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

Mike Harrington said:
thanks Nick...I think you just made my mind up

I had just bought the 35-70 and love the quality....I would love to build a contax zeiss set....

The only issue I see now is a guy can go out and get a new zeiss for canon set for almost the same price....based on what i see on ebay
Click to expand...

Yeah ebay pices are getting inflated. I'd stick to KEH, Adorama and B&H. They don't seem to have gone as crazy; especially KEH.

The zooms remain very affordable. Still can't believe the 28-85 goes for $450. Should be $900. One day I'm sure it will.
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Samir, I experienced the same. I had a mint example of 85mm 1.4 MM (Japan) since 2002 which has more halation and it's softer WO than the 85mm 1.4 AE (West Germany) I bought last year!!!!
Click to expand...

Funny, they apparently revised the 85 1.4 MM to be better wide open, but I guess they won some, and then lost some too, if you both are experiencing the same results. My 85 1.4 AE is one of my favorite lenses, so maybe you guys are helping me realize why. It has a certain magic to it I love. Plus I love seeing "Made in West Germany", turns my crank every time.
 
Hey Nick. Maybe when you have time since you have the most knowledge of these lenses you can put together a post of how you would go about putting together a new set from scratch if you didn't own any contax lenses. I know I have bought many of them but have bought them randomly when they were available on KEH and Adorama.
 
Samir Patel said:
Hey Nick. Maybe when you have time since you have the most knowledge of these lenses you can put together a post of how you would go about putting together a new set from scratch if you didn't own any contax lenses. I know I have bought many of them but have bought them randomly when they were available on KEH and Adorama.
Click to expand...

Sure, you mean on a separate thread? Or within the Survival Guide? I kind of tried todo a shopping guide HERE, last month. But it may have gotten lost in the mix. Let me know how that can be more helpful/usable.

thanks.
 
Nick Morrison said:
Sure, you mean on a separate thread? Or within the Survival Guide? I kind of tried todo a shopping guide HERE, last month. But it may have gotten lost in the mix. Let me know how that can be more helpful/usable.

thanks.
Click to expand...

That was it. Can you move that to the front page. I knew I had seen that somewhere but was buried on page 43.
 
Richard Luke said:
Its a narrow mount
Click to expand...

Thanks Richard...

Im still a little wary of ordering the adapter since the pictures I have of the 135 base looks quite different from the leitax narrow mount description...no screws at the base of the mount almost looks like the one leitax makes for AEG lenses would work
http://leitax.com/conversion/Contax-Canon/Contax_AE/index.html

I am going by these pics here for the base of the lens....since I dont have mine yet...
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Contax-Carl-...15?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item3383637d3b&_uhb=1

The base does not seem to fit with the narrow mount shown
http://leitax.com/conversion/Contax-Canon/narrow-mount/index.html
 
Hmm ... very strange. I just bought a 135/2.8 today to add to my collection, and my copy definitely looks like the Leitax pictures for a narrow mount shown here:

http://leitax.com/conversion/Contax-...unt/index.html

My lens has 4 screws and the tab as depicted above. I would hold off ordering until you actually see your lens.



_____________________________
Scarlet X # 1859 “Bettie Page”
“… preparing to ‘whip’ the competition …”

Zeiss Lenses:

CY 21/2.8
ZF 28/2.0
CY 35-70/3.4
CY 50/1.4
ZF100/2.0
CY 135/2.8

Nikon Lenses:
G 14-24/2.8
G 24-70/2.8
D 80-200/2.8

Tokina Lenses:

11-16/2.8
 
Ya it seems a little weird...

That is not the actual lens I ordered...but every Japanese 135 2.8 on ebay I can find pictures for seems to be this way...
Almost as if the older ones have the same style mount as the AEG ones
 
This thread is the first stop I make each visit to RU. Thanks guys!

