As I commented below - both ways.
This is not my opinion, this is known information as per the chart I linked (below) that Cosina is for sure aware of, and they certainly know a thing or two about making lenses.
BTW since you mentioned it, does me being a moderator have any bearing on this discussion? I think its irrelevant, but perhaps you think otherwise?
There are so many variables at play here- you have to guess at the assumptions made, or just set your own values for optimization.
1) Effective focal length for a lens that is over-corrected for spherical aberration increases as you stop down, meaning the focus shifts towards infinity.
2) For B&W Photography, use of deep yellow, orange, and red filters cause a shift towards infinity.
3) For a Sonnar 50mm lens, the shift towards infinity is pronounced.
The difference in focus throw between the Nikon and Contax is about 0.1mm. Focus shift from F1.5 to F4 covers most of that.
SO- optimize the Sonnar for up-close and wide-open. Stopping down and using filters will shift focus towards infinity.
From one of the articles I wrote,
The Asymmetric layout and compact design of the Sonnar gives rise to its most difficult to master design flaw: focus shift. The focal length of the center of the Sonnar is longer than the focal length of the edges. This means the best focus point of light entering the Sonnar from the center is behind that of light entering from the edge. Used wide-open, the image is dominated by light coming in at the shorter focal length of the edges. This is responsible for the lower-contrast/spread-out depth-of-field of the Sonnar used wide-open. Stopping down the aperture eliminates contributions from the edge; the image that remains is the product of the longer focal-length center of the lens. It “shifts” towards infinity.
The post-war West German Zeiss 50mm F1.5 is sharper and has less field curvature than the Nikkor 5cm F1.4. Adapting it to a Nikon is easy. I've compared mine with the M-Mount C-Sonnar 50/1.5, very close in performance. The C-Sonnar in S-Mount is rare, and costs several times the West German Sonnar.
I only change focal length by changing the spacing between front and rear group as a last resort, and for lenses that were off to to begin with. With the J-3, the lfar end of the 1% tolerance. I've been given unusable Sonnars, set them straight by changing focal length. BUT- for most, prefer optimizing for wide-open/ close-up and stop down for infinity.
.
1) Effective focal length for a lens that is over-corrected for spherical aberration increases as you stop down, meaning the focus shifts towards infinity.
2) For B&W Photography, use of deep yellow, orange, and red filters cause a shift towards infinity.
3) For a Sonnar 50mm lens, the shift towards infinity is pronounced.
The difference in focus throw between the Nikon and Contax is about 0.1mm. Focus shift from F1.5 to F4 covers most of that.
SO- optimize the Sonnar for up-close and wide-open. Stopping down and using filters will shift focus towards infinity.
From one of the articles I wrote,
The Asymmetric layout and compact design of the Sonnar gives rise to its most difficult to master design flaw: focus shift. The focal length of the center of the Sonnar is longer than the focal length of the edges. This means the best focus point of light entering the Sonnar from the center is behind that of light entering from the edge. Used wide-open, the image is dominated by light coming in at the shorter focal length of the edges. This is responsible for the lower-contrast/spread-out depth-of-field of the Sonnar used wide-open. Stopping down the aperture eliminates contributions from the edge; the image that remains is the product of the longer focal-length center of the lens. It “shifts” towards infinity.
The post-war West German Zeiss 50mm F1.5 is sharper and has less field curvature than the Nikkor 5cm F1.4. Adapting it to a Nikon is easy. I've compared mine with the M-Mount C-Sonnar 50/1.5, very close in performance. The C-Sonnar in S-Mount is rare, and costs several times the West German Sonnar.
I only change focal length by changing the spacing between front and rear group as a last resort, and for lenses that were off to to begin with. With the J-3, the lfar end of the 1% tolerance. I've been given unusable Sonnars, set them straight by changing focal length. BUT- for most, prefer optimizing for wide-open/ close-up and stop down for infinity.
.
flavio81
Well-known
Yes, you linked to a table that contained distances for many mounts. But sometimes such tables, provided by pages that don't specialize in a specific system- are wrong. For this kind of info i'd first trust more in a page specialist on Kiev. Contax, and Nikkon rangefinders than a page that is trying to cover all bases.
