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

Sad to say, I love my 80-200 but have to sell it. Only had it for a week or so now. Its one of the best lens I have used in a long time but the push pull just isnt for me and how I film. I thought I would post here first to see if anyone had any offers on it. Its in great shape and comes with end caps and bags. Its still the CY mount. PM or email me darktidemedia@gmail.com

Thanks
 
Russell Johnston said:
Sad to say, I love my 80-200 but have to sell it. Only had it for a week or so now. Its one of the best lens I have used in a long time but the push pull just isnt for me and how I film. I thought I would post here first to see if anyone had any offers on it. Its in great shape and comes with end caps and bags. Its still the CY mount. PM or email me darktidemedia@gmail.com

Thanks
Click to expand...

Yeah it's not really usable as a "zoom", more as a variable prime.
 
Ya I noticed that as well, but I need something fast and simple. I will just grab the Nikon 28-70 and 80-200 lens and a speedbooster for now.
 
I bought 35/50/85 speeds. Didn't have the Leitax/Fotodiox adapter when I received them, so couldn't test them before sending to RP Lens to get them worked on. Finally got them back on Friday and took them on a location scout yesterday. I am amazed, blow away by the clarity and 3D look when at f/2 - f/2.8. Really looking forward to using these on a production!!
 
Nice work domenic. You really got me going in the story and mood - When I stop looking for camera work and lens characteristics I know that I enjoyed the piece.

Do you find difficulty cutting the sigma with the contax. I am building a set of samyangs and con tax and would like to know other peoples experiences.
 
These are the most undervalued lenses on the planet. I don't ever see myself going to a different set. Don't be fooled with their small size, because they pack a powerful organic punch.

It's funny how much money people spend on lenses. On 99% of the projects I work on, "What lenses do you use" is hardly ever a question. Experience trumps all. If you know how to shoot, you can get amazing images with crappy lenses, especially when you shoot with RED. The thing is, with these bad boys, amazing imagery is a given!

Zeiss contax FTW!!!
 
Kirk.Attard said:
Nice work domenic. You really got me going in the story and mood - When I stop looking for camera work and lens characteristics I know that I enjoyed the piece.

Do you find difficulty cutting the sigma with the contax. I am building a set of samyangs and con tax and would like to know other peoples experiences.
Click to expand...

Thanks Kirk. I actually find that the sigma cuts together quite perfectly. Its a gem of a lens.
 
Chris McKechnie said:
These are the most undervalued lenses on the planet. I don't ever see myself going to a different set. Don't be fooled with their small size, because they pack a powerful organic punch.

It's funny how much money people spend on lenses. On 99% of the projects I work on, "What lenses do you use" is hardly ever a question. Experience trumps all. If you know how to shoot, you can get amazing images with crappy lenses, especially when you shoot with RED. The thing is, with these bad boys, amazing imagery is a given!

Zeiss contax FTW!!!
Click to expand...

Indeed.
Fact is I'm using now much more my set of Contax than my set of Leica R.
B.
 
Domenic Barbero said:
Thanks Kirk. I actually find that the sigma cuts together quite perfectly. Its a gem of a lens.
Click to expand...

2 weeks ago I shot a TV commercial with the Contax AEs 25, 50 and 85mm mixed in with the Sigma 35mm ART. The colour grader couldn't tell the difference.

I'm still looking for a 35mm AE to complete the set but I'm not in a hurry.
 
Paul, at which f-stop?
The 85 1.4 and especially the 50 1.4 when WO are very different so maybe you were closed down a little?
Or maybe you used filtering which masked the cleanliness WO of the Sigma?
 
Hi, all. Does the still range's performance extend to the s16 versions, or should I expect completely different results?
 
I'm really happy so far with the performance of the 35-70, when shooting tests against my 24-105L there's no competition. Though the 24-105 is pretty sharp, when comparing the actual colour representation and clarity there's no competition.

Quick questions for the experts in the thread... I'll try some primes too, and I bought a 50 1.4 which I'm awaiting, but I'm tossing up the 35 1.4 and the 28 Hollywood... Looking in the Flickr pools for each lens, they seem to make a neck and neck image, both amazing just different. I find both focal lengths appealing for their subtle differences... I guess I'm leaning to the 35 for the extra stop, but what is the consensus here? I know they're both going to be premium lenses (and reasonably equal cost) but which lens do you guys typically prefer?
 
Arthur Woo said:
I bought 35/50/85 speeds. Didn't have the Leitax/Fotodiox adapter when I received them, so couldn't test them before sending to RP Lens to get them worked on. Finally got them back on Friday and took them on a location scout yesterday. I am amazed, blow away by the clarity and 3D look when at f/2 - f/2.8. Really looking forward to using these on a production!!
Click to expand...

