they stack up. The close-focusing on the hollywood though is wonderful...

When Nick says it desolve metal and melt faces he's almost not kiding.
B.

HAHA. Yeah the 100-300 is a beast. Try the 80-200, not quite as thermonuclear. But very pleasing and organic.

The odd-ball is the 200 3.5. Technically not as "sharp" as either zoom, but I love how it renders...

 

[Greg McDonald]

Hey guys, there's a MINT 28 2.8 MM at B&H right now. These are very hard to find. Improved over the 28 AE, and rivals the famous "Hollywood" for performance.

And it's gone up in price a bit at $550. Used to be $350-$400. I know it's mint and a later SN at 8xx but it's still the highest price I've seen for a 28mm 2.8.

And Brice, nice shot!

 

[Nick Morrison]

And it's gone up in price a bit at $550. Used to be $350-$400. I know it's mint and a later SN at 8xx but it's still the highest price I've seen for a 28mm 2.8.

And Brice, nice shot!

Agreed. They have a 50 1.4 for $500, too. Prices are def starting to climb.

 

[Uli Plank]

My 28mm 2.8 MM is excellent on a SpeedBooster and the GH2 in photography, and that's showing any weakness of a lens in the corners. The Hollywood is considerably softer, but likable nevertheless.

 

[Brice Ansel]

The odd-ball is the 200 3.5. Technically not as "sharp" as either zoom, but I love how it renders...

Talking about the odd-ball 200 3.5 here is a frame from it.
I really was looking for trouble there, and I got what I was looking for, some bad green CA.
I'm surprise as it's my first CZ Contax who exibit it.

CZ Contax 200@F4 (F4 is when the ninja stars apear big time)5KFF 75fps shutter 1/150 compression 1/10 (Ctrl+click for bigger frame)

Edit: Ah and by the way, I didn't aply any sharpening on that frame, not bad for an old fart.

Ps Nick, I can't wait for your CZ Contax test, not sure your wife will be agree with me. ;-)
B.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Talking about the odd-ball 200 3.5 here is a frame from it.
I really was looking for trouble there, and I got what I was looking for, some bad green CA.
I'm surprise as it's my first CZ Contax who exibit it.

Yeah its a very, very old design. Not surprised about the CA. I like the bokeh on this lens a lot though. Those very visible Ninja Stars can add a lot of "funk".

I'd be fun todo a shoot out btw the 200 3.5, 180 2.8, and the Hassy 180 F4 (a beast).

 

[Nick Morrison]

Ps Nick, I can't wait for your CZ Contax test, not sure your wife will be agree with me. ;-)
B.

Haha. Yeah, waiting for the Epic...still in the process of getting the Scarlet, and then I'm going to upgrade...whole process may take a little bit...but I can't wait! My wife def wants "less stuff" in the house (haha).

 

[Brice Ansel]

My wife def wants "less stuff" in the house (haha).

Ha ha ha, you are not alone on that one.
Knowing your passion for lenses I can imagine the amount of water proof dust proof fire proof cases, you would not pass the test here.
You have to give me some tricks. ;-)

 

[Nick Morrison]

Ha ha ha, you are not alone on that one.
Knowing your passion for lenses I can imagine the amount of water proof dust proof fire proof cases, you would not pass the test here.
You have to give me some tricks. ;-)

I emptied out an entire closet. Lined it with Shelving. And stacked it with 1510 Pelican cases! Last I checked I had around 8, but unfortunately I expect that to grow. I already need more space (for the camera gear!), so all my hard drives need to find a new home. And I still need to organize all my filters and "knick-knacks".

Right now, I'm finding the Trekpak.com dividers very, very promising!

 

[Tom Greenberg]

I emptied out an entire closet. Lined it with Shelving. And stacked it with 1510 Pelican cases! Last I checked I had around 8, but unfortunately I expect that to grow. I already need more space (for the camera gear!), so all my hard drives need to find a new home. And I still need to organize all my filters and "knick-knacks".