That's why I wasn't completely convinced by it.
I didn't remember your name, this my only way to refer to you as a recent poster on a discussion was "a moderator". Please understand that it's not easy to remember everyone's name on a forum.
This discussion is not personal in any way, and I don't have any kind of intention of turning it into a personal discussion. I don't know you and I wish to remain absolutely neutral about people I don't know. I'm sure you also don't wish to turn the conversation into a personal topic.
But I can't be neutral about a third-party source that is not specialized in rangefinders.
I can trust the info provided by members of this forum, since it's specialized in rangefinders.
flavio81
Well-known
This good practical info. I was thinking on the "ideal" lens with no focus shift.
From my recollection of some "popular photography" or "modern photography" tests most normal lenses had 0.05mm, less, or zero focus shift. On the other hand, those were double gauss lenses. Sonnar lenses, as you mention, could have more shift, it all makes sense now.
I'm sure you can find the same information elsewhere on the internet. I suggest doing a search. You're bound to find a source you find more convincing.
I'm not sure if wiki passes the test for you, but the same information is there too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance
jonmanjiro, my username, would be fine. And its right there on the screen. You can't miss it.
Frontman
Well-known
One of my favorites for the Nikon S cameras is the 2.8cm f/3.5. I use one on my SP, which fortunately has a 28mm finder, but an accessory finder is easy enough to find for the S3. I've used most of the S mount lenses from the 2.1cm to the Millennium Niikkor, but most often use the 2.8cm.
Capt. E
Established
Not to brag, but I just purchased an original black paint S2 at the crazy price of $695. It isn't mint, but not far from it. I intend to use it with the 5cm 1.4 (it looks too good to just sit on a shelf). I guess I'll put it in a half case. I have the same attitude towards a re-issue S3 or SP that no longer has the boxes and all that came with it. Take care of it, but "Use it!"
I would brag. 
Congrats!
Congrats!
Capt. E
Established
Probably been said before, but just consider the frame lines on the S3. 3.5cm f/1.8 , 5.0cm f/1.4, 10.5cm f/2.5 is the obvious set of lenses. I'm also looking for a 10.5 f/4 at a reasonable price. This lightweight tele is great for a lightweight kit. Add a light meter on the accessory shoe.
das
Well-known
The lack of parallax correction on the S3 makes effective use of the 105mm difficult. There is significant parallax shift with 105s, especially at close distances. The only solution is to get a PC 105mm external finder for accurate framing. With the 1:1 finder, using a 35s with glasses is difficult, and it is really meant to use right eyed shooting. The 50mm seems to be the ideal lens for it, although parallax correction is also an issue. The 35mm f/2.5 and the 50mm f/1.4 are both affordable and great lenses to start with.. The f/2.5 is actually a fairly fantastic lens. The f/1.4 Sonnar-types are really not "general purpose" 50s, better used for close up and wider apertures.
Capt. E
Established
That is why I have a finder on my S3 when using the 105 (or 135 of course). I usually don't use anything but a 5cm or 3.5cm.
Capt. E
Established
I've been wanting one as well. I know of one here in town...$499. Not bad actually. Seen them advertised for up to $2000. I should probably go snatch it up.
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
You know you are talking to yourself right?
I have this lens in F-Mount, which is much more common that S-Mount- but the same optics. Found at a great price. It's a very good performer. On the F-Mount, the symbol for Infinity is past the infinity mark- which drove me nuts until I looked up the lens and found this was be design.
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
Lol
I only mention it because he seems to respond to himself quite often
stephen_lumsden
Well-known
I thought for 35mm and wider s mount lenses did not need to be recalibrated for Contax. I have a voightlander 25mm f4 which seems to work ok and am eyeing up a w-nikkor 35mm f3.5 to go with my j12 for my contax ii. Could someone clarify.
The FSU Contax/Kiev mount lenses will do better in "nailing the focus" after shimming them. Same with the Zeiss Biogon.
stephen_lumsden
Well-known
Does that apply the other way though, namely Nikkor lenses getting mounted on Contax?
Yes- the same is true, I have reduced the shim for a Nikon 3.5cm F2.5 to be used on a Contax.