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

In certain situations that play to the former's strengths you could match an iphone camera with an Epic. It doesn't mean they are in any way comparable in terms of outright image quality.

But don't get me started on the FS7 :)
 
Ben Scott said:
In certain situations that play to the former's strengths you could match an iphone camera with an Epic. It doesn't mean they are in any way comparable in terms of outright image quality.

But don't get me started on the FS7 :)
Click to expand...

I would like to know your opinion on the FS7 .
 
I was joking as I recently sold my Scarlet and bought an FS7 because I think for my line of work the FS7 is a lot more likely to get hired. Loving the camera and as you'd expect from 3 year newer tech it is better than the Scarlet in many many ways - ergonomics, weight, cost, lens mounts, recording options, full S35 slomo 4k 60fps recorded internally, low light. However, I still believe the outright 'image quality' crown goes to Red MX and if I was to shoot a feature tomorrow and had the option of FS7 or Scarlet it would be the Scarlet I shot it on.

As
 
I recently tested Epic Dragon (both OLPFs), Blackmagic Ursa, Sony FS7 and Sony A7S (with the Shogun recorder) very carefully for a very respected German magazine. The crown in image quality clearly goes to the Epic Dragon, but the Scarlet MX is left behind in many aspects.

But if you'd like to discuss this further, please let us take it somewhere else.
 
Dragon testing with GL AE Contax set, Leica R, Sigma 18-35, Canon CNE

 
Piotr Renes said:
Hi,

Can anybody confirm that C/Y Zeiss Distagon T* 18mm f/4 was optically improved in late serial poduction? MTF is not impressive even with f/8:

http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Ph...oadcenter/contax_yashica/distagon4_18mm_e.pdf
Click to expand...

The Contax 18mm isn't "known" to have been improved with later serials, as far as I know.

For a full frame vintage 18mm, it's performance at f8 was certainly prized. Pebblespace considers the 18mm "my favorite Contax lens", and it certainly has a number of fans.

I suppose sharpness is relative. At f8, the 10mm line hits 95, which is certainly sharp (and on par with other Contax primes stopped down). But admittedly, the 20mm and 40mm lines show fall off on the edges at full frame. However for S35 and even Dragon, this 18mm has been commendable, and it's lack of distortion a bonus.

Again - depends on what you need, and you're medium. As Christopher Probst points out, the Dragon sensor resolves at about 100lpmm (which is about as sharp as a Super Speed wide open). You don't NEED razor sharp glass to render very compelling imagery on Dragon. Steven Soderbergh shot "The Knick" wide open on Super Speeds and it looks great. The 18mm at F8 is certainly much sharper.

So again, it's all relative. If you are shooting on a 5D Mark III with a strong OLPF and want a wicked sharp full frame wide angle, then the 18mm Contax may not be the best choice. But for Dragon and MX I love the small size, character and look of the 18mm and happy to add it to the arsenal. There aren't that many vintage 18mm that are as good.

However, if you need uncompromising performance from a wideangle...then the Contax 21 is certainly a much more discerning choice (but clearly at a price).

Hope this helps!!!

best
 
Last edited:
Great thanks Nick, also for Pebble space review! I put this lens on my wish list.

Best.
Piotr


Nick Morrison said:
The Contax 18mm isn't "known" to have been improved with later serials, as far as I know.

For a full frame vintage 18mm, it's performance at f8 was certainly prized. Pebblespace considers the 18mm "my favorite Contax lens", and it certainly has a number of fans.

I suppose sharpness is relative. At f8, the 10mm line hits 95, which is certainly sharp (and on par with other Contax primes stopped down). But admittedly, the 20mm and 40mm lines show fall off on the edges at full frame. However for S35 and even Dragon, this 18mm has been commendable, and it's lack of distortion a bonus.

Again - depends on what you need, and you're medium. As Christopher Probst points out, the Dragon sensor resolves at about 100lpmm (which is about as sharp as a Super Speed wide open). You don't NEED razor sharp glass to render very compelling imagery on Dragon. Steven Soderbergh shot "The Knick" wide open on Super Speeds and it looks great. The 18mm at F8 is certainly much sharper.

So again, it's all relative. If you are shooting on a 5D Mark III with a strong OLPF and want a wicked sharp full frame wide angle, then the 18mm Contax may not be the best choice. But for Dragon and MX I love the small size, character and look of the 18mm and happy to add it to the arsenal. There aren't that many vintage 18mm that are as good.

