pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I am getting interested in reading about the "outrageously priced" Zeiss Zontaflex TLR camera. It seems to be rather valuable and difficult to find reports on. Is it totally a collector's item these days or do you know of anyone who is posting images that were taken with such a camera? I wonder how good the lenses were and how different [if at all] the TLR lenses were from lenses made for the Contax cameras. I have one Zeiss 5cm lens that is in Leica Thread mount, but that seems to have used the optics that were meant for a Contaflex TLR. This is the main reason for my interest in the Contaflex. I have no wish to buy such a camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Difficult and very expensive to repair and they are all old and need repair for complex age related issues. There is but one person doing proper repairs on them and he is in need of repair himself. Others are forced to do "patchy" repairs due to lack of skill/parts. I would look elsewhere for a user camera. The repairman who does the work has a website describing the problems and his repairs. I suggest another camera that uses Zeiss lenses such as the Contaflex SLR. A Rollei 35 with 3.5 Tessar lens is another suggestion. In general, German optics are different than Japanese and if that is what you like, any German camera will do. http://www.zeisscamera.com/services_tlr.shtml Check out the link. When you are all done, you still have an uncoated 1930 lens camera. I think you would like an early Rolleiflex with 3.5 Tessar uncoated lens. Much more repairable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_foreman1 Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Yes me too, I'd love to hear from somebody that has one or uses one! It's quite an interesting design cutting edge in it's day and all. But as Ronald said in the the end you've got an uncoated pre-war camera and lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Hi Ronald, I am searching for information on what users of such a camera could tell us about the camera. Of course, the repair nightmare information that you have mentioned is very important to keep us away from ever buying such a camera even if we had the cash. As for "uncoated pre-war" lenses, these are lenses that I currently prefer over all other type of lenses. If you haven't tried a Sonnar 5cm 2.0 or 1.5 (pre-war), then you have not yet seen how beautiful a renditon you can get with such first class optics. Brian Sweeney is a believer in such lenses. He is also an optics expert who has kindly helped several people to obtain Sonnar lenses changed into LTM from Contax mount. I have Sonnars in both mounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Chuck, The camera seems to be an amazing "photo machine" from the design and construction perspective. It was supposedly a Zeiss masterpiece of some sort. I saw this morning two 135mm/4 lenses on "sale" for the TLR. The price was over $1500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razondetre Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I had one of these once. The shutter was not working properly. Never took a pic. with it. Very heavy. Generally a nice solid camera. Being it is 35mm the lenses from this and the Contax are virtually identical. The mount looks the same as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Joseph, This makes sense; the lenses are very similar. The TLR lenses have a notch cut at the mount for RF focusing. It looks different from the Contax mount lens mount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Zeiss Ikon had the reputation of making fine cameras which were overly complex. When new they worked wonderfully, but were incredibly difficult and expensive to repair, even in those long-ago days. The Contaflex TLR was a good example of this. For example, instead of having a 50mm viewing lens to match the taking lens, it had an 80mm viewing lens with differential gearing to match the focus of the taking lens.<P>From there it was all downhill. Great optics -- disaster camera bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furcafe Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I have only handled the original Contaflex (both times during a recent vacation in Japan on a tour of fancy camera stores), but can confirm that it is heavy & well-made. From what I gather from my (English language) Zeiss Ikon history books, it was indeed a complex beast, even for Zeiss Ikon, mainly because it combined the workings of the Contax RF cameras w/a TLR w/exposure meter, i.e., all the most advanced technology that ZI could bring to bear @ the time. Zeiss Ikon offered a lens conversion service for customers switching to the Contaflex from the Contax system. The lenses were optically identical to the versions made for the Contax RF, though quality control may have been even higher for the Contaflex because it was such a prestige product. Similar to you, I have a 5cm/2 Sonnar in Contax RF mount that, according to Marc James Small & Charlie Barringer of the Zeiss Ikon Collectors Group, appears to have been originally manufactured for the Contaflex (supported by the fact that it has an additional aperture mark): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZICG/message/7350 For a direct user experience, you might want to ask Vince Lupo on the Rangefinder Forum: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58956 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Christopher, I feel lucky to own a lens that was made for the Contaflex TLR since extra QC may have been used to ensure high quality for this prestigious camera. I will have to check my lens to see if it has an extra aperture mark. Thanks for the tip to ask Vince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furcafe Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 You're welcome, Raid. The Contaflex & Kodak Ektra are the 2 "white elephant" systems that I wouldn't mind having as a collector, but scare me away as a user on account of their legendary complexity/unreliability. I'm just guessing about the extra QC, but my Contaflex/Contax lens is as heavy as my 5cm/1.5 Sonnars despite being slower & performs better than my other 5cm/2's from the same time period (albeit they're all collapsible & less rigid). