Dralowid
Michael
One thing worth considering is balance.
Put a Summarit on an LTM camera and it becomes nose heavy because the camera is small and light.
Put a 1.5 Sonnar on a Contax II and it doesn't make that much difference. The camera is heavier and the lens, devoid of helicals etc is lighter.
Now...I will admit that I haven't weighed either so this may be more of an 'impression' than fact.
Put a Summarit on an LTM camera and it becomes nose heavy because the camera is small and light.
Put a 1.5 Sonnar on a Contax II and it doesn't make that much difference. The camera is heavier and the lens, devoid of helicals etc is lighter.
Now...I will admit that I haven't weighed either so this may be more of an 'impression' than fact.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
Brett: Yes, the lenses must be cleaned from time to time, but the same is true for many other Leica lenses, such as the Summicron Rigid (mine had it for the second time, but I can clean the lens myself on the inside) and many others from the same era and earlier. Nobbysparrow (eBay) has written excellent manuals how to open and clean the earliest Leitz lenses. The later lenses are much more difficult to open yourself. In The Netherlands there is a great repairman, Will van Manen in Zoetermeer. He is not cheap, but he does an excellent job: https://www.kamera-service.info/index.php/nl/.
Erik.
Erik.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
As an experiment, I went for a 20km hike yesterday with a Leica IIIf and a Contax II. It was interesting swapping between the two continually; I largely kept the 50/1.5 Sonnar on the Contax and a CV 28/3.5 (with a 1930s Zeiss 28mm finder, amusingly) on the IIIf.
A few observations you may or may not disagree with:
A few observations you may or may not disagree with:
- The separate RF and VF of the Barnack design is more of a strength for me than anything. Shifting from one finder to the other is fast on a late Barnack, and the higher magnification of the RF on a late Barnack is a huge positive. Despite the long base length of the Contax, the IIIf is considerably easier to focus for me. This is obviously less relevant on a Leica II; I can see why you'd pick a Contax II over that setup.
- Setting shutter speeds on a Contax is less complicated, as everything's on one dial...
- ...but the Leica shutter speeds are far easier/less awkward to see. I don't have to tilt the camera at weird angles to see which speed I'm on with a Leica.
- The odd ergonomics of the pre-war Contax body (the famed "Contax grip") is something you get used to quickly, and focusing a 50mm with the focusing wheel means you can hold everything stable while making small adjustments.
- Changing lenses on a Contax is a pain in the ass. Yes, the bayonet is faster than screwmount, but swapping from a 50mm to an external bayonet lens and back involves a lot of juggling, especially as the two lenses can't share the same rear cap.
- Rewinding a Contax II is far more awkward than rewinding any Barnack. The little pull-out knob on a Barnack is hardly ideal, but it's a damn sight better than the little knurled knob you can only grab with your fingertips on a Contax. And having to keep a button depressed instead of flicking a lever to a locked position for rewinding is not ideal. Not that this mattered yesterday as...
- ...Loading a Contax is far more difficult than a Barnack, as I found out to my horror half way through the walk when I realised that despite the fact the rewind knob had tension on it, it hadn't been spinning around as I "wound on" for the last two hours. Sure enough, I checked when I got home, and the damn film hadn't moved an inch. I don't care what anyone says; trying to snag a film into the most ridiculous take-up spool design ever, holding it and the spool in place while trying to keep the film flat, ensuring it actually engages with sprockets, and then repositioning the back without anything shifting is far more awkward than the Barnack slot loading setup. I have to stop and sit down with a Contax; the Barnack can be loaded while walking without an issue. I think I'd need two pairs of hands to keep walking while loading a Contax!
Erik van Straten
Mentor
I agree for 100% with Coldkennels here. Great write-up that ends the discussion forever.
Erik.
Erik.
Cascadilla
Well-known
Both systems work and photographers have made great (and mediocre) photographs with both systems. I'm personally invested in Contax more for the lenses available now at more realistic prices than anything else and have gotten used to the ergonomics to the point where it feels fairly instinctive. Had I started with Leicas I would probably find the Contax to be difficult to adapt to. I own and have used a Leica IIIa, but only after using Contax bodies for 5 or 6 years so it doesn't feel as natural to me. I don't find loading either camera particularly challenging, but I have also never used an auto-loading 35 SLR either so it isn't that different from loading the Pentax SLRs that I used to make a living for decades.