Right now, I'm finding the Trekpak.com dividers very, very promising!

I feel your pain, Nick...I have 6 1510's and just got a 1560 (and have another one on the way)...4 of the 1510's and the 1560 have TrekPak...absolutely LOVE IT. You can get so much more in a case when it has compartments that are "right-sized" for what you want them to hold...

 

[Nick Morrison]

I feel your pain, Nick...I have 6 1510's and just got a 1560 (and have another one on the way)...4 of the 1510's and the 1560 have TrekPak...absolutely LOVE IT. You can get so much more in a case when it has compartments that are "right-sized" for what you want them to hold...

How are you using the TREKPAK? I got the custom tabs that come with the 1510, and I didn't feel there were enough tabs todo what I needed. Especially for packing say 10 lenses in "holes" of the same shape. Or are you using the ROLLIPAK for more customization?

 

[Matthew Robertson]

Contax 28mm hollywood @f8 from a book promo shoot today! Slapped a quick grade on the c100 log footage. Mounted the c100 on a avenger magic arm and a manfrotto super clamp with a manfrotto 701 on it. Made sure to use a construction bubble level to make sure it was straight horizontally since the level on the 701 won't work when its mounted in that fashion haha.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Matthew, that shoot looks GREAT!!!!

 

[Matthew Robertson]

Matthew, that shoot looks GREAT!!!!

Thank you nick! I am indebted to you and your hard work providing us all with INVALUABLE contax info in this thread! Really like the natural distortion of the 28 if that makes sense haha.. Has a very cinematic type distortion imo. Makes you know its a wide angle yet subtle enough to not distract

 

[Nick Morrison]

Thank you nick! I am indebted to you and your hard work providing us all with INVALUABLE contax info in this thread! Really like the natural distortion of the 28 if that makes sense haha.. Has a very cinematic type distortion imo. Makes you know its a wide angle yet subtle enough to not distract

Haha, yeah I think that's why 28mm primes are so popular in S35. For that very reason...they are WIDE, but they don't call attention to themselves (ie you don't notice they are wide). Whereas a 24mm or 25mm on S35 starts to betray some of the "expansion" of a wideangle lens.

I consider a 24/25 my first "wide".

Whereas I consider a 28mm and a 35mm as "neutrals". They are neither wide, or portrait. They are slap dap in the middle between TELES and WIDES. This idea of shooting "neutral" seems to be catching on. The director Michael Haneke pretty much shoots ALL HIS MOVIES only with a 35mm prime (because it's an "honest" lens, it "sees" what we see with our eyes, and does not "distort" reality). Amor for example was shot entirely on a Cooke 35mm prime.

And House of Cards is similar. Shot almost entirely on 27mm and 32mm Masterprimes...I have to imagine for the same reason. To not DISTORT Frank's world, but to present it HONESTLY. Without the grandeur of a wide-angle (a 21mm or a 24mm can be quite "heroic"), or the beauty and separation of a portrait lens (like a 50, 85 or 100).

This is my long way of saying yes...the 28mm Focal Length is VERY interesting. And its all the more fun when you have an exciting, organic copy like the HOLLYWOOD 28!

 

[Tom Greenberg]

How are you using the TREKPAK? I got the custom tabs that come with the 1510, and I didn't feel there were enough tabs todo what I needed. Especially for packing say 10 lenses in "holes" of the same shape. Or are you using the ROLLIPAK for more customization?

Nick, so far (although I am trying to catch up) I don't have nearly as many lenses as you do, lol! At this point I'm not using TrekPak for my lens cases. Those are still using foam insets, however I will probably change them over at some point in the future. I found that by the time I bought a bunch of TrekPak inserts and customized my camera and sound cases the way I wanted them, that I had a lot of insert pieces left over. They cut easily with a pair of scissors (although TrekPak makes a nifty little cutter specifically for this purpose), so I am now thinking about doing some additional customizing. I bet you could also buy more insert pieces from TrekPak if you contacted them...I have found them to be extremely responsive to questions. I'm looking forward to the release of their heavier duty "Industrial" line, which will give a little more structure and rigidity where needed (notice the bow in the piece next to the camera body from carrying all the weight when the case is stored in an upright position)...that could stand to be a little beefier. But overall, I am very satisfied with the TrekPak..great stuff!

