Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

[Craig J Marshall]

I understand your dilemma! I thought after my recent acquisition of the 21 that I too was cured! Not so. That 15mm f3.5 looks very enticing but really, with the Metabones focal reducer restoring the 21's full field of view on my S-35 sensor, it's really wide enough for most of my work. 90 degrees at f/2.0 with 0dB Gain up is fine...

 

[Craig J Marshall]

What is this Contax lens? I see this 300mm tele available for sale all the time but it's a very different shape to my 300mm which is tapered, along the same lines as my AEG 180mm f/2.8 but a lot larger and heavier...

 

[Nick Morrison]

What is this Contax lens? I see this 300mm tele available for sale all the time but it's a very different shape to my 300mm which is tapered, along the same lines as my AEG 180mm f/2.8 but a lot larger and heavier...

Craig this is probably the 300mm f4 MM.

The AE and MMs sometimes changed shapes. The 180 AE and 180 MM have slighty different shapes, from what I remember...

 

[Craig J Marshall]

Thanks Nick. My 300mm f/4.0 might be an AE then and it actually seems pretty sharp and looks a lot larger than the one pictured above. (mine is pictured below and weighs about 1.8kg)

My 180mm f/2.8 is made in West Germany and is one of the few Contax lenses I have with the 'ninja star' iris (which I like) but my 300mm may also be from that era. Do you know from your tests whether there is any optical difference between the AE vs MM 300mm?

 

[Nick Morrison]

Thanks Nick. My 300mm f/4.0 might be an AE then and it actually seems pretty sharp and looks a lot larger than the one pictured above. (mine is pictured below and weighs about 1.8kg)

My 180mm f/2.8 is made in West Germany and is one of the few Contax lenses I have with the 'ninja star' iris (which I like) but my 300mm may also be from that era. Do you know from your tests whether there is any optical difference between the AE vs MM 300mm?

Optically, I believe 300 never changed from AE to MM.

I believe on the 180 opinions are split, but there's a general assumption something happened in shift to MM, and the 180 MM is a bit better.

Also Zeiss was always known to "tweak" designs over the years, so it's safe to assume if there's a 15-20 year gap, the later model may be "better". I say that in quotation marks, because while better, the coatings will also be newer and flare less, and you also wont have the charming ninja star we see in AE. So if you're looking for more flares and ninja star, then the AE's are still "better".

best

 

[Richard Luke]

Hey Nick.
An MMG 28 2 sold on eBay last week for 1550. The MM is real.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Hey Nick.
An MMG 28 2 sold on eBay last week for 1550. The MM is real.

WOW. Cool! Yeah someone else mentioned at one point they'd seen a 28 F2 MM. That's great. I guess there are "a couple" out there in the wild!!

 

[Craig J Marshall]

There's a couple of 28mm f/2.0 AEs listed at the moment for around US$650. Is the MM the rare one?

 

[Nick Morrison]

Yup, the MM is the rare one!

 

[Craig J Marshall]

So people are prepared to pay two to three times the average to avoid a ninja star or am I missing something?

 

[scott devitte]

I have 28/2 mm. I looked for a long time and it wasn't cheap but I really dislike the ninja star. Absolutely nothing in nature or pratical lights that look like it. Really distracting.

 

[Richard Luke]

Wanna sell Scott? ..... Ha

 

[Craig J Marshall]

Thanks Nick. My 300mm f/4.0 might be an AE then and it actually seems pretty sharp and looks a lot larger than the one pictured above. (mine is pictured below and weighs about 1.8kg)

My 180mm f/2.8 is made in West Germany and is one of the few Contax lenses I have with the 'ninja star' iris (which I like) but my 300mm may also be from that era. Do you know from your tests whether there is any optical difference between the AE vs MM 300mm?

I just checked my 300mm (pictured above) which I bought from Germany a few years ago and it was made in West Germany so it probably has the Ninja Star iris but as I use it coupled to a Mutar 2x to shoot rock climbers out in the midday sun here in the Blue Mountains, it's not likely to matter one way or the other.

 

[Mike Favazza]

I had an Ebay alert set for the 28 f2 MMG and found my email 12 hours too late.
Already sold for $1550.

 

[Mike Favazza]

...and there's another 28 f2 MMG that just popped up on Ebay. $1499 for serial #6158694. It's a little bit ragged on the edges but looks like clean glass. Think I'll pass...

 

[adam fitz]

@david w jones, the wife catching you looking at lens porn! Hahaha gave me a good laugh that one. If I had a wife I can imagine the conversation going something like this. Wife "what are you doing looking at this you already have 5 cameras and 30 lenses how could you possibly need any more?" And my response would be "how many pairs of shoes do you own and how many pairs of feet do you have?" ....

 

[David W. Jones]

WIFE; what are you doing with all this crap on my dining room table?

ME; I'm going to take a picture of my 75 lenses.

WIFE; not on my table your not.

I had yet to unload the other 4 cases of lenses before she caught me.

 

[Vance Colvig]

Drool drool!!!

 

[Nick Morrison]

Haha - awesome David!!!

 

[Nick Morrison]

Speaking of the 28mm Hollywood, here's some samples from that lens, shot on Friday! Dragon LLO @ 6K.

Has a lovely, creamy roll off. The slightly older AE coatings do wonders to highlights, but the lens itself is still contrasty and sharp, especially by 2.8.

Jake Blackstone always grades our dailes so he's usually the final arbiter if a lens is good or not (he judges by color, contrast, etc)...and on a technical level he was very happy with this.

And that made me very happy, as that to me is the Valhaha - a vintage lens with character and wonderful coatings that is still sharp and contrasty regardless.

Also - the minimal distortion did wonders for the architectural work we were doing.

Overall, just an excellent, excellent lens. We shot it alongsie a 24MM Standard prime, and they complimented each other perfectly!