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

Keep in mind, though, that some of the lenses with weaker corners WO (I'm looking at you, 25mm f2,8) will show more of that.

Still a great lens when stopped down.
 
Jake Wilganowski said:
Can anyone comment on the build quality Kimcamera PL versions of the contax? He seems like he is the only one that will do the 35 speed, for some reason the others like GL Optics and someone else I asked wont do that lens, which has held me off from getting these PL modded. Kimcamera has pics of all these older great photo lenses rehoused and they look good in the pics, and the price is good. Soooo, whats the catch. I can't seem to find much at all as far as firsthand user experience with these. It seems like maybe he puts a shell on these and leaves the internals but I have no idea, I think i remember hearing that.
You can see Kimcamera on social media and eBay.
Click to expand...

Jake,

Kimcamera rehousing is basically the worse one around, really cheaply made vs the competitions, not precise enough with finishing blemishes and mechanical issues.

Contax 35 1.4 can't be rehoused to PL unless the rear element edge is trimmed, causing less coverage, so it's not really an option.
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Jake,

Kimcamera rehousing is basically the worse one around, really cheaply made vs the competitions, not precise enough with finishing blemishes and mechanical issues.

Contax 35 1.4 can't be rehoused to PL unless the rear element edge is trimmed, causing less coverage, so it's not really an option.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info!!
 
I have been looking for the 28 Hollywood f2.0 but not a whole lot of them on ebay at the moment. About a year ago there was a couple of them circulating on Ebay by Japanese sellers. I found a 28 f.2.8 MM in really good condition, almost looks new. What's everyone thought on that one? Worth it? I like the fact that it is small and would work well with gimbals and a small cam like the Komodo. Are there any lens test videos out there for the 28mm F2.8 MM ?
 
Domingo Lamarre said:
I have been looking for the 28 Hollywood f2.0 but not a whole lot of them on ebay at the moment. About a year ago there was a couple of them circulating on Ebay by Japanese sellers. I found a 28 f.2.8 MM in really good condition, almost looks new. What's everyone thought on that one? Worth it? I like the fact that it is small and would work well with gimbals and a small cam like the Komodo. Are there any lens test videos out there for the 28mm F2.8 MM ?
Click to expand...

CARL ZEISS DISTAGON 2,8/28 T* (C/Y) AEJ Speedbooster SONY A6000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ_e5HAgu7U
 
Hi Nick and friends!

Thanks so much for all your help and advice with regards Contax Zeiss lenses.

I have built a good collection so far (25mm 2.8 AEG / 35mm 1.4 MMJ / 50mm 1.4 MMJ / 85mm 1.4 MMJ / 135mm 2.8 MMJ / 80-200 4 MMJ) and they are truly gems and I use them all the time.

What I am really desperate for right now is some wide and ultra-wide glass, wider than my 25mm AEG. I do not have the money right now (especially in these most uncertain of times) to buy the 21mm.

At risk of controversy, are there any options from other brands that might fulfill my need for wide at a much cheaper price in the mean time, until I can save up for the 21mm. Pentax? Minolta? Old Canon? Anything else?

These are my needs:
-21mm or wider
-f2.8 or brighter
-Solid manual focus lens with hard stops
-Easy conversion to Canon EF
-Standard focus direction (not Nikon then I guess)

I am happy to have something that isn't quite as world class as the 21mm MMJ if I can afford it and it will intercut relatively smoothly with my existing Contax glass... I'm thinking something under the $500 mark (rather than the $1500-2000 that good units of the 21mm cost).

Thanks so much in advance :-)
 
Jacob Schindler said:
Hi Nick and friends!

Thanks so much for all your help and advice with regards Contax Zeiss lenses.

I have built a good collection so far (25mm 2.8 AEG / 35mm 1.4 MMJ / 50mm 1.4 MMJ / 85mm 1.4 MMJ / 135mm 2.8 MMJ / 80-200 4 MMJ) and they are truly gems and I use them all the time.

What I am really desperate for right now is some wide and ultra-wide glass, wider than my 25mm AEG. I do not have the money right now (especially in these most uncertain of times) to buy the 21mm.

At risk of controversy, are there any options from other brands that might fulfill my need for wide at a much cheaper price in the mean time, until I can save up for the 21mm. Pentax? Minolta? Old Canon? Anything else?

These are my needs:
-21mm or wider
-f2.8 or brighter
-Solid manual focus lens with hard stops
-Easy conversion to Canon EF
-Standard focus direction (not Nikon then I guess)

I am happy to have something that isn't quite as world class as the 21mm MMJ if I can afford it and it will intercut relatively smoothly with my existing Contax glass... I'm thinking something under the $500 mark (rather than the $1500-2000 that good units of the 21mm cost).

Thanks so much in advance :-)
Click to expand...

What about the 21mm f2.8 ZE? (Or ZF if you need the click stops, but not sure which direction that focuses in, others will know...)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/802101412-USE/zeiss_1762_848_distagon_t_21mm_f_2_8.html

Why are the Contax lenses so much more expensive than their optically updated ZE counterparts?
 
Last edited:
Hi Jacob,

I recommend getting the Olympus 21mm f2. I paired with my Contax Zeiss most of the time and got excellent results. It is sharp wide open, also

sharper than its f3.5 sibling at the same aperture. The bokeh is a bit busy wide open when shooting against busy background for example trees. Mainly

in the corner and goes away when stopping down to f2.8 which I personally love shooting at. Image contrast also matches with the Contax Zeiss lenses.

