Leica v Zeiss Contax

Started Dec 18, 2011 | Discussions
sillette
Regular MemberPosts: 164
Like?
Leica v Zeiss Contax
Dec 18, 2011

Was the Zeiss Contax a betterand more innovative rangefinder camera than the Leica?

Knorp
Senior MemberPosts: 2,968Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 18, 2011

sillette wrote:

Was the Zeiss Contax a betterand more innovative rangefinder camera than the Leica?

As the Lieca is now old technology the Ziess shows the Lieca a clean pair of heels.

Take care.

........................................................................................................
Bart

 Knorp's gear list:Knorp's gear list
Leica M8 Leica M9-P Pentax K-5 IIs Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JamieTux
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,554Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 18, 2011

I used to own the contax g2 the lenses were superb, af adds convenience, no way to mg except by measuring it and setting the distance made it unuseable to me!
--
James
http://photos.jamestux.com
http://photos.flickr.com/jamestux
http://blog.jamestux.com

 JamieTux's gear list:JamieTux's gear list
Sony SLT-A99 Sony Alpha 7R Sony 50mm F1.4 Sony 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony 85mm F1.4 ZA Carl Zeiss Planar T* +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BSweeney
Contributing MemberPosts: 903Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 20, 2011

Leica Rangefinder vs Zeiss Contax Rangefinder.

A debate fresh from the 1930s. Two different philosophies, the Contax was probably more advanced as it had a combined VF/RF compared to the Leica of the period. The Contax roller-blind shutter was much more complex, not better. Zeiss had to take a different approach as Leica had a patent on the horizontal travel shutter.

These days, 50 years after the Zeiss Contax was discontinued- the Leica showed much better "staying Power". Note that Zeiss did not come out with new lenses in Contax RF mount, but made them in Leica M-Mount. Even the C-Sonnar 50/1.5 was available in Leica M-Mount and Nikon S-Mount. So if Zeiss believes the Leica mount was better for reintroducing RF lenses, I;m not going to disagree. But i still like my Contax II.

 BSweeney's gear list:BSweeney's gear list
Leica M8 Nikon D1 Nikon D1X Leica M9 Olympus PEN E-P2 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Sanders
Junior MemberPosts: 38
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 20, 2011

Had both 50 years ago. Both were good picture takers, but would use the Leica
more than not because of its versatility. The odd thing about the Contax was

its shutter curtain, a vertical affair held together by silk thread, which was prone
to breaking.
nokton.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Irakly Shanidze
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,972Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 20, 2011

Historically, Zeiss has always been more interested in producing lenses than cameras. While Zeiss lenses have very clean and simple design and top performance, nearly all their cameras, including both classic and later RF models, had "something". While aways innovative and even ground-breaking at times, most Contax cameras were unnecessarily complex. I've used professionally ST, AX, RTSII, N1, N Digital, G1 and G2. I am still using C645 and, in my opinion, this is the only camera that is absolutely perfect in terms of design, even ten years after it came out.

I think that if Kyocera didn't abandon Contax brand in 2005, Leica would have much harder time entering medium format.
--
Irakly Shanidze
http://www.shanidze.com/en

 Irakly Shanidze's gear list:Irakly Shanidze's gear list
Leica M9
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mike_j
Regular MemberPosts: 145
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to Irakly Shanidze, Dec 20, 2011

It depends what part of their 80 year old history you are talking about. Just prewar it was Leica lll and Contax ll. The Leica was smaller, lighter and arguably more reliable. the Contax had a better combined rangefinder/viewfinder window and a longer rangefinder base. It had easier film loading and bayonet lens mount.

Leica came out of the war fairly intact and managed somehow to get back on its feet. Zeiss Ikon was broken up and Contax production was taken off to Kiev. Early Kiev cameras were really Contax and quite good but quality gradually went downhill.

Of the two I prefer the Contax to use but my Leica lll is the one with film in because of the unbroken legacy of lenses and mount that let me use reasonably modern lenses on the old body. I have a 15mm Voigtlander that comes into its own on the 1933 Leica, on my M8 it loses too much width.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Irakly Shanidze
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,972Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to mike_j, Dec 20, 2011

I was referring to a time span across the whole history of the brand, and I agree with everything you say. Except I never liked Leica IIIf. M3, on the other hand, even though came out much later, rendered Contax II obsolete
--
Irakly Shanidze
http://www.shanidze.com/en

 Irakly Shanidze's gear list:Irakly Shanidze's gear list
Leica M9
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulhofseth
Regular MemberPosts: 136
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to Irakly Shanidze, Dec 20, 2011

I have never used a Contax, but did use a "copy", the Nikon SP, which I traded for my IIIG. The lens lever-focusing on the Leica was slightly faster to use than the Contax\Nikon focus wheel. I liked the SPs multiple framelines , but as i vaguely recall, the IIIG framelines were more luminous. The early , collapsible Summicron 50 helped make the IIIG pocketable, and performed well, but so did the early "tokyo" 50\1,4. Never scanned the negatives, so pixelpeeping is out of the question.

P.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cmo56
Forum MemberPosts: 91
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to sillette, Dec 20, 2011

My very first camera was a Contax Super Ikonta A. It is with this camera that I learned the basics of a rangefinder usage and about light.
The other camera available was a Leica IIIf with a 50mm Summicron(collapsible).

I prefered the Super Ikonta. It was easier to focus and allowed usable copies by contact. The Leica contact copies were too small.

This was a long time ago. I did not have access to color film or an enlarger or even a light meter. But it was how I learned to photograph and process film (only B&W).
For me the larger sensor had the clear advantage.

I am sure that you were not thinking on those cameras when you asked, but it make me remember the experience of learning photography in the childhood almost 50 years ago.
--
Clovis

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sillette
Regular MemberPosts: 164
Like?
Re: Leica v Zeiss Contax
In reply to cmo56, Dec 21, 2011

I was thinking of the old cameras. My first "super" camera, after a Retina and Agfa was an old leica III with a Summar lens. I then got given a Contax II. A nice camera but too big after the leica. Then, in the mid sixties, I went the way of most and transfered to SLRs by way of Pentax and Nikon. I wandered back to an M3 and M4 before returning to Zeiss when I purchased a Contrarex. Now that was a big camera. Now I am back with an M8. Life is a series of circles.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads