Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

I'm not Nick, but I own both AE and MM lenses. None of my MMs has a Ninja star, so he is referring to AE.
 
Me too, just like Cooke's sawtooth ;-)
 
Cziraki Vilmos said:
Hi, Where can I find the serial number when I made the lens? I know this page, but there is a number that does not provide a value.
http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/hw/hwlenses.aspx
Click to expand...

I have never found any official source for dating the lenses based on the serial number but here are some indications.
- The oldest series I have seen on a Contax Zeiss is 59xxx or so. I'm betting this could go down a bit more maybe 57~58? Not sure. These should be around 1975 or near after that.
- The Berlin wall fell in June, 1990. By October Germany was one country. It's not like all manufacturers adjusted in one day but the "Made in WEST Germany" on the German made copies has changed to "Made in Germany" at around that time (1990~91). By observing lens serial numbers and the Made In mark you can generally deduct that the early-mid 7xxx serial numbers are around that era.
- MM mount was introduced in 1984. Again not everything changed overnight and the most MM lenses I see around seem to be from the early 90s and on (deducted from the the point above).
- I have a 28/2.8 MMJ that actually has the manufacturing date written on the inside (was repairing the lenses). The serial is 790xxxxx and the date is 23/Oct/1996.

Hope this helps :)
 
Last edited:
Georgios Tryfonas said:
I have never found any official source for dating the lenses based on the serial number but here are some indications.
- The oldest series I have seen on a Contax Zeiss is 59xxx or so. I'm betting this could go down a bit more maybe 57~58? Not sure. These should be around 1975 or near after that.
Click to expand...

Georgios I think your right - I've never seen anything earlier than 59, as far as I recall.
 
Hey I'm looking for a 21mm 2.8 AEG or AEJ but can only find MMJ on eBay. Is this lens mm only?
 
Thanks! I've an AEG Tele-Tessar 200mm f3.5 with 58xxxx serial number. This lens is the oldest in my collection.
 

I've just shot/edited this test video of our new set of Cineovision spherical lenses. It's supossedly based on Zeiss Contax glass from the 1980's, but my guess is that Cineovision put new irises on the lenses so they look identical and round, plus the flares are very Zeiss-like (at least, from my knowledge of Ultras, Masters, Standards, Superspeeds and Highspeeds) with some rainbow colors that remind me of Canon FD's (the 24mm is supposed to be the 24mm F1.4 FD L). What do you think? I'm not that familiar with Contax still glass at all. The 20mm should be the 20mm f2.8 flektogon and shows some veiling flare wide-open, with severe contrast improvement stopped down to T5.6.
 
Ignacio,

I have a Cineovision Zeiss set in BNCR mount. My Cineovision 20mm does not say Zeiss and says 2.8 on the lens front engraving, and also on the Iris ring. It is not a 2.8 and is not a Flectigon but is actually an Olympus Pen F half frame lens that only covers S35 and not full frame as the Zeiss do. Looks like Cineovision was representing this lens as a 2.8 when it never was and never could be.
 
Hello Vance,

My set doesn't have engraved any brand other than Cineovision. I know they are Zeiss lenses because i) that's what I was told and the serials can be Zeiss from the 70's and 80's and ii) the look of the 35-50-85mm is very Zeiss to my eyes. My set is in PL mount, but could have been converted from BNCR at some point.

I believe my 20mm T3 is a 20mm f2.8 Flektogon because the appearence of the glass is the same, plus it covers Alexa Open Gate 3.4K, which is a bigger sensor area than Super 35. I put the lenses on the projector and they cover FF35 from 24mm and up. My guess is that the 20mm doesn't cover full frame as it should per its still design because the Cineovision housing was made with Super 35 in mind and not Full Frame, so the 95mm front isn't big or wide enough and I'm seeing the front of the lens itself.

Vance Colvig said:
Ignacio,

I have a Cineovision Zeiss set in BNCR mount. My Cineovision 20mm does not say Zeiss and says 2.8 on the lens front engraving, and also on the Iris ring. It is not a 2.8 and is not a Flectigon but is actually an Olympus Pen F half frame lens that only covers S35 and not full frame as the Zeiss do. Looks like Cineovision was representing this lens as a 2.8 when it never was and never could be.
Click to expand...
 
Ignacio Aguilar said:

I've just shot/edited this test video of our new set of Cineovision spherical lenses. It's supossedly based on Zeiss Contax glass from the 1980's, but my guess is that Cineovision put new irises on the lenses so they look identical and round, plus the flares are very Zeiss-like (at least, from my knowledge of Ultras, Masters, Standards, Superspeeds and Highspeeds) with some rainbow colors that remind me of Canon FD's (the 24mm is supposed to be the 24mm F1.4 FD L). What do you think? I'm not that familiar with Contax still glass at all. The 20mm should be the 20mm f2.8 flektogon and shows some veiling flare wide-open, with severe contrast improvement stopped down to T5.6.
Click to expand...

This is great. And yes they do look very Contax-ish.

Funny, we've also added a Canon FD 24mm 1.4 to our kit, so we're on same page!

Didn't Cineovision also use these sets as bases for anamorphic lenses?
 
Yes, Nick, they mostly used Contax as the base for their anamorphics, though some sets (problably ordered by JDC et al) may have used actual cinema lenses. Neither Standard Primes nor Superspeeds have such round bokeh as these Cineovisions. Do you think it’s a new iris or just regular Contax?

The 24mm FD 1.4 L (or the SSC) is wonderful. Great quality and beautiful flares, maybe the backgrounds are a little softer with that lens and the focus falloff is less abrupt than the typical Zeiss, but here it matches well enough IMHO!
 
Ignacio Aguilar said:
Yes, Nick, they mostly used Contax as the base for their anamorphics, though some sets (problably ordered by JDC et al) may have used actual cinema lenses. Neither Standard Primes nor Superspeeds have such round bokeh as these Cineovisions. Do you think it’s a new iris or just regular Contax?
Click to expand...

Yeah I think it's a new iris. No Contax I know of has circular iris!

Ignacio Aguilar said:
The 24mm FD 1.4 L (or the SSC) is wonderful. Great quality and beautiful flares, maybe the backgrounds are a little softer with that lens and the focus falloff is less abrupt than the typical Zeiss, but here it matches well enough IMHO!
Click to expand...

Yeah we're LOVING our 24 FD, and yes does seem to match nicely! Just used it last week for the first time!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top