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

About to buy this set. Is this a decent price for them or should I keep looking?


Contax/Zeiss Super Speed Set - 28,35,50,85mm
$3,400

selling my beloved Contax/Zeiss set. Every lens is as close to mint condition as I could source.
Each lens has been follow focus geared by Duclos Lenses, as well as set with a Leitax Canon EF Mount.
I went with AEG models, as opposed to MMJ, because of the lens coatings. They are arguably similar to Zeiss Super Speeds in flare and contrast performance.

Contax Zeiss Set:
28mm f/2 “Hollywood” Distagon
35mm f/1.4 AEG Distagon
50mm f/1.4 AEG Planar
85mm f/1.4 AEG Planar
 
Tyler Kerpsack said:
About to buy this set. Is this a decent price for them or should I keep looking?


Contax/Zeiss Super Speed Set - 28,35,50,85mm
$3,400

selling my beloved Contax/Zeiss set. Every lens is as close to mint condition as I could source.
Each lens has been follow focus geared by Duclos Lenses, as well as set with a Leitax Canon EF Mount.
I went with AEG models, as opposed to MMJ, because of the lens coatings. They are arguably similar to Zeiss Super Speeds in flare and contrast performance.

Contax Zeiss Set:
28mm f/2 “Hollywood” Distagon
35mm f/1.4 AEG Distagon
50mm f/1.4 AEG Planar
85mm f/1.4 AEG Planar
Click to expand...


It is a reasonable asking price. I personally prefer the later MM's because they do not have the "ninja star" of the AE's. I must not be alone in that because the MM's generally go for more than their AE counter parts. In order to remember whether it is the AE's or the MM's that are the later lenses, I came up with "more modern" for MM's and that helped me to recall which of the two is the later or the more modern lens. Have realistic expectations for these lenses. They are, after all, lenses designed for still photography. Even with a lens gear attached and follow-focus the focus throw is short. And, while less of an issue than the short focus travel, the iris throw is also short. Some follow focus will have difficulty with these lenses because they are so short in length. The iris can be difficult to access when a FF is mounted.
 
DUCKWRTH - MICHUUL shot on Zeiss Contax

DUCKWRTH - MICHUUL shot on Zeiss Contax

Music Video++ Shot last year on 100% Zeiss Contax++ Using the heck out of that 100-300mm

 
DUCKWRTH - TAMAGOTCHI shot on Zeiss Contax

DUCKWRTH - TAMAGOTCHI shot on Zeiss Contax

Music Video++ Shot last year on 99% Zeiss Contax++ (except for the Arial) (#2)

 
J Obertone said:
Music Video++ Shot last year on 100% Zeiss Contax++ Using the heck out of that 100-300mm

Click to expand...

J Obertone said:
Music Video++ Shot last year on 100% Zeiss Contax++ (#2)

Click to expand...

Wow, these are amazing. Love the crash zooms.

On Tagamatchi, what zoom were using for the car scenes? 28-85 or 35-70?

Amazing work - visually, and conceptually, these are so great.
 
J Obertone said:
Music Video++ Shot last year on 100% Zeiss Contax++ (#2)

Click to expand...

Holy cow that was brilliantly shot. The shots were tight and lyrical and had awesome motion, which matched the subject perfectly. I couldn’t tell where the rapper ended and the camera began, the two became one. Please tell me what lens you used for the mounted car shots, my Contax zooms are not that saturated. My f1.4 primes could maybe get there, but not my zooms. I need to add to my kit!
 
Jim Skinner said:
Holy cow that was brilliantly shot. The shots were tight and lyrical and had awesome motion, which matched the subject perfectly. I couldn’t tell where the rapper ended and the camera began, the two became one. Please tell me what lens you used for the mounted car shots, my Contax zooms are not that saturated. My f1.4 primes could maybe get there, but not my zooms. I need to add to my kit!
Click to expand...

Thank you BTW! Tamagatchi, the mounted cam on the front of the car was all Prime. The humble contax 50mm, and a take with 85mm. Zooming in and out via post. Never used the 28-85/35-70 at all.
 
Those music vids were well done! My lenses cower with envy. Great job all around.
 
Nick Morrison said:
I generally recommend folks send their lenses to be fully modded at a lens tech.

Either Duclos or RP lens are great.
Click to expand...

This is a no brainer if you live in the US, but down here on the southern tip of Africa, not quite as realistic. I have declicked one of my MMs pretty easily, but the AEs seem more complicated - I managed to strip to a certain point but couldn't get any further. Does anyone have tips on declicking AEs? Thanks!

{EDIT: Wow, just noticed I've been lurking here since 2011 - this is my first post!!}
 
Hi men,

I'm finally using my two contaxes zooms! 35-70 and 80-200. Love it!
I have noticed something on my gear and I want to ask something to you experts:

a. I'm using a fotodiox adapter on EF on my RED EPIC MX (EF MOUNT). I have to say it's really more stable of what I was expecting, but I noticed (overall in the 35-70) that it's quite hard to focus, overall at the infinity. And images look always softer that I was expecting... Could be the adapter?
b. The zoom barrel of the 35-70 is quite hard to push on wide. It's like physically difficult to push, hard resistance. Is there a way to make it softer?
c. I would like to put a variable ND on them, converting the front of the lenses on the same diameter. Do you think Cordvision can help me?
d. I would probably buy a 18-35 Sigma to complete the set (I need wide and light), whinh grade of BPM you suggest to me?

