Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

[Zak Forsman]

Great feedback guys, much appreciated. How do you both get over the fact that the 18mm doesn't have a filter thread? I like using ND via screw on filters, so is there any viable options out there for a DIY solution? Keep in mind I live far away from the US/Europe so sending the lens to be modded by the people mentioned in this forum is out of the question.

I use magnatized Xume adapters on all my ND for fast swapping. Perhaps you could semi-permanantly epoxy a Xume adapter to the front of the 18mm?

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

Great feedback guys, much appreciated. How do you both get over the fact that the 18mm doesn't have a filter thread? I like using ND via screw on filters, so is there any viable options out there for a DIY solution? Keep in mind I live far away from the US/Europe so sending the lens to be modded by the people mentioned in this forum is out of the question.

I bought a copy with the 70/86 filter adaptor.

 

[Ben Scott]

same. and had an 86-82mm step down ring on it.

 

[Uli Plank]

Another vote for the Contax C/Y 18mm.
Yes, it's not fast, but does that still matter so much with modern cameras like the Sony A7S you mention?
I consider it quite sharp WO and it has a very nice way of handling distortion – somehow it doesn't look so 'bulging' when you move around with it like other very wide lenses. With some patience you should still find it for a decent price, I paid 430,- € for mine.

The Eastern Zeiss 20mm is not matching the Contax line very well, they had good optics, but crappy coating. Plus, their QC was very low, you may have to test a lot of samples until you get a good one (they can be good for sure). Prices have risen quite a bit these days.

You see, if you want to be ready for FF, I wholeheartedly suggest the Contax 18mm too. But if you want to go cheap and vintage, there are the 17mm Tokina and Tamron f 3.5 lenses or the 17mm Canon FD f 4.0. Have a look here http://www.vintagelensesforvideo.com/battle-of-cheap-vintage-17mm-lenses/ and here http://www.vintagelensesforvideo.com/canon-fd-17mm/

While I normally don't like zooms very much and never became a friend of the 11-16mm Tokina, the 18-35mm Sigma is a fantastic lens. With some experience it can be matched to Contax Zeiss, but as you already noted, it's APS-C/S-35 only.

 

[Joe Cage]

Is there a video out there, that compares the contax zeiss lenses with the Leica-R lenses? (I own a set of Sigma ART lenses atm) But I am interested in either the contax or the leica-r's(already bought the summicron f2 It looks good! However I feel F2 might not be fast enough for me).

 

[Nuno Serrão]

Hi guys,

About a year later since i started researching vintage lens (really have to thank all of you for the information in this post, amazing!). I can now say i have a nice zeiss contax kit:
28 2.8 (great for gimbal use)
35 1.4 (my favourite lens)
50 1.4 (very good)
85 1.4 (another favourite)
135 2.8 (very useful)

All MM and all cinemoded by me, this was part of the fun, getting to know more about the mechanics of the lenses.

I haven’t finished the kit yet, still looking for a 21mm, the 28mm f2, and a macro lens, but i wanted to contribute to this post that has given me so much.

Heres a titles film i made for a festival that happens in Madeira Island, hope you guys like it! Shot on a ursa mini 4.6, prores hq, graded from scratch.

Again, thanks for the amazing info, great to see everyone sharing their love for lenses.

http://vimeo.com/222489022

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

Hi guys,

About a year later since i started researching vintage lens (really have to thank all of you for the information in this post, amazing!). I can now say i have a nice zeiss contax kit:
28 2.8 (great for gimbal use)
35 1.4 (my favourite lens)
50 1.4 (very good)
85 1.4 (another favourite)
135 2.8 (very useful)

All MM and all cinemoded by me, this was part of the fun, getting to know more about the mechanics of the lenses.

I haven’t finished the kit yet, still looking for a 21mm, the 28mm f2, and a macro lens, but i wanted to contribute to this post that has given me so much.

Heres a titles film i made for a festival that happens in Madeira Island, hope you guys like it! Shot on a ursa mini 4.6, prores hq, graded from scratch.

Again, thanks for the amazing info, great to see everyone sharing their love for lenses.

http://vimeo.com/222489022

Beautiful work there Nuno!

 

[Rick Griemink]

First of all; love this post and all useful information I'm finding on Reduser regarding Contax Zeiss lenses. But; I have a question regarding a Contax Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 MMJ. The lens seems very 'glowy' when shooting with really bright highlights. Only when adding a lot of contrast and lowering my shadows I can get rid of the 'glow'. The lens doesn't have any signs of fog, fungus or any other damage on the glass. I have added a still in witch you can see the 'glow', I hope. When switching between my 35 1.4 and 50 1.4 I really notice a lot of difference. Is this a common problem to the 50? Or did I just happen to buy a faulty lens...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/x7eq4y7al5lmueh/3-6.4.jpg?dl=0

 

[Nick Morrison]

First of all; love this post and all useful information I'm finding on Reduser regarding Contax Zeiss lenses. But; I have a question regarding a Contax Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 MMJ. The lens seems very 'glowy' when shooting with really bright highlights. Only when adding a lot of contrast and lowering my shadows I can get rid of the 'glow'. The lens doesn't have any signs of fog, fungus or any other damage on the glass. I have added a still in witch you can see the 'glow', I hope. When switching between my 35 1.4 and 50 1.4 I really notice a lot of difference. Is this a common problem to the 50? Or did I just happen to buy a faulty lens...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/x7eq4y7al5lmueh/3-6.4.jpg?dl=0

That glow seems pretty normal wide open for that lens, yes. Most old lenses of that era do the same. Even older cine lenses.

In fact, the "new" retro Speed Pancro's coming out from Cooke this year have been faithfully made to recreate this look wide open, to a greater extreme. At NAB one of the primes I tested glowed so much wide open I actually did a double take!