 

[Matthew Robertson]

Haha, yeah I think that's why 28mm primes are so popular in S35. For that very reason...they are WIDE, but they don't call attention to themselves (ie you don't notice they are wide). Whereas a 24mm or 25mm on S35 starts to betray some of the "expansion" of a wideangle lens.

I consider a 24/25 my first "wide".

Whereas I consider a 28mm and a 35mm as "neutrals". They are neither wide, or portrait. They are slap dap in the middle between TELES and WIDES. This idea of shooting "neutral" seems to be catching on. The director Michael Haneke pretty much shoots ALL HIS MOVIES only with a 35mm prime (because it's an "honest" lens, it "sees" what we see with our eyes, and does not "distort" reality). Amor for example was shot entirely on a Cooke 35mm prime.

And House of Cards is similar. Shot almost entirely on 27mm and 32mm Masterprimes...I have to imagine for the same reason. To not DISTORT Frank's world, but to present it HONESTLY. Without the grandeur of a wide-angle (a 21mm or a 24mm can be quite "heroic"), or the beauty and separation of a portrait lens (like a 50, 85 or 100).

This is my long way of saying yes...the 28mm Focal Length is VERY interesting. And its all the more fun when you have an exciting, organic copy like the HOLLYWOOD 28!

That's awesome! Yeah i'm trying to be more mindful of my focal length choosing, and doing so intentionally in every scenerio. Learning to love that 25-35 range. Its such a different feel than when you see people who are new to filmmaking shooting everything with a 50mm and their canon 7d haha

 

[Brice Ansel]

Haha, yeah I think that's why 28mm primes are so popular in S35. For that very reason...they are WIDE, but they don't call attention to themselves (ie you don't notice they are wide). Whereas a 24mm or 25mm on S35 starts to betray some of the "expansion" of a wideangle lens.

I consider a 24/25 my first "wide".

Whereas I consider a 28mm and a 35mm as "neutrals". They are neither wide, or portrait. They are slap dap in the middle between TELES and WIDES. This idea of shooting "neutral" seems to be catching on. The director Michael Haneke pretty much shoots ALL HIS MOVIES only with a 35mm prime (because it's an "honest" lens, it "sees" what we see with our eyes, and does not "distort" reality). Amor for example was shot entirely on a Cooke 35mm prime.

And House of Cards is similar. Shot almost entirely on 27mm and 32mm Masterprimes...I have to imagine for the same reason. To not DISTORT Frank's world, but to present it HONESTLY. Without the grandeur of a wide-angle (a 21mm or a 24mm can be quite "heroic"), or the beauty and separation of a portrait lens (like a 50, 85 or 100).

This is my long way of saying yes...the 28mm Focal Length is VERY interesting. And its all the more fun when you have an exciting, organic copy like the HOLLYWOOD 28!

Today I was out with the 28 (F2.8) AE and 100 AE (F2)

28AE@5KFF

100 AE@5KFF

The 100 is a no brainer, but the humble 28 AE F2.8 continu to surprise me.
B.

 

[Nick Morrison]

The 100 is a no brainer, but the humble 28 AE F2.8 continu to surprise me.
B.

Brice I love how your enthusiasm shines through. The Contax 28s in general, are superb. Some of the best of the bunch.

 

[Sam Barnett]

I'm trying to find a contax makro lens. I'm thinking the 60mm because the copies I have seen are less expensive, and a focal length that I'm more interested in. Is there any reason to go the 100 over it?

Thanks, Sam