Thanks for any advice guys.

I love contaxes!

Bye.
 
hey! looking to get my first contax after lurking this thread for quite some time. Are all 35-70 MM (and if not is there a jump in quality over the AE?)

cheers :)
 
Pedro Erthal said:
hey! looking to get my first contax after lurking this thread for quite some time. Are all 35-70 MM (and if not is there a jump in quality over the AE?)

cheers :)
Click to expand...


Yes, the 35-70 is MM only. It effectively replaced a 40-80AE design which is not supposed to be all that great.
 
Been reading this page for many years it seems and have learned so much. I just got a RED Raven a few weeks ago that I plan to use for wildlife film production and smaller client jobs that dont need me to rent higher end REDs. Right now I have a 80-200 and love it but need more reach. I have been using my Nikon 50-300 F4.5 ED lens and love everything about it except is just a big lens and hard to fit in a backpack. So I am thinking of getting a 100-300 Zeiss and a 28-85 to have in my bag as my run around zoom kit. I have a few questions though,

- Since I have the 80-200 should I just get the 300mm F4 and a 1.4 or 2x tele for it?

- Have any of you had any luck with putting a 1.4 or 2x on the 100-300mm lens, if so how was it?

- I like the idea of having the same makes in my kit for my main stuff so if I go with with the Zeiss I will just put my 50-300 on the desk for other jobs and such, but how does the CY Lens look compared to newwer long glass like the Canon EF 500 and 600mm lens that I will be needing to rent for shoots, or should I just buy some Canon FD lens for that and change the mount?

Thank You
 
The only Mutar teleconverter you can use with the (fantastic) 100-300mm is the Mutar I, which is optically just so-so.

AFAIK (don't own that zoom) the 80-200 can be used with either teleconverter, it's just a consideration of speed vs reach.

Another option would be the 180mm f2,8 with the better Mutar II, but that is a heavy lens.

In my experience it's not too hard to match current Sigma Art zooms with Zeiss C/Y. Canon lenses are more difficult color-wise.
 
I would consider using the 300mm f4 with the 2X mutar which is what Zeiss originally recommends. Personally, I leave that teleconverter on that lens all the time as a permanent lightweight 600mm. If you are serious about wildlife you are definitely going to need that and beyond. The zooms are not to be recommended with the Mutars, they can work but with "optical limitations".

Also, your 50-300mm is a really useful range for wildlife, pity it focuses the opposite way. :))
 
Im used to the focus, and I love my 50-300. Looking to add a 1.4 to it soon to make it a killer zoom. May just end up buying an older Nikon 600mm for work. We will see.
 
Quick question about the different versions of the Contax 60mm macro:

Does the big 60mm version have an MM flavor? I bought a 60mm (big version, not the C version) that was sold as an MM variant, but it doesn’t have any green paint on the final position on the f-stop ring. This came from a legit shop in Japan, so I am hoping the big version just simply doesn’t have the green paint feature (maybe the big version of the lens was only issued during the MM era?).

I am certain the smaller C variant of the 60mm has the green paint feature, as I bought an MMJ 60mm C and LOVE IT (and it has the green paint on the f-stop ring). The small C version is so amazing that I had to get the big 60mm version as well. Has anyone else purchased the big 60mm version and did your copy have the green paint indicator that most of the other MM era lenses have? Thanks!
 
Contax 60mm - an exotic macro in 3 flavors

Contax 60mm - an exotic macro in 3 flavors

William Long said:
I believe the 60mm Planar - S (1:1) is only AE. The 60mm planar - C (1:2) is an MM. The 100mm macro is also brilliant.
Click to expand...

Thanks William. I have the mysterious third flavor, the full sized 60mm that came after the S variant. I’ve been doing lens tests over the last couple days, and this rare lens is really odd. Amazing and odd. Here are some observations:

At f2.8 there is a ton of light pollution inside the lens. The iris actually lifts up out of view at f2.8, so at f2.8 the light is only controlled by the housing. Colors are washed out and the image is only somewhat sharp. Really strange, the C model does not behave like this at all.

Then closed down one stop to f4, this thing is the sharpest lens I’be ever seen. Much nicer than the C version. Except! Except for the weird ninja bocca at f4. The iris doesn’t fit together cleanly at f4 (and only at this stop). So while the image is sharp the bocca is ugly as sin.

Then closed down to f5.6 the iris blades finally come together and make perfectly fine bocca. Lens is sharp as a tack and looks amazing.

I haven’t seen anything posted about this online (the ninja stars at f4) but my copy is in perfect condition, it doesn’t seem to be a problem with just this copy. If anyone else could confirm this weird iris behavior I would appreciate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top