I think that a lot of these are personal preferences and result from chance as much as anything. I didn't buy a Nikon when I bought my first serious SLR because I use my left eye for focusing and every Nikon I picked up turned on its meter by pulling out the winding lever that then poked my right eye. The mid-range Canons didn't "feel right" when I tried those so I wound up with Pentax, which worked well for me. I'm sure lots of other people would have had the opposite reaction.
Bingley
Mentor
Barnack Gurl I am...would love to try a Contax with a 35 biogon
Below is the 35 1.7 ultron LTM on a Leica IIIA
Up Close
by Helen Hill, on Flickr
I really like this photo, Helen.
If you have a chance to try the post-WWII Zeiss Biogon 35/2.8, you should. It’s an amazing optic (assuming the lens is in good condition), with impressive resolving power and that Zeiss pop with color film (it’s great w/ bw too). Alas, there’s no adapter I’m aware of that will allow the Biogon to mount on a Leica camera. But the Biogon can be easily mounted on either a Contax IIa, IIIa, or Nikon rangefinder; I have used my sample of the Biogon on a Nikon S2 and it works fine.
markjwyatt
Well-known
Not the pre-war Biogon, or at least i have read many places the rear element will interfere with the shutter. The post-war Biogon was redesigned to fit the iia/iiia.
Bingley
Mentor
I believe that’s correct. I was referring to the Biogon from the 1950s.
Highway 61
Revisited
I am feeling a bit reluctant to have this somehow deceptive "I use the best, you use the baddest, and the reverse" discussion go ahead once and again, since some other fellow seems to think that it's now been ended and forever
, but, besides thinking that eternity may last for too long a lapsetime, especially towards its end , I'd rather say I have no problem whatsoever with loading my old Contaxes, and that no horrid event happened to me yet. Both have their original, German made and properly marked, take-up spool (metal for the Contax II, plastic for the Contax IIa) : this might explain why it works flawlessly for me (most of the old Contaxes being now fitted with funky spools of unknown origin, if not Soviet). And : once you know how to load a MF camera, there is nothing difficult with the Contax, either. Quickly folding the film leader end, so that the take-up spool slot catches it securely, helps very much, too.OTOH, when I was owning and using my Leica IIIf, I couldn't have it loaded without using a pair of scissors to custom cut the film leader so that it had the typical +/-10cm long triangular shape which is needed for any "bottom loader" LTM Leica (or Canon), AFAIK.
Thus, I suppose that you have more than two hands indeed, to be able to load a Barnack while walking, one for the camera, one (or two) to hold the camera bottom and the take-up spool (which must be pulled off the camera housing), and the third one for the scissors (you may even need a fourth (or fifth) hand to hold the film while using the scissors, if you're like normal people).
Of course, any LTM Leica user will prepare his film stocks at home, custom cutting their leaders on the kitchen table so that the pair of scissors hasn't to be used in the field.
Joking aside, both those old systems have their pros and cons. What counts is the photographic result quality. The latter being provided by three things (in a random order) : what is photographed, the photographer's talent, and the lens.
Amen, Inshallah, Mazal Tov (in the alphabetic order).
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
Yeah, I'm sure I could get used to it, and by no means take my previous comment as a slam on Contaxes in general, just as an observation of what elements of the pre-war Contax system are preferable to the early Leicas, and vice-versa. I used to use the Kiev 4AM all the time - it was my introduction to the "Contax system" back when I was a poor post-grad - so I'm already pretty familiar with the Contax's quirks and foibles.
Of course, the Kiev 4AM has multiple "improvements" over the original Contax, the most significant of which for this discussion being the built-in take up spool. Even then, I learned quickly that if the sprockets don't engage fully with the sprocket holes on the film, you're going to get a lot of film transport problems, and the fact the back is totally removable makes that a fairly easy situation to find yourself in if you've got a particularly curled film leader. It's not impossible for the same situation to arise on a bottom-loading Leica, of course - but the fact the pressure plate is already in place makes it far less likely, in my experience.
I actually have two different take up spools for the Contax - one metal one with a "wavy" slot for the film, and one plastic one with the diagonal "slash" with a tooth in it. Both say Contax and Made in Germany on the end, so I presume both are legitimate. I like the slash one but I can't get the tooth to grip the film at all; it's probably just too worn to be functional.
On another note, I notice they both have a central slot; I assume that was for the old paper leaders of 235 film?