Can't wait to see what you do with them Arthur!

Chris McKechnie said:
These are the most undervalued lenses on the planet. I don't ever see myself going to a different set. Don't be fooled with their small size, because they pack a powerful organic punch.

It's funny how much money people spend on lenses. On 99% of the projects I work on, "What lenses do you use" is hardly ever a question. Experience trumps all. If you know how to shoot, you can get amazing images with crappy lenses, especially when you shoot with RED. The thing is, with these bad boys, amazing imagery is a given!

Zeiss contax FTW!!!
Click to expand...

Haha. Love this. Your enthusiasm is INFECTIOUS.

Brice Ansel said:
Indeed.
Fact is I'm using now much more my set of Contax than my set of Leica R.
B.
Click to expand...

I love Lieca R's (my father is a big Leica/Rokkor guy), but I too am smitten by Contax. Brice your macro footage is still emblazoned in my mind. I've gone back and looked at it several times. Mesmerizing...

J Gonzales said:
Hi, all. Does the still range's performance extend to the s16 versions, or should I expect completely different results?
Click to expand...

Yes, very similar. In fact back in the day it wasn't uncommon for enterprising DP's to extend the range of the s16 primes by pairing them with Contax 35, 50, 85 1.4's, using an Aaton mount I believe. If I remember correctly I think Mitch Gross might have even built a set like this while at Abel.

Daniel Pearson said:
I'm really happy so far with the performance of the 35-70, when shooting tests against my 24-105L there's no competition. Though the 24-105 is pretty sharp, when comparing the actual colour representation and clarity there's no competition.

Quick questions for the experts in the thread... I'll try some primes too, and I bought a 50 1.4 which I'm awaiting, but I'm tossing up the 35 1.4 and the 28 Hollywood... Looking in the Flickr pools for each lens, they seem to make a neck and neck image, both amazing just different. I find both focal lengths appealing for their subtle differences... I guess I'm leaning to the 35 for the extra stop, but what is the consensus here? I know they're both going to be premium lenses (and reasonably equal cost) but which lens do you guys typically prefer?
Click to expand...

The 35-70 is a great lens, for sure.

Personally, because it's such a "go to" lens and a stop faster, I'd get the 35 1.4. Its the prime I use the most. And I love and appreciate it's "normal FOV" on s35. I think a 35mm is a must prime for that reason alone. Once you have it, then yes...I recommend getting the 28, for those wider, gorgeous shots that can add more drama, and give you macro shots with special pizzaz.
 
Last edited:
Nick Morrison said:
The 35-70 is a great lens, for sure.

Personally, because it's such a "go to" lens and a stop faster, I'd get the 35 1.4. Its the prime I use the most. And I love and appreciate it's "normal FOV" on s35. I think a 35mm is a must prime for that reason alone. Once you have it, then yes...I recommend getting the 28, for those wider, gorgeous shots that can add more drama, and give you macro shots with special pizzaz.
Click to expand...

Hi Nick,

Thanks, this was pretty much my thinking. Both lenses seem to perform exceptionally, but the 35 1.4 seems like a great mix of IQ and practicality.
 
After much lurking and admiring of the images being shot with these lenses I decided to get them myself. Took a little while to get to use them but it was well worth the wait. I was always more of a longer focal length kinda guy. I thought I would fall in love with the 85, and I do in fact love that lens... However, I've never loved a lens as much as I love my 35 1.4 AE. I put it on the Epic and I ended up swapping it out once and found that I just wanted to put it back on. It's such a perfect lens... Perfect to me that is. The clarity, the softness, the way it removes that digital feel. These lenses truly are something unique and special. I picked up a 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 all in AE as I fell in love with the way they flair in all of the shots I've seen. The contamination is something I've always felt was a character in every story told with these lenses. Looking forward to doing some magic hour tests soon and I'm positive that the 28 f2 and a makro will be my next 2 lenses. As always, thank you so much to everyone who have contributed to, what I feel, is one of the best threads started on this forum.

Not sure how to post the images to the forums so here is a link to the couple of frames I grabbed.










https://www.flickr.com/photos/80775149@N04/14252349923/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/80775149@N04/14045517919/in/photostream/

I tried the "insert image" to no avail. Any idea as to what I may in fact be doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Just copy the bbcode from flickr and paste it in here.

p0SyEYX.png


And yes, they're pretty bloody sexy aren't they? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top