Contax II - Port Stanley Ontario

Some shots from my recent trip to Port Stanley Ontario. The Contax

has really become my #1 film burner these days. Be sure to check-out

the earlier 4 pages if you missed them.

 

<p><b><a

href="http://www3.sympatico.ca/mskovacs/pv/ContaxII/5/contax2_5.html">Contax

II in Port Stanley</a></b>

Hi Mike. Those shots from Port Stanley are great; very sharp and clear, and such great tone. All the other shots are great, too. I've always loved Queen West for photographic inspiration; you just can't beat the street life. Hmmm ... maybe I'll have to get me one of those Contax IIs? Oh god, what am I saying ... Remember daily affirmation: "No more cameras, No more cameras ..."

 

Nancy

Nice work. I just dropped off a roll (200 asa color print) from my Contax II with the collapsible uncoated Sonnar 2.0/50. Its a camera that an uncle bought at the port of Antwerp in 1938, when the entire clan left their farms in Czechoslovakia and fled to Canada, and they had to spend their last currency. Unlike the first roll that I shot that was low-contrast, I mounted a lens hood this time. I hope to report great success in due course.

Those shot are outstanding, Mike. But you are missing a key

in-between focal length-- the f2/85. Sorry, I don't have the Sonnar, but I have the Jupiter 9 version. I'd like to lend it to you for the summer to see what that lens can do under your supervision. I have finder and cases for it and the lens. I'll write off line to ask particulars about shipping them.

 

Great work! You are a excellent photographer, Mike. Keep em coming!

Mike, outstanding clarity! Nice compositions.

Mike: I can't believe how clear and sharp your pictures look on my monitor. The actual

prints must be fabulous. Likewise, your scanning skills are first-rate.

awesome pictures Mike. amazing glass on your Contax. thanks

Nancy, you HAVE your Contax II already although your camera's frontplate is engraved "Kiev" ;-))

Lovely work Mike. I particularly find the infrared images work well with Sonnar lens.

 

It's good to see Port Stanley in daylight. My experience of it is mostly spent by the fringe of Lake Eerie, walking its smooth sands to firelights of barbeques midsummer at night.

 

Thanks for showing - these images brings back a lot of nostalgia.

Hey Mike, very nice work. I see that you've really become quite proficient and comfortable with te Contax II.

I have a Kiev 4A coming soon with a Jupiter 8 lens and, I would just pee my pants with excitement if my photos were to be as sharp as what you have posted. I may have to break down and buy a contax with a good Sonnar lens. Sometimes I get dishearted at my results from the equipment that I have. Out of twenty one cameras one should get one good photo, ha ha! I may dump all my classics and buy one good camera ....what would you suggest?

Funny thing, but the quality of these shots brings to mind the photos you showed of the inner guts when you had it in pieces. An impressive achievement to bring it back up to this.

Awesome shots the quality amazes me

I think those of you with Kievs are capable of the same results, that is, if the camera and lens are properly overhauled. I put 12-20 hours of my time into every Contax that has landed in my house thus far.

>I have a Kiev 4A coming soon with a Jupiter 8 lens and, I would >just pee my pants with excitement if my photos were to be as sharp >as what you have posted.

 

Well Ron, I do have a Kiev 4a with an 8. So where do we ship the Depends too?

I will say it again and again - every time I get a roll back from one of my Kiev's and a Jupiter 8, I am more astonished. I don't have the scan here at work, but I scanned one of the negs that I shot of my grandson at the car show at 5400ppi, and I can read the script around the lens bezel of the Olympus Trip 35 camera that is hanging around his neck! This is the shot I'm referring to scanned at 511ppi, and I also post one of the other shots again - large image.<div></div>

Maybe you don't need depends since these are digital fakes and apparently look too good to be made with a film camera from 1938. Seriously, on the weekend I received an anonymous email questioning the validity of these very shots.

 

The people on page 4 from Toronto all sat across from my Contax II as it captured their faces. I had a slew of cameras with me, none digital, that is, unless I've found a way to convert a Contax II to digital :)

Large image - Kiev 4a and Jupiter 8 1/250th @ f16 Fuji 200 Colour Neg<div></div>

Mike - These are superb shots - and I've no doubt at all that they are shot with your Contax II and zeiss / Jupiter lenses.

Mike - These are superb shots - and I've no doubt at all that they are shot with your Contax II and zeiss / Jupiter lenses.

There is something wrong with the TONES. What i see is mostly grey. i don't see rich black and white tones.

Alfred - I see superb tonal range, even here on my un-calibrated monitor at work.

The histograms in photoshop show pure white and pure black, if you want to go by the numbers.

 

Can you see each square of the gamma scale that I've attached? Set brightness full, then adjust contrast so you can see the difference between the darkest tones.