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

Filters for matching modern lenses to contax

Filters for matching modern lenses to contax

I am looking at Tokina 11-16 and other wide lenses to complement my Contaxes. Any suggestions and experinces: ultracon, lowcon, digicon, black magic whatever?
 
soren k jensen said:
I am looking at Tokina 11-16 and other wide lenses to complement my Contaxes. Any suggestions and experinces: ultracon, lowcon, digicon, black magic whatever?
Click to expand...

We've had good success with a 1/8 or 1/4 promist.
 
soren k jensen said:
Thanks againagainagain Nick!
Click to expand...

No worries, if you want to see it in action, we used it on this spot:

https://vimeo.com/128340330

Shot on Epic and Scarlet MX.

Main lens was the Contax 25mm AE on A-Cam (Epic) and Tokina 11-16 with Promist 1/4 on B-Cam (Scarlet, for "selfie cam" look).

They matched pretty well - the promist really helped bloom the sky white in a way that felt organic, and more in keeping with how our Contax flare as well.

The night shots were a Contax 35 1.4 MM, wide open.
 
Thanks for sharing that piece Nick. Great skintones and that Tokina was perfect for what you guys were going for. And that 25mm AE looks great! My 25mm MM looks way worse than that.
 
DAVID BARKAN said:
Hello all, has anyone ever tried their Contax lenses with the SLR Magic Anamorphot?
Click to expand...

Yeah, basically the widest you can go is the contax 35/2.8 on 6K dragon.
Bare in mind, the FOV using the anamorphot is wider then then 25,
but quite more narrow then the 21.

I find the compact contax standard primes w/ less elements/groups, require less stopping down.
(when using the anamorphat)

The 45mm tesser (4 elements, 3 groups) wide open at 2.8,
is as sharp as the 50mm/1.4 at about F5 (7 elements, 6 groups).

The 35/2.8 works ok starting around f3.5, with its 6 elements in 6 groups;
So does the 85/2.8 sonar beginning at f4, with its 6 elements in 5 groups.
The 100/3.5 creates a compressed 85mm look with 5 elements in 4 groups, but have to stop down a bit more.

I suggest using series 9 or 4x5.65 filters to reduce soft vignetting.

Don't use the SLRMAG diopters, they have a horrible green cast and cause heavy vignetting.
I use Tiffen series 9 +1/2 and +1 diopters.


SLRM-ANAMPHT FOV ROUGH APPROXIMATIONS ON FF35:

ok = soft, but not mush, and low/no weird lateral fringing
(think of it as a starting point, gets better further stopped down from there)

35/2.8
84˚ a bit wider then 25mm
(ok F3.5-ish or higher

45/2.8
67˚ about halfway between a 35 and 28
(looks ok wide open)

50/1.4
63˚ closely matches the 35mm
(ok F8 or higher)

60/2.8C
52˚ about the same fov as the 45mm
(looks ok wide open)

85/2.8
37˚ almost as wide as a 60mm
(ok F4 or higher)

100/3.5
32˚ a little wider then the 85mm
(ok F5.6-ish or higher)


The copy of the C/Y 50/1.4 I use is decently sharp (especially @5.6, see below);
I suspect the complicated planar design leads to mush unless stopped down to around f8 w/ the Anamorphot.

IMG_4398.JPG

IMG_4029.JPG
 
Last edited:
I'm selling a 21mm 2.8 in Europe.
(mint condition, with box, MM version)

PM me if interested.
 
Daniel Reed said:
I find the compact contax standard primes w/ less elements/groups, require less stopping down.
(when using the anamorphat)
Click to expand...

Have you tried either the 35-70 3.4 or the 28-85 with the anamorphot? I've always wondered how that combination would work.
 
I've gone the same route as Bill with an A7R II as a second camera and love it.

Interesting observation, though: the acclaimed 28mm f2 by Sony is not as good WO as the Contax Hollywood in the corners. It's a tad wider, though and surpasses the Contax 28mm f2,8.

So glad I went that route years ago by Nick's advice!
 
Uli Plank said:
... the acclaimed 28mm f2 by Sony is not as good WO as the Contax Hollywood in the corners. It's a tad wider, though and surpasses the Contax 28mm f2,8. ...
Click to expand...

My CY 21/2.8 is sharp edge-to-edge, fantastic wide open, and when used on the A7RII with the Speedbooster in Super 35 mode it has an effective fstop of 1.8. Does quite well in low light.
 
For sure! But I was writing about 28mm …
 
Hey guys, I know I've always promised I'd show the custom Schneider hood we use for filtration - here are some pics!!

The beauty of it is it can clamp on 80mm...and yet has a 77mm thread.

We use it on almost all our shoots.

That's Hollywood Black Magic 1/8 in there now, on the 180 MM.





 
I have one too...it's a Century Series 9 filter holder/hood...freakingly rare! ;)

I'd never sell it he he! Keep it Nick! he he

Have you modded for 77mm making a step down from the threads where the series 9 retention ring screws onto, right? ;)

The problem is that it will vignette with wides...which is the widest lens you can use @ 6K with it and a 77mm filter on front??
 
Hi guys,

I have a nice collection of contax zeiss that i love to use, i got an offer for a SMC Pentax 15mm f3.5 for a decent price.
after reading a bit there are some rumours out there that it shares the design of the contax 15mm.
Anybody tried this lens? wondering if it would cut with my contax glass.

Thnx!
 
Quick question for you Nick, if you don't mind. I've been looking at getting the 21mm 2.8.... I have a canon mount epic and canon mount raven on the way. I noticed there is a 21mm 2.8 mounted for canon ... http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-Carl-Ze...320021?hash=item1ea1211a15:g:j6wAAOSwUuFW0~sq

vs something more along the lines in the survival guide...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MINT-CONTAX...307719?hash=item43edf8b2c7:g:2UYAAOSwEK9XAjG5

Any suggestions, clarifications. Seems the only difference is the canon mount has a screw on option for filters?
 
Hey Nick,
I was hoping you might have some insight on the difference between the 21mm 2.8 Contax mount, and the 21mm 2.8 canon mount. I see both up on eBay, the only difference I can see is the canon mounted version is in a newer body, probably from the 2000's... and the contax is the vintage style body. Also the canon mount has a possible lens screw on front.

Anyways, any reason to buy the vintage contax mount, or did they continue making the lens the same, therefore the canon mount has the same image?, The canon mount is also cheaper, consistently by a couple hundred.

I have canon dragons and a raven on the way, so just wondering when buying these Contax Zeiss lenses, if there is a more modern canon mount option, is that the same beautiful image you have discovered in the Contax line?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top