Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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

Tommaso Alvisi said:
Tom,
once you have the ss set you could use them on every job...I find the 2.8 versions to be interesting only if considering bang for bucks!
Click to expand...

For those that don't open up to 1.4 or similar speeds, the smaller and lighter size of the slower counterparts are much more useful. There's obviously positives and negatives of both but seeing how more sensitive sensors are coming out, the demand for slower glass will slowly rise... and Dragon is a good example.
 
Absolutely right indeed guys! It's just that once you get to 2.8 you are near 3.4 of the 35-70!!
I regret having sold it! ;)
But I have since january the gorgeours 35-135!!
 
Shervin Mandgaryan said:
For those that don't open up to 1.4 or similar speeds, the smaller and lighter size of the slower counterparts are much more useful. There's obviously positives and negatives of both but seeing how more sensitive sensors are coming out, the demand for slower glass will slowly rise... and Dragon is a good example.
Click to expand...


That was my justification for offloading my Samyang f1.4s when I started building the contax set. I have a Scarlet, which I tend to have enough lights for, and a 6D for smaller jobs which has astonishing iso.

However, I do find myself missing that 1.4 look...
 
Shervin Mandgaryan said:
For those that don't open up to 1.4 or similar speeds, the smaller and lighter size of the slower counterparts are much more useful. There's obviously positives and negatives of both but seeing how more sensitive sensors are coming out, the demand for slower glass will slowly rise... and Dragon is a good example.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm insane and have both the faster Contax primes, and slower ones (when you've been collecting these as long as I have, it just happens...trust me). My frequent DP and I see advantages in both sets. My SLOWER primes are all brand new MMs, so I also use them for the latest coatings (a number of them are high 8s). We also think the 2.8.s in general may have a PUNCHIER look (see the recent comparison of the 85 1.4 and 2.8...I think that may apply to many of the 2.8 primes...their slower speed allows them have a very strong rendering even wo).

I bought a lot of this glass so cheap, that I ended up getting a bit of everything, and love the variety. You can have flaring ninja stars (older AES), clean small primes (2.8 MMs), faster primes, zooms. All with a TINY FOOTPRINT, with a great look, that are a breeze to travel with and throw on our REDS.

I love showing up on set with two 1510 pelicans and a STASH of primes. We are ready for ANYTHING. Even across multiple cameras. Which in our business (the fast paced, ever changing world of broadcast promo), is a huge plus.
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
But I have since january the gorgeours 35-135!!
Click to expand...

How are you digging the 35-135? You know it's super rare right? Only made about 4,000 of them. Apparently it was the zoom the Zeiss engineers at Contrax prized the most. Has a bit of distortion at 35mm, but otherwise is very, very sharp. And the Macro function is very strong...even more developed than on the 35-70.
 
Shervin Mandgaryan said:
For those that don't open up to 1.4 or similar speeds, the smaller and lighter size of the slower counterparts are much more useful. There's obviously positives and negatives of both but seeing how more sensitive sensors are coming out, the demand for slower glass will slowly rise... and Dragon is a good example.
Click to expand...

Absolutely my thought when I choose the 2.8 prime.
We could also add to the argument; light solution are getting smaller and cheaper.
I have fast lenses and tend not to use them that much.
And seriously why should I pay more for lenses who have to compromise to achieve a 1.4 aperture?

And for Nick I coudn't resist to post that pic

60 AE @ F8 2K WS 7:1 compression (ctrl+click for big pic)
467615_10201262478470371_1186841207_o.jpg

E viva.
B.
 
Brice this pick is fucking insane!!! My favorite Contax pick on this thread!!!!

The 60 2.8 is becoming one of our faves too. Utterly destroyed on a shoot this week, as our portrait lens paired with the 21 on the B-Cam.

Brice Ansel said:
Absolutely my thought when I choose the 2.8 prime.
We could also add to the argument; light solution are getting smaller and cheaper.
I have fast lenses and tend not to use them that much.
And seriously why should I pay more for lenses who have to compromise to achieve a 1.4 aperture?

And for Nick I coudn't resist to post that pic

60 AE @ F8 2K WS 7:1 compression (ctrl+click for big pic)
467615_10201262478470371_1186841207_o.jpg

E viva.
B.
Click to expand...
 
After lots of testing and side to side comparisons, i think what it really comes down for me is this:

I prefer the mechanics, weight, and speed of the ZE's (and probably a slight edge to sharpness) , but I prefer the overall image, and bokeh, and uniqueness wide open of the contax's.

The ZE's are just PERFECT handheld on my c100 though. My contax glass is too light and the focus rings just aren't silky smooth like the ZE's that I prefer. Sure they're smooth, but I just seem to be so much more accurate with the ZE's when focusing.
 
Hi,

I've got a zeiss 35-70 3.4 with the push pull zoom that is stuck. it only moves a few mm's.

Any fixes??

thanks
 
Stuck where?

