Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

[Vance Colvig]

Seems that a drop of low grip thread lock compound like Locktite, one small drop of sugar water, or a dab of contact cement on the threads might be a quick and inexpensive trick for a dedicated adapter on each lens.

 

[Craig J Marshall]

Having been very impressed with my Contax 21mm after I finally located one in good condition last year and at the right price too, how would people rate it today - compared to other FF or S-35 super wide lenses? Is there anything else out there which ticks all those boxes then adds some? Do RED users think it is a great wide angle lens full stop or just a great Contax wide angle?

 

[bart cortright]

Hey all,

quick question - I recently purchased a set of Zeiss Contax lenses and was surprised to see the 21mm have some fairly serious vignetting? Is this common? The seller said that the 21mm had been cine-mod'ed by RP lens. Is this normal?

Here is it on a 5d mkiii - sorry it's just a quick iphone pic

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

I recently purchased a set of Zeiss Contax lenses and was surprised to see the 21mm have some fairly serious vignetting? Is this common?

You definitely shouldn't see any vignetting on a Canon 5D series.

I can't see the photos so I'll ask these questions blind - have you got any filters on the front of the lens? A step down-ring perhaps? Or a delrin front for matte box?

 

[Bill Sepaniak]

You definitely shouldn't see any vignetting on a Canon 5D series.

I can't see the photos so I'll ask these questions blind - have you got any filters on the front of the lens? A step down-ring perhaps? Or a delrin front for matte box?

I don't see any on my 5D MkII. However, I do use ultra-thin 82mm filters, which are supposed to be better with wide angle lenses. I also use it on a Sony A7RII with a Speedbooster Ultra and a SLR Magic 82mm variable ND, and no vignetting.

 

[Lee Kelly]

I didnt want to sift through 101 pages of arguments so figured I would ask some questions instead.

Does anyone know if the AG 'look' with more washed out flare is preferred or frowned apon against the MM which from some reports dont flare as easily?

Did they ever make a 21mm f2.8 in AEG?

If you had a set of AE and added an MM to the mix would it stick out like dogs balls?

Do people prefer the ninja star or circular bokeh? Is it only other camera geeks who boo and hiss or does the ninja star bokeh look like a cheap star effects filter?

Has anyone seen Saturday Night Fever (John Travolta) Wowee those stage lights with their star flare looking thing going on was doing my head in! Not that that is anything to do with my main questions but gee whiz it was distracting.

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

I didnt want to sift through 101 pages of arguments so figured I would ask some questions instead.

OK.

Does anyone know if the AG 'look' with more washed out flare is preferred or frowned apon against the MM which from some reports dont flare as easily?

YES (for my taste).

Did they ever make a 21mm f2.8 in AEG?

NO.

If you had a set of AE and added an MM to the mix would it stick out like dogs balls?

It could in some situations.

Do people prefer the ninja star or circular bokeh?

It depends who you ask it to.

Is it only other camera geeks who boo and hiss or does the ninja star bokeh look like a cheap star effects filter?

It's nice, many like it, Cookes are very sought after and they don't have smooth aperture, it has spikes all around their polygon shape.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Does anyone know if the AG 'look' with more washed out flare is preferred or frowned apon against the MM which from some reports dont flare as easily?

AE's just flare more, because the coatings are more lowcon. It's subtle, but there. MM's have newer coatings, so they flare less...and have more contrast. MM's with later serial numbers are noticeably more contrasty.

Did they ever make a 21mm f2.8 in AEG?

No. And the 21 is CONTRASTY.

If you had a set of AE and added an MM to the mix would it stick out like dogs balls?

We mix them a lot and its VERY HARD to tell. These four spots mix an 85 MM and 85 AEG for the closeps. It's not even noticeable. Shot a couple of weeks ago:

Notice you can't even notice the "ninja star" (one of the closeups is rocking an 85 AEG with Ninja Star iris...

Not saying there aren't differences btw AE and MM...We def noticed in the grade the AEG was less contrasy. But was easy to match. And they "feel" the same (same design).

Do people prefer the ninja star or circular bokeh? Is it only other camera geeks who boo and hiss or does the ninja star bokeh look like a cheap star effects filter?

The ninja star is def there. You can't take it out. But so is the Cooke "star" in a TON of movies and films. I like it. Has character.

Here's an older sample from earlier in thread, from Ben Scott:

Has anyone seen Saturday Night Fever (John Travolta) Wowee those stage lights with their star flare looking thing going on was doing my head in! Not that that is anything to do with my main questions but gee whiz it was distracting.

The Ninja star is NOT a star flare. That's something completely different. That's a star "streak" filter. Completely different!

 

[Lee Kelly]

Thanks guys. I am keen to get a set. Its a shame there is not an easy or 'inexpensive' option to PL them as we dont all exclusively only use RED cameras with nice EF mounts.
Do you think the star effect in Saturday Night Fever was a filter and something they specifically wanted? It was horrible! In fact really horrible! Not only did it cause the star pattern but the flaring kind of bled through the frame and made it really distracting. I kind of get the idea of the star pattern for those lights but it was a bit extreme.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Thanks guys. I am keen to get a set. Its a shame there is not an easy or 'inexpensive' option to PL them as we dont all exclusively only use RED cameras with nice EF mounts.
Do you think the star effect in Saturday Night Fever was a filter and something they specifically wanted? It was horrible! In fact really horrible! Not only did it cause the star pattern but the flaring kind of bled through the frame and made it really distracting. I kind of get the idea of the star pattern for those lights but it was a bit extreme.

The star effect is a star filter. I've used a modern star filter on a Xmas spot (see below, shot on a Contax 21), and it looks GREAT. Depends on how you use!