Of course, the Kiev 4AM has multiple "improvements" over the original Contax, the most significant of which for this discussion being the built-in take up spool. Even then, I learned quickly that if the sprockets don't engage fully with the sprocket holes on the film, you're going to get a lot of film transport problems, and the fact the back is totally removable makes that a fairly easy situation to find yourself in if you've got a particularly curled film leader. It's not impossible for the same situation to arise on a bottom-loading Leica, of course - but the fact the pressure plate is already in place makes it far less likely, in my experience.
I actually have two different take up spools for the Contax - one metal one with a "wavy" slot for the film, and one plastic one with the diagonal "slash" with a tooth in it. Both say Contax and Made in Germany on the end, so I presume both are legitimate. I like the slash one but I can't get the tooth to grip the film at all; it's probably just too worn to be functional.
On another note, I notice they both have a central slot; I assume that was for the old paper leaders of 235 film?
I use a spool from a Nikon AM-1 reloadable cassette as a replacement for the spool in the Contax. For the M3- bought a couple of extra spools and pre-thread them for quick reload.
Before the Kodak Retina II- preloaded film cassettes were not standardized.
Before the Kodak Retina II- preloaded film cassettes were not standardized.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/265291693757
Wow, an auction for a 1607 block Sonnar 5cm F1.5 with the "black ring" and nickel finish went for over $800. I converted mine to LTM, but kept the Contax Mount with shims in it so the lens can be unscrewed from the black J-3 LTM mount and back to the Contax mount. My favorite Sonnar, one of the first that fits into a J-3 mount.
Sonnar Conversion by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
sonnar_1607_2 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
I'm surprised to see the prices shooting up so. This is 10x what mine cost some 10 years ago.
Wow, an auction for a 1607 block Sonnar 5cm F1.5 with the "black ring" and nickel finish went for over $800. I converted mine to LTM, but kept the Contax Mount with shims in it so the lens can be unscrewed from the black J-3 LTM mount and back to the Contax mount. My favorite Sonnar, one of the first that fits into a J-3 mount.
Sonnar Conversion by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickrsonnar_1607_2 by fiftyonepointsix, on FlickrI'm surprised to see the prices shooting up so. This is 10x what mine cost some 10 years ago.
Erik van Straten
Mentor
I have exactly the same Sonnar (black ring, nickel finish) but with serial number 1628901. I use it on my Contax I v3 and my Nikon S2. Clear as a bell, no scratches. (This repeats something I've said earlier in this thread, I'm sorry for that.)
The bokeh is nicer than that of the RF-nikkor 50mm f1.4.
Erik.
The bokeh is nicer than that of the RF-nikkor 50mm f1.4.
Erik.
raid
Dad Photographer
I have a chrome Sonnar 5cm/1.5 that was made in 1938. It is in J3 (done by you). Is it also now costly?
The Skyllaney 5cm F1.5 LTM conversions- go for well over $1000. They do a total rebuild. I've spent 20 hours each on a couple of them, I know first-hand what goes into it. The 1607 lens above was a lot of work. These days- I leave the conversion projects to Skyllaney.
raid
Dad Photographer
I need to check him out again. He seems like a nice guy to chat with.
I would be more interested in a different lens conversion that would be unique. Maybe the QMB 50/1.4 Zeiss Planar.
I would be more interested in a different lens conversion that would be unique. Maybe the QMB 50/1.4 Zeiss Planar.
micromontenegro
Well-known
We must live in different universes, LOL
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
Maybe. I literally spent a good fifteen minutes trying to load a roll of Fomapan into my Contax II the other day with it slipping and tearing the sprocket holes every time. I eventually gave up and put some bulk-loaded APX 100 into a proper Zeiss cassette and using that instead... and I'm still not sure it hasn't slipped off the sprockets at points during the roll.
I've never had this much trouble with a Barnack - even a lowly Zorki.
I've loaded film into my first Digital Camera faster than that... Much more involved than loading the Contax II...
Pioneer
Mentor
That is interesting. I typically can load a Barnack pretty quickly but the Contax is still quicker. I use a Contax II regularly with both Zeiss cassettes and standard factory cassettes. Loading my Contax is pretty quick and simple. Your takeup spool and sprocket wheels may not be properly synched. You may want to have them checked especially if the sprocket teeth are tearing through the notches even after the film is loaded.