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

Uli Plank said:
– The Minolta Rokkor MC W.Rokkor 21mm 1:2.8 is a very nice lens with a non-rotating front thread and an optical quality only mildly inferior to the Zeiss C/Y 21mm – I'd say from all vintage glass that is cheaper than the 21mm Distagon it's the only one coming close. It's distortion is well controlled and very similar to the Distagon (mild mustache), resolution is great and the only weakness is some CA (even the Distagon is not completely free of that). The other problem is the different mount.
Click to expand...

I can tell you by reputation that the Rokkor 21mm is considered one of the best vintage 21's ever made, so Uli's recommendation is well taken. My father owned a photo store, and is an avid Rokkor collector, and has reminded me numerous times that...back in the day...a leading magazine once reviewed all 21mm lenses, and found the CY to be #1, and the Rokkor to be #2. That article is likely 15-20 years old, but point remains that the Rokkor has widely been regarded as an EXCELLENT lens (indeed, the whole Rokkor lineups is underrated).

I've also found the build quality of the Rokkor 21 to be excellent.
 
Well, the Rokkor has more of a Leica character too…
And I assure you that it's very close to the 19mm Elmarit.
 
Just heard a rumor that Zeiss may have icensed the "Hollywood" design to Rokkor...which helped Minolta come out with their own "floating element" 28/2. Hmmm...

Turns out the original 28/2 may have been made in conjunction with Pentax (soon after the Pentax/Zeiss "contract" appears to have been severed), which is why it seems Pentax also has their own "version" of the 28/2.

Maybe this "design" was made available to other manufacturers while Pentax and Zeiss reconsidered their partnership?

Hmm...

Love to know more about this specific, and unique piece of "Hollywood" history. Though it looks like it didn't have a blockbuster ending, still comforting to know the "Hollywood" may have some "cousins" out there!!
 
Last edited:
Hmm, sounds strange, those lenses are quite different:

This is the Rokkor in MC Version:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a0ff9fbk3j53ipx/Minolta_28mm_f2_MC-X.jpg

This is the MD version (even better, later used in AF with minor changes):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uz0n9c1htm45c26/Minolta_28mm_f2_MD-III.jpg

And this is the 'Hollywood' according to slrlensreview:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0lrbmqxsdxjk4zx/Distagon_28_2_aka_Hollywood.png

Hmm, any idea why my Dropbox links don't show here as images? They are small jpg or png. Yes, I did try to paste the links with an IMG tag…

Maybe there was some patent exchanged regarding floating focus groups?
 
Nick Morrison said:
@Brice: ps, your 35-70 pic was just jaw-dropping by the way. My jaw hit the floor and shattered. So good!!!
Click to expand...
Yea, I found those old footage test on a hard drive. The two flies fucking was my first attempt in macro mode with the 35/70.
Considering its price, you can do quiet a lot with this little compact mid range zoom, and sooo sharp!
And actually when in macro mode the back ground and its bokeh is really interesting thought.
My only concern is, for insect stuff it is not enough, the minimum focal distance is to high for small subject like insects.
But hey, you can't have everything and in the macro family the 60AEG is a pure gem.
Cheers

jordan levy said:
the leica is sweet, but i think for sure youd have to go with the whole set to match it.
Click to expand...
I own a Leica R set and a CZ Contax set, I use both and intercut from time to time the 19 Elmarit with the Contax. For the Leica, I use a lowcon filter as a start, to help matching the Contax.
The 19 Elmarit version one, is prone to flare like my AE's and bloom white like the AE's, the bigest difference is in the blacks, wich are much deeper with Leica's R.
Matching the two German brands isn't to much of a big deal thought.
Cheers
 
Brice Ansel said:
I own a Leica R set and a CZ Contax set, I use both and intercut from time to time the 19 Elmarit with the Contax. For the Leica, I use a lowcon filter as a start, to help matching the Contax.
The 19 Elmarit version one, is prone to flare like my AE's and bloom white like the AE's, the bigest difference is in the blacks, wich are much deeper with Leica's R.
Matching the two German brands isn't to much of a big deal thought.
Cheers
Click to expand...

Interesting observation about the blacks. We once shot a job mixing Leica R's with Contax and found similar results. Contax was noticeably more lowcon even than Leica R, even though the Leica's were also about 20+ years old.