However, if you need uncompromising performance from a wideangle...then the Contax 21 is certainly a much more discerning choice (but clearly at a price).

Hope this helps!!!

best
Click to expand...
 
I suspect some where amongst the 263 pages of this thread it has already been discussed.. But can someone share what they know about the differences between the 2 versions of the 60mm marcro? (Regular vs Compact)
 
Ted Parkes said:
I suspect some where amongst the 263 pages of this thread it has already been discussed.. But can someone share what they know about the differences between the 2 versions of the 60mm marcro? (Regular vs Compact)
Click to expand...

Sure! The regular goes 1:1 macro, the compact 2:1 macro. So the regular gets you twice as close. Though 2:1 is same as the ZE/ZF macros.
 
Thanks Nick .. Amazing post / thread, I refer here often. So does that mean all the 1:1 s-planar 60mm macro lenses are AEG and when they switched to MM they became 2:1.

cheers
Ted
 
Two touch zoom

Two touch zoom

My first post on this forum, so I wanna say thanks for providing this invaluable source of information on contax lenses! Already built myself a small kit of affordable primes (18, 28, 35, 50, 85 & 135) and love them so far! The only thing that's missing is a decent two touch (!) zoom (don't ask, I sometimes just love spaghetti western references). As I'm still a student and therefore don't have the budget to buy proper cine-zooms I was wondering whether someone could recommend a lens for the long end (preferably 70-200 or the likes, but any other would be alright and good to know of, really) that's decent, yet affordable and matches the contaxes quite well. I know it's a lot to ask, but somebody might know the secret on here.
Thanks in advance,

David

PS: if I remember correctly you mentioned the Canon fd 35-105 Nick but weren't really impressed by its performance, right?
 
Ted Parkes said:
Thanks Nick .. Amazing post / thread, I refer here often. So does that mean all the 1:1 s-planar 60mm macro lenses are AEG and when they switched to MM they became 2:1.

cheers
Ted
Click to expand...

The 60 1:1 and 100 1:1 always remained AEG, for whatever reason. Most of them have serials in the late 6's, so I usually view them as "MM" in performance, even though they're "technically" AEG's in that they don't have the MM style aperture control (and also have ninja stars, at least both of mine do).

The 60 2:1 "C" I always thought of as an affordable Macro that Zeiss smartly added to their lineup...presumably later in the MM era. It's supposed to be just as good as the 1:1...up to 2:1 (indeed, the optics in both 60s are supposed to be very similar, just the 2:1 can't focus down as far as the 1:1).

I don't think the 2:1 "C" was ever supposed to replace the 1:1 60 - I believe both were available for sale at the same time, just in different "categories".

Hope this helps!!
 
Last edited:
Really appreciate your insight Nick. There is a big difference in price but that is to be expected. I have a lead on one. A really mint AEG still in the box. I best grab it even though I spent my equipment budget on the Dragon upgrade.

cheers
 
Ted Parkes said:
Really appreciate your insight Nick. There is a big difference in price but that is to be expected. I have a lead on one. A really mint AEG still in the box. I best grab it even though I spent my equipment budget on the Dragon upgrade.

cheers
Click to expand...

No problem. We use the 60 a lot, much more than the 100 (for whatever reason). In fact, the 60 2.8 is all over this trailer, if you want to see it in action:


Once the "experts" sit at the table, every medium that's "behind" the equipment, peering at the table over/through things, is the 60 2.8 1:1. The closeups were on 135 and 180 Standard Primes, and I have to say...the 60 often looked sharper (at least at the video village). The crew became "very interested" in my Contax glass during that shoot!
 
Great looking promo, very nicely done. Amazing how sharp and a great feel to the soft focus stuff also.. works really well. I have the 35-70 and can't believe how sharp it is either. If only they made them a little faster but you can't have everything especially at this price point.
Thanks again...
 
It's such a shame certain focal lengths like the 180 can't be Leitax'd to Nikon!!
 
Josh K said:
It's such a shame certain focal lengths like the 180 can't be Leitax'd to Nikon!!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure if you send a 180 to Peter at RP Lens he can Nikon Leitax it for you. I've certainly sent him much weirder requests!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top