Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by MTC Photography, Jun 25, 2018.

  1. My contax 139 lens cannot fit Contax s2. ARe these two camera all has c/y
    lens mount ?
  2. Really odd since both are C/Y mount. The later S2 was released at a time when Kyocera had made the C/Y lenses in MM designation so they would function in program and shutter priority modes on Contax and Yashica models that had such capability. However, the S2 being manual exposure shouldn't need an MM. And older C/Y still could be used on program models, but with limited capabilities. So, really puzzling why it won't fit.
    Will the lens fit but not latch or not even line up with the camera lens mount? How many lenses have you tried? Keep us all informed about your progress. Maybe some other members who own C/Y lenses will post.
  3. Contax 139 mount has larger diameter than S2 mount

    Contax 139 Planar 50/1.4 distagon 28/2.8 vario elmar 28-70/3.5 mount diameter =51mm

    Contax s2 lens mount diameter =46mm

    Apparently, Contax s2 mount is not C/Y mount, it is a different class.
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2018
  4. How old is this Contax S2? There were some Contax SLR's made in the late 40's through 50's that were screw mount (M42) rather than the much later C/Y mount. Those lenses had a smaller diameter than the C/Y mount.
  5. Do you bŷ any chance mean the Contax G2?
  6. It is Contax S2 60 years anniversary edition,
    with titanium body
    I don't understand why Yashica chose to use different
    lens mount then the C/Y mount.making things more complicated. It means that who ever buy Contax S2
    must buy another set of lenses, and cannot use contax
    C/Y mount lenses
  7. You must have an odd camera, the 139 has the exact same lens mount as the S2. Can you post a picture of your camera with the lens off, and the lens mount?
  9. That isn't a Contax.
  10. By the time I got to the 6th image, I was really sure that wasn’t a Contax S2, or indeed a Contax of any kind.

    I think you may have your cameras confused my friend, because this is a Konica, not a Contax, so no matter how hard you try, that lens from your 139 will not fit.
  11. A starting summary of Konica lens mounts is at LINK
  12. I had a Konica T with 28/2.8, 50/1.7 and 135/3.4-4.5 in the 70s, later sold them to a used camera store, and bought a Contax 139 with Carl Zeiss Planar 50/2 lens.

    Recently I dig out a Konica Hexanon 50/1.7 lens in my

    Since Konica T or TC body is quite cheap on ebay
    for nostalgic reason, I bought a Konica TC
    body .it is in the mail.
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2018
  13. What? I already answered this in quite some detail Martin !

    Did you as "Moderator" really *remove my thoughtful corrections, detailed & time-consuming explanations?
    If so, I'm appalled by this blatant censorship...

    I'm one of the few camera/lens technicians who spend the time to answer questions & participate in this Pnet community. If I spend my valuable bench time to thoughtfully answer/correct something in these forums, then you can only imagine how upset I am by expunging such content. My participation was purly to warn folks not aware, that there was to be serious error left in the Pnet archives.
    If not addressed, I may just leave this community & review it accordingly in my upcoming YouTube channel...

    * Many other Pnet members also posted thoughtful replies in this thread that are now gone (Pictures & text etc).
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
  14. Vincent Peri

    Vincent Peri Metairie, LA

    This place is REALLY going downhill fast! If your latest post is deleted, I'm going to delete my membership renewal.
    Ray House likes this.
  15. Ray House

    Ray House Ray House

    Wow...just wow!
  16. Gus,

    Count me as one who VERY MUCH appreciates your contribution to this site.

    I was about ready to defend actions in this case, though, as the previous thread where you responded was titled to the effect of "Do not buy Contax S2 body without lens."

    I went looking for it, though, and it appears as though the entire thread has disappeared. That speaks VERY poorly of this site that-in many ways-is already circling the drain. That's especially the case if Martin was the one who deleted it.

    Thank you again for your willingness to contribute. Like every good camera repairman I know of, you seem to stay up to your eyeballs in work so your posting good information means a lot to me. Plus, I know that if I see it from you, I can trust it.
    John Farrell likes this.

Share This Page