Love the idea of using lowcon to match btw sets! Was considering this for my Tokina and Sigma wide zooms, so nice to be reminded of this again. Lowcons can come in handy!
 
Last edited:
For those with one....
The 35-135 isnt parafocal by any chance is it?
 
Mike Harrington said:
For those with one....
The 35-135 isnt parafocal by any chance is it?
Click to expand...

My copy is pretty close to parfocal..however the push pull design makes focusing through the zoom range pretty impractical under ordinary shooting circumstances...so not sure how helpful it is ultimately that the zoom holds it focus reasonably well. That said, I've managed to push and pull the lens with moderate success and hold focus, so I think under run and gun scenarios, it's great. But for demanding studio situations, I really think it would be hard to manage focusing consistently during zooms.

Otherwise, the lens has great character and is very, very sharp. Covers 6K with ease, and having that much range (35 to 135) with Macro, all accessible with one hand (allowing you to focus and zoom)...certainly make this lens an intriguing tool for certain situations. Having that classic Zeiss look and signature, across that much range, is also quite nice.

Is a hefty, big piece of glass. Probably the heaviest Contax I have. Great barrel rotation too for rack focusing. An impressive, impressive collection of glass. Was very, very expensive back in the day...
 
Last edited:
been looking at one...that is a great range for run and gun....
surprised not to see it in your survival guide...:sifone:
 
Mike Harrington said:
been looking at one...that is a great range for run and gun....
surprised not to see it in your survival guide...:sifone:
Click to expand...

Haha. It's so rare, and comes up so infrequently, don't think it occurred to me! It's slow enough that people don't seem to gravitate towards it for shooting video... even though optically it's a clinic...and you're right...it covers a very wide range (on Dragon 6K...the FOV is 28 to 110!). And it's so big, with such a wide focus rotation, that it's actually VERY usable for shooting.

I'm lucky though and got mine for a bargain...

At one point I heard only 2,000 or so copies were ever made, so even hough there are several on ebay...I don't get the sense there are tons of these in the wild. It's an odd, heavy unicorn that I don't think ever found a real home (too big for stills photographers, probably too slow for video).

But now that Dragon is a bit better in lowlight, I think this legend may become a bit more palatable...seeing that it covers 6K, has appealing range, and does so many things "well".

Only weakness is possibly bit of distortion at 35mm, but I don't notice it on cropped sensor. Not sure how much you may see on Dragon 6K.
 
Last edited:
Uli Plank said:
Hmm, sounds strange, those lenses are quite different:

This is the Rokkor in MC Version:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a0ff9fbk3j53ipx/Minolta_28mm_f2_MC-X.jpg

This is the MD version (even better, later used in AF with minor changes):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uz0n9c1htm45c26/Minolta_28mm_f2_MD-III.jpg

And this is the 'Hollywood' according to slrlensreview:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0lrbmqxsdxjk4zx/Distagon_28_2_aka_Hollywood.png

Hmm, any idea why my Dropbox links don't show here as images? They are small jpg or png. Yes, I did try to paste the links with an IMG tag…

Maybe there was some patent exchanged regarding floating focus groups?
Click to expand...

Yeah those designs look pretty different. I think we can probably dispel that rumor.

The Pentax/Contax connection does remain sort of intriguing however.

That said, I wonder how strong a performer the Pentax "Hollywood" was? Using the design, and implementing it, are presumably not the same thing.

Thanks again for looking into this Uli...
 
Filippo B said:
I have a 50mm 1.4 AE and want to try on a Red One with Nikon Prolock mount, should one of this adapter works?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Contax-Yash...ens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item5190c1c0ea

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-kipon-a...ens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item1c2d58ab9a
Click to expand...

Both of those adapters use a lower budget glass element inside, and will be optically compromised. I do not recommend them at all.

Converting Contax lenses to Nikon can be a major challenge due to the nature of Nikon's flange length...however...Leitax has come up with a solution. Theirs is the only Nikon adapter I can strongly recommend, however it does require that you do a bit of engineering at home, and attach it to lens yourself. If not have a local lens tech do it, or RP lens or Duclos.

Hope this helps!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top