At 35, it goes Macro, and while in the macro range, it locks out of the zoom. If you focus back down to normal, it should push out to 70 pretty easily.

If that's not the problem, then it sounds broken. And if it's broken, I have no idea how to fix it. Nick Morrison will probably pop on within the next 12 hours and give better advice than I can.
 
Mestizo Devon said:
Hi,

I've got a zeiss 35-70 3.4 with the push pull zoom that is stuck. it only moves a few mm's.

Any fixes??

thanks
Click to expand...

Nick P is right, stuck how? Stuck in macro mode? Or stuck in general? If its really stuck, you'll need a lens tech to fix it. Try Peter at RP lens.
 
Matthew Robertson said:
After lots of testing and side to side comparisons, i think what it really comes down for me is this:

I prefer the mechanics, weight, and speed of the ZE's (and probably a slight edge to sharpness) , but I prefer the overall image, and bokeh, and uniqueness wide open of the contax's.

The ZE's are just PERFECT handheld on my c100 though. My contax glass is too light and the focus rings just aren't silky smooth like the ZE's that I prefer. Sure they're smooth, but I just seem to be so much more accurate with the ZE's when focusing.
Click to expand...

Matthew, I'm curious...which Contax do you own?

Also not sure what you mean about the "speed and weight" difference btw Contax and ZE, could you elaborate?

For example, the weight and "speed" of a Contax 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are almost identical to a ZE 35 1.4, 50 1.4, and 85 1.4 (as the designs/builds are so closely related). All the lenses are the same "speed" at 1.4, and all of them are made with similar construction (all glass and metal), so the "weight and speed" should be very hard to differentiate.

Or are you perhaps comparing ZEs to some of the budget Contax primes, like the 35 2.8, 28 2.8, and 50 1.7? In that case YES, these budget primes lenses would be slower, smaller, and weigh less than the ZEs (as you have noted).

However, if you compare the PREMIUM Contax primes to their ZE descendants (ie the 21 2.8, 28 f2, 35 1.4, 50 1.4, 85 1.4) the speed and weight should be almost indistinguishable, as these Contax lenses designs were the origins for the ZE's themselves.

Image wise, it's certainly safe to assume some of the ZE's have matured in their designs and become sharper wide open (in particular the 28 f2 and 18 3.5); and the ZE's coatings are definitely "contrastier" (which perhaps you are noticing?).

However many of the premium Contax primes are almost IDENTICAL to their ZE/ZF cousins in terms of sharpness, in particular the 21 2.8, 35 1.4, 50 1.4, and 85 1.4.

Ironically, all the Contax budget primes are so sharp, they give most ZE/ZF's a run for their money...I'm thinking of course about the MM copies of the 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.7, 85 2.8, and 100 3.5. All of these primes are staggeringly sharp (even wide open) and I think are some of the best deals in budget film-making ever.

Of course...don't forget one advantage ALL THE CONTAX have over ZE's (besides their cost) is a manual aperture ring. That's always a bonus!

And...another additional bonus for the Contax primes is how they FLARE. Contax primes generally flare WHITE (which looks very organic), whereas ZE/ZF's have a more modern tendency of flaring PURPLE (which can call a lot of attention to itself), as Timur Civan once noted a while back (I'm including his pic below as an example):

flare.jpg



So...to summarize...the "weight" and "speed" should be similar (if we are compare related lenses). Contax flare better and have manual aperture rings. And they are often way cheaper. And the budget prime are a steal (as are the zooms!).

To me they are a no brainer, and I clearly prefer them to ZE/ZF's, because I feel they give you all the mechanical advantages of ZE/ZF's, but with a more pleasing picture from a classic, bygone era of Zeiss film-making.

Mechanically, it must be noted that some of these lenses are 30+ years old, and some WILL need lubing. The more modern, fresh out the factory polish of ZE/ZF's is not always easy to compete with. Almost all my (many) Contax primes have been fine, however RP lens did need to "freshen up" one of my primes...a 50 1.4...however bear in mind that was just one lens out of two cases I sent. So still...a pretty good ratio overall!

But I suppose there are no correct answers in film-making. We each choose our tools, and we all need to choose wisely and pick what works best for us. Happy shooting all.
 
Last edited:
Nick Pasquariello said:
Stuck where?

At 35, it goes Macro, and while in the macro range, it locks out of the zoom. If you focus back down to normal, it should push out to 70 pretty easily.

If that's not the problem, then it sounds broken. And if it's broken, I have no idea how to fix it. Nick Morrison will probably pop on within the next 12 hours and give better advice than I can.
Click to expand...
Nice EPIC battle...

Tear down clean lube and tighten screw! She zoomz now! More than I was in for but hey.....
 
hi all, i have been through this entire thread and it has me very excited to get into contax zeiss lenses, great stuff. Alas, no one has addressed how to them onto the red one, mine currently has the pl mount but i was probably going to swap it out for the nikkon.

any advice regarding mounts/adapters is appreciated.

thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top