ooops, I did it again ...( Contaflex?!?!?)

[Matthew Currie]

I shouldn't be allowed into certain places without my hands tied behind my back.

But OK, so I wandered in to Vermont Camera Works just as the boss tossed a

somewhat tuckered-looking but functional Contaflex SLR into the 10 dollar bin,

and I've never had a Contaflex, and....so of course it followed me home.

 

So anyway, a couple of Contaflex questions (if I understand right, this is a

Contaflex IV of circa 1956 vintage:

 

First, this thing has a 35/f4 Pro Tessar on it. So when I set the aperture on

the camera, do I assume that 2.8 is a nonfunctional duplication of 4, or do I

offset all the f-stops by one?

 

Second, the meter on this one responds well to light, but it seems way too

sensitive, in fact you have to put your hand in front of it to get it to drop.

I suspect that there's something wrong (duh!) but wonder if anyone has any

experience of what it might be. The photocell is obviously alive and kicking,

and the coupling does have an effect (but only with the window almost completely

blocked off, or in dim light). Any contaflex meter gurus out there, or should I

just go hand-held?

 

I threw some leftover Max400 film of uncertain date into the thing tonight and

went out shooting. I'll report back when I see results (if I see results). The

viewfinder seems nice and bright, and the lens looks pretty sharp despite what

looks like delamination around the outside edges, and I have some hope that it

will turn out to be a nice picture taker despite its odd ergonomics.

[Matthew Currie]

Addendum: I obviously didn't spend enough time googling this thing: It's a Contaflex Super.

[jeff_schneider]

I had a Contaflex long ago. I remember that the light meter had a door over it, which was supposed to be opened only in low light. Does yours have that?

 

Re. f2.8, I have no idea!

[Matthew Currie]

Definitely no door on a Contaflex super. I found an on-line manual. But the manual does not mention aperture setting on auxiliary lenses.

 

The good news is that KEH has ugly grade lenses for this thing dirt cheap, so if it turns out to be a keeper, I can grab a couple to fill out the kit.

 

I wonder how big a can of worms it would be to try taking the top off.

[ralf_j.]

can you take a digital photo of it? I have two of those with the full lens complement. I just want to make sure you have the same one as mine. I believe mines are the super, the only draw back with the contaflexes is that they never imprinted the model name on the camera body.

[ralf_j.]

I meant take adigital photo and post it here so we can take a look. DOn't worry about what you see on the side of the lens, it is just coating separation, and shoulve minimal to no effect on the outcome of the pictures. The coating separation is a common thing on the contaflex tessar lenses.

[jon_goodman1]

The top is not too difficult to remove. Please let me know if you need info about that.

 

Jon

[michael_p2]

Yes the Contaflex is a nice one. You can pick them up for next to nothing and yet the engineering is the quality as that for the superb Contax IIa of the same era. I had one for a while but the aperture froze up - a common problem, apparently. The only complaint I had was the mirror noise. Could wake the dead.

[marbing]

I have a working Contaflex super. It still does a good job and the lenses and accessories are still available and affordable through auction sites.</p><div></div>

[Matthew Currie]

I don't own a digital camera any more since mine drowned in a slush puddle, but the camera in question is as shown in Meryl's link. Definitely a Super with the little front dial. I think this may turn out to be a keeper, even though I am not fond of the handling and the non-returning mirror. It's got wonderful heft for its size. I can only imagine how much brass there is inside there. If the first roll comes out I might have to throw a couple of extra-cheap lenses into my next KEH order.

[bonsignore_ezio]

Does the meter react proportionally to changes to the film sensibility or/and shutter speed/opening?

[dave_powell2]

The aperture-stiffening mentioned above is certainly something to watch for in the future! I found a Contaflex B for a buck at a yard sale a couple weeks ago, and decided to grab it...even though the shutter and aperture didn't work at all. (I like challenges...and I LOVE trying to coax the old classics into working again). And after a couple weeks of occasional winding and firing, it's working again...but won't stop down below the widest aperture.

 

I haven't tried to disassemble it for cleaning, since I've read on the web that this is devilishly difficult. So maybe I'll try to see how the Tessar performs wide open!

 

--Dave

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

I am not familiar with the Pro-Tessar aux lenses. But the Kodak Retinas used to have a similar system with aux lenses. You do not have to offset the aperture dial, but the f-stop number on the aux lenses is the maximum f-stop available when using these lenses. So if you use a f/4 35mm aux lens, the maximum aperture available will be f/4.

[Matthew Currie]

thanks to all for the various advice. I'm assuming, as winfried suggests, that there is no offset, but that stops beyond F4 simply don't accomplish anything more.

 

The meter responds to changes in setting, so I know the coupling is all right, but it acts as if the ASA dial is not registering correctly, and it's always set for ultra high speed film. I'm guessing there's a resistor there, and it's shorted or open or dirty or something.