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I got to play with one on my last trip to PA. Not really a very practical camera to shoot with IMO - rectangular format are no good for WLF's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razondetre Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Yeah? Well, the Bolsey C is no easier to use or any of the obscure Japanese 35mm TLRs like the Meisupi or ToyocaFlex. I've tried the few 35mm TLRs I could find but they are, in my opinion, too quirky in operation and not quick to focus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Christopher: I feel that my 5cm 2.0 LTM with the Contaflex glass is a solid performer. The lens is heavy and rigid. Mike: Thanks for the tip. I will ask him about how he uses the camera. Joseph: The Rolleiflex TLR is easy to focus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles_s. Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Raid, There is a reason the Contaflex is so expensive. In real terms it is one of the most expensive 35mm still camera I know of. In 2006 Cdn dollars it was $6,396.23 Cdn. I used it as an example in an article for my local camera club about calculating camera prices in real terms. If the camera was rare at introduction because of price it likely will likely be a rare camera always. "Per Robert White, Discovering Old cameras - 1839-1939, ISBN 978 0747802662): “a Contaflex TLR in 1939 with an f2 Sonnar lens cost £71 17s 6p.” Using Measingworth.com this equates to £3,062.48 in 2006 pounds. con Then using RC4152 one learns that the average exchange rate between British pounds and Canadian dollars was 2.08858$/£. Therefore, in today’s inflated money a Contaflex TLR would be worth $6,396.23 Cdn." See, http://www.phsc.ca/phsc_e-mail/Vol-6/PHSC-E-Mail-V6-12.pdf on page 8 where they don't give me credit and http://www.phsc.ca/phsc_e-mail/Vol-7/PHSC-E-Mail-V7-1.pdf on page where the correction was posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 Just noticed my name mentioned in this thread regarding the Contaflex TLR. Here's an update on my particular beast... I got it off eBay, sent it to Frank Marshman at Camera Wiz for him to replace the ribbons, give it the full spit and polish etc etc. I got a 135mm lens for it too (about as expensive as the camera), and proceeded to run exactly one roll of film through it. I found that there was shutter capping at anything above 1/100th of a second, and you have to be careful not to shake the camera due to the use of a lever as a shutter release. I managed to get a few decent shots out of it before having sent it back to Frank to fix that shutter capping. As of last week, (November 20/08), Frank still had it completely taken apart, so hopefully with enough prodding I'll have it back by the end of the year. Despite these initial technical hiccups, it is definitely now my favourite camera -- you really need to hold and handle this thing to really appreciate it. Prior to having purchased it, I was serious dissuaded from buying it by those 'in the know'. Granted, it isn't a speed camera, verticals take some getting used to (not a big deal, really), and it weighs about 4 lbs or something, but if I wanted an easy way to take pictures I'd use my Blackberry. It's really not the point with this camera, or any vintage camera for that matter. It definitely slows you down, which for me is a good thing. So, if you can afford it and expect to send it away for a full overhaul, it is quite a rewarding camera to own and use. Vince Lupo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 Just as an update -- here's a photo from my singular roll of film taken with the Contaflex TLR. It's using the 50mm f/2 Sonnar lens. BTW, the mount for the Contaflex is in fact different than a Contax -- not to mention the price! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 We'll try this again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 One more time with feeling.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted November 28, 2008 Author Share Posted November 28, 2008 Keep on trying,Vince. I am looking forward to see a Sonnar image with the Contaflex TLR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 <p>Okay, last chance on a photo from my one roll of film......</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 <p>It still won't work. Try this link and you'll be able to see three shots there, about halfway down the page:<br /> <a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58956&page=2">http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58956&page=2</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted December 15, 2008 Author Share Posted December 15, 2008 <p>Thank you, Vincent. I saw the photos on RFF.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent_lupo Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 <p>I got the camera back from Frank -- this camera is unreal! I have a roll of Tri-X in it right now, and am hoping to have it shot by the end of this weekend. I'll be sure to use the 135mm lens as well, and will post photos to let you assess the next round of results -- judging by my track record of posting photos here, they may end up on Rangefinder Forum instead!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wendy_ginnings Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 <p>I have a Contaflex IV camera Tessar 1:28 with 50mm lens model number 1719849 that my father bought when he was in Germany during WW2. It has the original case as well as numerous accessories like filters and other lenses. Works like a dream for its age IMO. I still use it, although not as much as I use my digital camera. He gave it to me many years ago and I really enjoy using it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now