 

[Paul Russell]

Yep, my 50mm AEG glows like mad when it's wide open at f1.4. After 2.8 it calms down a bit.

 

[Ben Scott]

Yep that's why my Contax set had the 50 1.7 and not the 1.4. The 1.7 is razor sharp from wide open.

 

[Vladimir Cazacu]

It doesn't seem that bad after adjusting the exposure.

I wonder how similar the f/1.4 (T1.6) and the f/1.7 (T2?) are wide open.

 

[Ben Scott]

The Contax 50mm 1.7 wide open

London Marathon 2016 by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Brac Island, Croatia by Ben Scott, on Flickr

Interview Stills by Ben Scott, on Flickr

 

[Patrick Monaghan]

Im going to purchase some of the Cordvision Cine Rings for my new lenses, but the suggested Adorama lens caps are no longer available. Any one have a good alternative they can recommend??

 

[Rick Griemink]

Yep, my 50mm AEG glows like mad when it's wide open at f1.4. After 2.8 it calms down a bit.

Well the fact is it is shot at 2.8, if it was full open on 1.4 I would understand the glow and softness. Only when stopping down to around 5.6 it's getting less.

 

[Joe Cage]

In Europe these contax zeiss lenses seem to be more rare. I have been looking for a contax zeiss 35mm 1.4, but have not seen one for sale so far. Not sure what the prices are up to these days.

 

[Tony Yang]

Hey everyone! Nick Morrison, you sir are awesome. Been a long time lurker of this thread before I finally decided to pull the trigger and start building a set of Contax Zeiss lenses! I currently have the 28mm f/2 AEG, 50mm f/1.4 MMJ, 85mm f/1.4 MMJ, 35-70mm f/3.4 MMJ, and 35mm f/1.4 MMJ. Blown away by the quality.


Anyway, I was hoping to get some second opinions though on the 35mm f/1.4 MMJ that I bought off eBay. The description said it had been professionally cleaned and was free of fungus, haze, or residue. However when I inspected it with a flashlight, I noticed some markings towards the front of the lens. Here are pictures:

https://flic.kr/p/V1vEps

Front of the lens with no flashlight - looks clear

https://flic.kr/p/W2Zxob
Looking through the front of lens and everything looks clear still

https://flic.kr/p/V1vHPU
Looking through the back of the lens, everything still looks good.

https://flic.kr/p/V1vFEy
Shine a light through the front, and the back looks fine with the exception of some dust.

Now here is where I see the problem:

https://flic.kr/p/W2Zvh7
When I shine a flashlight through the back of the lens, this mark shows up towards the front element in the center. I can't tell what it is. Is it haze? Residue? I don't believe it's fungus. When I shine a light at the front, everything looks fine.

https://flic.kr/p/VGEXdW

Here are some test images, but I didn't notice the mark showing up.
Shot against a brightly lit white wall at f/16

Show against a blue sky also at f/16

Another random test image:

So do you think I should return the lens?
Is that marking going to get worse?
Will I be fine if I take it to a professional cleaner?
Could my lens coating, micro-contrast, color, etc be affected in comparison to a clean Contax 35mm f/1.4?

Sorry for the long post, but I really want to get to the bottom of this!

Here is a link to all the photos if you want higher resolution: https://flic.kr/s/aHskYeBejC

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

If I was to guess, I'd say it looks like coating damage. But the only way to be sure is to take it to a lens technician to give you a diagnosis.

One of the dangers with buying a lens that once had fungus (mould), is that even if you clean it, there's possibly permanent coating damage. Also, it's almost impossible to say the fungus will never return at some time in the future. If there's any evidence of fungus or haze, I won't touch the lens. You may be able to take images with it, but for how long? Will it still be ok in five, ten or twenty years? I personally fell it's not worth the risk.

There's a reason why many lens repair shops, such as CinemaTechnic, refuse to take lenses that have/had fungus.

http://cinematechnic.com/resources/avoiding_fungus_damage

 

[Tony Yang]

Gotcha. It's my first purchase with vintage lenses and first experience with any kind of lens deformity. Luckily, the seller has agreed to refund me the full amount and I'll just repurchase another 35mm f/1.4 MMJ!

 

[Tony Yang]

So onto my next conundrum: figuring out what is the best route for Cine-Modding my Contax lenses. I've already purchased the Leitax mounts and will probably send them to whichever store I chose to have them install. So I see several options:


1. Buy all the necessary parts separately from Cordevision to put together myself
- 80mm Cine Ring with Cap Combo: $47 per lens
- Pro Lens Focus Gears: $49 per lens
- Goja 67mm to 77mm Step Up Ring: $7 (not all of my lenses are 67mm, but the step-up ring prices will all be in this range)
- I'm not sure how much it costs to de-click the iris, but I'll assume it's no more than $60 from a local shop because that's what is listed on Duclos.
- Cordevision total: $163 per lens

2. Obviously Duclos is the most recommended option, but also the most expensive at $250 a lens.
Prices compared to Cordevision
Focus Gears: $105
80mm Front Ring: $75
80mm Front Cap: $20
Iris De-click: $60

For people that have gone the Duclos, is the quality of their work that much better than Cordevision? Why exactly is their Focus gear so much more expensive? Are they permanent or removable like the Cordevision gears? Would love to hear some opinions from people that have maybe done both.

3. RP Lens. I've read a lot about this store through this thread so I'm more than willing to give them a shot. How much does it cost to cine-mod a lens compared to Duclos? Are there any differences in the end results? Quality differences?

While I can afford to send my lenses to Duclos, if the final cine-mod quality from Cordevision is going to be around equal, it makes more sense to go with the cheaper option. Same thing with RP Lens if they provide a similar level of service as Duclos but for cheaper. Any feedback is appreciated!