 

[Ben Scott]

The ninja star is def there. You can't take it out. But so is the Cooke "star" in a TON of movies and films. I like it. Has character.

Here's an older sample from earlier in thread, from Ben Scott:

Worked like a Bat signal and I came running...

Hi All. Hope you're all well. Apologies for anything stupid my country is doing in the next few months.

Just had a short trip to Prague and only took the A7sII and my Contax 21mm which used to belong to Tommaso as a bit of a swan song because I am going to be selling my Contax set in the marketplace to fund some Otus purchases for upcoming gigs.

Here's the album in case anyone is bored - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sneakyeye/sets/72157670175678315

And here's a few stills.

View from the clock tower - Old Town Square - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

View from the clock tower - Old Town Square - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Kafka Bookshop and Cronenberg exhibition - Old Town Square - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Charles Bridge - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Strahov Library - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Strahov Library - Prague by Ben Scott, on Flickr

 

[Lee Kelly]

Keep me posted Ben, Im on the lookout for some glass.

How rad is Prague!!! I went there about 11yrs ago and it was like going back to the 80s. Such fashion!

 

[Ben Scott]

Listing is here. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...-Want-to-trade-a-Contax-Zeiss-set-for-an-Otus

I have more but I'll need to get the replacements in first before I offload the others.

Just sold my 28mm to another chap in Australia funnily enough

And yes, Prague is amazing. My GF is Czech so I go a few times a year. It's caught up a bit these days but you can still find the occasional amazing mullet.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Amazing pics Ben!!!

 

[Ben Scott]

Cheers Nick. One of those places where it's hard to take a bad one

 

[Chris McKechnie]

Check www.keh.com

I'be bought many lenses there and they have a great return policy if you don't like the lens' condition.

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

Janis, unfortunately Contax never made a wideangle zoom in C/Y. They made a fabulous 17-35 for the auotofocus N line, but that's very expensive, and needs to be modded to EOS (also expensive).

Hi Nick,

Do you know the reason why the Contax N lenses are so expensive/difficult to adapt to EF?

It seems strange as the flange distance of Contax N is 48mm, so it would seem there's lots of room to add an adaptor. Is the exit pupil size? Or do users only want an active mount, instead of passive?

Either way, I'm seriously considering getting a 17-35mm f2.8 if can be converted into a fully manual (focus, iris & zoom) lens. It'll probably cost $2000-2500, but looks to render beautiful images in the ultra-wide range.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Hi Nick,

Do you know the reason why the Contax N lenses are so expensive/difficult to adapt to EF?

It seems strange as the flange distance of Contax N is 48mm, so it would seem there's lots of room to add an adaptor. Is the exit pupil size? Or do users only want an active mount, instead of passive?

Either way, I'm seriously considering getting a 17-35mm f2.8 if can be converted into a fully manual (focus, iris & zoom) lens. It'll probably cost $2000-2500, but looks to render beautiful images in the ultra-wide range.

The Contax N are hard to adapt to EOS because it's an ELECTRONIC mod, not just a mechanical mod.

These are autofocus lenses, and even the iris is electronic. Yes these lenses have manual irises, but the actual aperture won't change unless the lenses are "mounted" onto a camera.

Which is why CONURUS made these incredibly complicated expensive mods. And the guy who worked at Conorus is, I believe, one of the principles now at Metabones. He certainly knows what he's doing.

My caution to you is this - the CONORUS modded lenses are not guaranteed to work on ALL Canon Mounted cameras. For example, we purchased a Contax N 24-85 and our Epic Dragon wasn't able to recognize it...leaving us without autofocus or even being able to change iris...a real bummer (I assume RED's firmware has not been updated with protocols for incredibly rare Conurus modded lenses!)....

The only way I see these lenses working is from a complete RE-HOUSE, and no one I know is doing that....

Besides...most 17-35's modded to EOS run at least $3-4K.

Hate to say it, but you may be better off with a Sigma 18-35, or a GL Optics rehouse of that...if this particular zoom config is what you're looking for...

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

The Contax N are hard to adapt to EOS because it's an ELECTRONIC mod, not just a mechanical mod.

These are autofocus lenses, and even the iris is electronic. Yes these lenses have manual irises, but the actual aperture won't change unless the lenses are "mounted" onto a camera.

Which is why CONURUS made these incredibly complicated expensive mods. And the guy who worked at Conorus is, I believe, one of the principles now at Metabones. He certainly knows what he's doing.

My caution to you is this - the CONORUS modded lenses are not guaranteed to work on ALL Canon Mounted cameras. For example, we purchased a Contax N 24-85 and our Epic Dragon wasn't able to recognize it...leaving us without autofocus or even being able to change iris...a real bummer (I assume RED's firmware has not been updated with protocols for incredibly rare Conurus modded lenses!)....

The only way I see these lenses working is from a complete RE-HOUSE, and no one I know is doing that....

Besides...most 17-35's modded to EOS run at least $3-4K.

Hate to say it, but you may be better off with a Sigma 18-35, or a GL Optics rehouse of that...if this particular zoom config is what you're looking for...

Ah ha, thanks. I didn't realise the iris ring was uncoupled from the mechanics - so it's just driving the motors. So a complete re-house would be the only option... which is no option if no-one does it.

I've recently sold all my electronic EF lenses and replaced them with manual (Contax CY, Leica R & Tokina 11-16) lenses. I have the Contax 18/4 but was hoping to find a manual zoom in that range at f2.8. Do you know if the Nikon 17-35/2.8 is manual, or also electronically controlled? It may match the vintage look of Contax/Leica better than the Sigma.

 

[Brice Ansel]

Amazing pics Ben!!!

+1
B.