Like many, I am occasionally looking for Contax lenses. I noticed that several sellers incorrectly ascribe the "MM" designation to AE lenses. Dunno if it is intentional or not but I have learned to look carefully at the pics and the serial number. Someone on this thread already mentioned an unscrupulous seller painting the highest aperture number green. But, what I have seen more is just flat out wrong description. I have learned to look for the MM tab (in its various iterations) or absence thereof on the base of the lens, as well as the serial number range as Nick has pointed out. This along with the green paint... This is not a rant about AE or MM being better, just a heads-up so you know what you are buying.

BTW, I am sort of new to Contax, and have seen only a limited number of these lenses in person. Am I correct that there is ALWAYS a tab of some sort on the base of the MM lenses? I figure there must be to make contact with the MM bodies they were designed for. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Uli Plank said:
Well, of course it's a matter of taste, but OOF highlights with an extender look nearly like from a mirror lens ;-)
Click to expand...

What about that one Uli?
Do you think high light look that bad?
I'm not beeing sarcastic or showing of by asking you that.

100/300+Extender (Ctrl+click for bigger pic)
1048045_10201394774137680_519381336_o.jpg

Cheers
B.
 
I can still see those circles, of course. But a very nice shot for sure.
 
Mike Harrington said:
Thanks Richard...

Im still a little wary of ordering the adapter since the pictures I have of the 135 base looks quite different from the leitax narrow mount description...no screws at the base of the mount almost looks like the one leitax makes for AEG lenses would work
http://leitax.com/conversion/Contax-Canon/Contax_AE/index.html



I am going by these pics here for the base of the lens....since I dont have mine yet...
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Contax-Carl-...15?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item3383637d3b&_uhb=1

The base does not seem to fit with the narrow mount shown
http://leitax.com/conversion/Contax-Canon/narrow-mount/index.html
Click to expand...

Hello
The lens in the picture is an AEG version.
 
Uli Plank said:
I can still see those circles, of course. But a very nice shot for sure.
Click to expand...
Well I'm afraid it's the price I'll have to pay if I want to be closer to the action this year.
Cheap solutions have their limits.
Thanks Uli.
 
Samir Patel said:
Hey Nick. What do you think about differences between 180/2.8 AE vs MM?
Click to expand...

Samir, I only have the 180 MM, so I can't speak with confidence about the differences. I know, like a number of other primes, the 180 was rumored to be "unofficially" improved during the change to MM. As with most of the quiet improvements Zeiss is assumed to have made over the Contax years, it's presumed their main objectives was to improve FLARING, and WO performance. I think it's safe to assume if there are differences btw the 180 AE and MM, these are the traits you'd most likely see improvements in.

For whatever it's worth, during my days trolling the stills boards, most Contax enthusiasts did generally prefer the 180 MM over the AE. There did seem to be consensus around that. As opposed to say the 85 1.4, where the AE version has always maintained a strong loyal fan base that swears the AE is better than the later MM version (see our recent discussion here that the 85 1.4 AE had less "glow" than the MM, fueling more fuel to this fire).

Hope this helps. Sorry I don't know more!
 
Richard Luke said:
Hello
The lens in the picture is an AEG version.
Click to expand...



It says made in Japan on it....so it's not AEG

I talked to David at leitax and he said some of the Japanese lenses have the AEG style mounts..

My seller also sent me a picture which has the same mount and also says made in Japan on it
 
My 180mm AEG is a beautiful lens, I see no reason to complain. Maybe on a Dragon we might see a difference with an MM.

It's so kind to faces. Maybe my Minolta 200mm 4.0 is a tad more analytical, yes. But the Zeiss C/Y has the nicer bokeh and flare.
 
Mike Harrington said:
It says made in Japan on it....so it's not AEG

I talked to David at leitax and he said some of the Japanese lenses have the AEG style mounts..

My seller also sent me a picture which has the same mount and also says made in Japan on it
Click to expand...

Your def right it's Japanese but without the 4screws and the tab it will have to be an AEG style mount
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top