The only complain would be the color it renders, not matching with Contax Zeiss Line-up which will require some tweaking in post.
Check out this previous post of mine for examples.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...rvival-Guide&p=1850558&viewfull=1#post1850558
 
Matt W. said:
Why are the Contax lenses so much more expensive than their optically updated ZE counterparts?
Click to expand...

It's like asking why Super Speeds are more popular than CP2s or even Ultra Primes for that matter.

The older coatings make a big difference. It's a look you can't fake.

But for a modern pristine look then there are definitely better options - from Milvus to Sigma PL
 
Nick Morrison said:
It's like asking why Super Speeds are more popular than CP2s or even Ultra Primes for that matter.

The older coatings make a big difference. It's a look you can't fake.

But for a modern pristine look then there are definitely better options - from Milvus to Sigma PL
Click to expand...

Do you know if the story is true about the 28mm f2 Contax being the same as a standard speed? The front elements look similar in size. If so, I wonder if the 60mm f2.8 macro, 100m f2, and 135mm share similar designs, too.

With Canon, the K35s and FD SSC Aspherical lenses that are allegedly the same have the same number of groups and elements, so I tend to believe they're at the very least similar.

But I can't find optical diagrams for standard speeds anywhere and I don't own a 28mm standard speed to compare.
 
I'd get the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. I have a whole lot of Zeiss C/Y but also couldn't justify the price for the 21mm.
If you need to take a bit of its bite off, use a weak Promist, but colors are pretty easy to match.

For something more vintage, the Minolta 21mm f2.8 is not that far behind the Zeiss if you find a good sample.
 
Matt W. said:
Do you know if the story is true about the 28mm f2 Contax being the same as a standard speed? The front elements look similar in size. If so, I wonder if the 60mm f2.8 macro, 100m f2, and 135mm share similar designs, too.
Click to expand...

The 28 f2 "Hollywood" is NOT exactly the same as the Standard Prime 28 T2 - I've tested them. The Standard Prime doesn't cover full frame, and is much sharper wide open. Otherwise they do look very similar however. If you stand them next to each other the are also very similar in size, tc. They are supposed to be cousins, optically. My assumption is that one of the elements in the Contax 28 f2 expands the coverage wider to cover vista but in turn loses some sharpness wide open. But I'm wildly guessing here.

I have also assumed like you that the 135 f2, 180 2.8, 60 2.8 Macro and 100 2.8 Macro were all rebadged/re-housed by Arri in PL during the 80's and 90's. I've shot with the Standard Prime 180 T3 and it certainly looked at quick glance like a rehouse of the Contax. If you look at photos of the Arri 60 and 100 Macros, they also look like rehouses. Again we're speculating but I think these are relatively safe/ok guesses.
 
Nick Morrison said:
The 28 f2 "Hollywood" is NOT exactly the same as the Standard Prime 28 T2 - I've tested them. The Standard Prime doesn't cover full frame, and is much sharper wide open. Otherwise they do look very similar however. If you stand them next to each other the are also very similar in size, tc. They are supposed to be cousins, optically. My assumption is that one of the elements in the Contax 28 f2 expands the coverage wider to cover vista but in turn loses some sharpness wide open. But I'm wildly guessing here.

I have also assumed like you that the 135 f2, 180 2.8, 60 2.8 Macro and 100 2.8 Macro were all rebadged/re-housed by Arri in PL during the 80's and 90's. I've shot with the Standard Prime 180 T3 and it certainly looked at quick glance like a rehouse of the Contax. If you look at photos of the Arri 60 and 100 Macros, they also look like rehouses. Again we're speculating but I think these are relatively safe/ok guesses.
Click to expand...

Something along those lines would make sense to me. The Hasselblad 110mm f2 Planar and 100mm f2 Contax Planar, for instance, have similar optical designs. But the Contax has considerably better MTF and less coverage. I don't know the first thing about lens design but it would make sense that they're related but not the same.

I think the FDs and K35s might be the same or nearly the same, though. The 24mm, 55mm, and 85mm K35s all seem to cover full frame.

I think the 50mm standard speed does cover full frame, whereas other 50mm cinema lenses don't always. I wonder if it's the same as the Contarex.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,

I understand most of you are video shooters but I shoot stills and recently got a 28mm 2.8 in pristine condition aside for one thing - it has a 72mm filter thread. I think this is some kind of cinemod, but I'd prefer the 55mm filter thread if possible. I was just wondering if there's any way to get a replacement 55mm barrel (I can unscrew the 72mm filter but it removes the front plate (w the focal length, distagon etc), removing most of the front portion of the lens besides the glass itself). All I'd need is a replacement front barrel, but I'm not quite sure where to find one without buying a whole new lens. The replacement 72mm thread front has "S55-72" inscribed on it, but no other branding or anything that my searches have been able to find. Any advice?

Thanks and stay safe!


https://imgur.com/a/HDjQCNb
 
Was doing some quick analysis of all the C/Y Zeiss primes this weekend. Thought I would share my spreadsheet if useful reference to anyone: https://jmp.sh/PGTbRIG
 
Last edited:
Tim Erickson said:
That's likely just a stepup ring (S55-72 implies the S is for step up, 55 is the native thread, 72 is the resulting thread) thats been fixed on with loctite. If you can't unthread it manually, try to remove it carefully with heat: https://www.hunker.com/13416387/how-to-remove-loctite
Click to expand...

Ah thank you! Seems to be the issue. I'll take a heat gun to it and give it a shot soon - otherwise will potentially just buy another lens (in poor condition for cheap) and just use the front of that on my good copy

Thanks again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top