Evaluation of my current collection

[kevin_weimer]

I have a collection of cameras that I bought basically on a whim, I'm learning film photography as a hobby and truly have no desire to go

digital, my cameras range in condition but here is what I have and am wondering on base values to see if I got took when purchasing

them as well as usefulness now and in the future

1. Zeiss Ikon Contax IIIa Color Dial light meter doesn't work but other than that camera runs fine, has a few dings on the bottom cover

2. Zeiss Ikon Contax IIa Black Dial shutter sticks needs serviced

3. Zeiss Ikon Contaflex Super a few minor issues with the shutter I've listed on another thread but cosmetically perfect and light meter

works

4. Zeiss Ikon Nettar 215/2 compur rapid shutter and nettar antistigmat 3.5 lens a few minor tears on front cover of case door that covers

mechanism but overall functional and nice

5. Nikon F2 photomic with dp-1 prism light meter isn't working camera body seems to operate fine numerous dings and some cosmetic

issues my user camera

6. Nikon F2 photomic, fully functional nice overall condition

Any and all thoughts are appreciated

[rogerwb]

<p>Check sold items on ebay for items in comparable condition.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Your best answers with the least amount of work, would be to look thru completed auctions on the big auction site and check some dealers' asking prices in used gear with condition similar to yours, such as KEH.</p>

[kevin_weimer]

My post wasn't especially clear my apologies on that. I was looking more at the quality and pros and cons of each camera

I have, I wasn't thinking when I posted and got things mixed up, that said thank you for the replies thus far

[brett_rogers]

<p>The Contaflex Super has a sharp version of the Zeiss 50mm Tessar and is capable of fine results. The 115mm Pro Tessar is not bad, the 35mm and 85mm Pro Tessars are excellent. It's true the interchangeable lenses share three lens elements across all the focal lengths, but they themselves contain a lot of glass pieces and are much better corrected than most people would expect. The film backs usually work too, and offer unparalleled flexibility (and lighten my load as I can take one camera body and three backs for B & W, C-41 & E-6). But their dark slides should be stored out of them when they are empty, to prevent the seals compressing. I run a strip of black auto electrical tape over mine when it is on the camera as simple insurance and it lives in the dedicated half case which also slows the light to the slide slot down. No issues at all with leaks.</p>

<p>Fifty years after these cameras were made it is quite unusual to find one in full working order because they have a Compur shutter and a Compur shutter in any camera is going to need cleaning to run at all the speeds. A Contaflex is no different. But as is usually the case with a Compur shutter once a CLA is done it will run pretty sweet. These were very well made cameras with excellent materials and a high standard of finish. They are capable of a lot of use as long as they have had a service. I do all my own (and occasionally, other peoples', too) and have made at least twenty, probably more, go beautifully again. They each have their good and bad points to work on. Personally I find the first Super one of the easiest to do. The Super B, BC/S are usually pretty good, too. The IV and probably the III have a couple of annoying quirks, as does the rare Rapid, and getting the focus ring off a I or II is harder than it really needs to be. But none of it is rocket science, and they are actually easier to work on than people probably think. At least I think they are, but I've done quite a few, so maybe it just seems that way now. They are massively under rated cameras in my view.</p>

<p>Here's a shot I did with a Super BC a few weeks ago. Fuji RVP in a magazine back and the 85mm f/3.2 Pro Tessar. Subject is a Tiger 100.<br /><a href="http://www.redbubble.com/people/brogers/works/13379632-triumph-t100">http://www.redbubble.com/people/brogers/works/13379632-triumph-t100</a></p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I am personally not hands on familiar with Zeiss Ikon gear. All I know: the Contax RFs were considered better than Leica for a while and the choice of journallists to be taken into combat zones. - So my related advice would be: check the lenses you have already and those you have in reach and if they justify it: rush to get any bitching Contax you have serviced by somebody capable while that person is still with us.- While getting your repair / CLA done you can probably ask for a look into the crystal ball about general condition and how worn everything appears when it will need next service etc.<br>

You seem to have enough built in light meter issues to justify investing into a great hand held meter. <br>

Nikon F2s are probably as good as they get & good enough forever, as long as you have them servicedd when they need it. - Used lenses seem easy to get too.<br>

"No comment" on the Contarex. - I guess its as good as it feels in your hands.<br>

What does "learning film photography as a hobby" mean? - You spotted a drugstore where you already dropped 8 rolls of color? Or you rigged up a darkroom and are confident that you'll print 3 frames of the next roll of BW you'll process? - What about you and the larger formats? What kind of subjects are you trying to go after?<br>

IMHO the average no sports, no wildlife, guy is well served with a lens line from 20 - 200 mm. Its nice to have 20 to 85/90mm for RFs And longer down to maybe 35mm for SLRs. After counting our lot of cameras we maybe wonder when / how to need them. For a journalistic approach 3 on you is pretty normal if you are skipping the zooms (which seems a good idea, although Nikon make some nice ones).<br>

Your posting did not mention lenses you have or haven't. - I guess most camera collecting people already pondered paving their yards with 50mms. - Anyhow it can't be wrong to have one for ech system and another to place on the spare camera in your display case, body caps are so ugly. But a lens collection really brings multiple cameras to life. - here I like going out with 35 & 90mm mounted 21, 50 135mm pocketed (I am a bit short on Leica bodies) with SLRs I normally grab 2 sometimes more for film speed changes & such. Whenever I want to get a shot done I try to bring a backup, just in case.<br>

I'm not sure how easy the seasoned Contax is to operate. - it displays just a 50mm frmaeline and relies on auxillary finders for everything else? If so I'd try to shoot one with a 50mm, would be confident about a 35mm with finder on the other -and hope that Cosina made a Voigtländer 20mm f4 in Contax mount too. - I'd definitely try to give a 85 / 105mm a go too.<br>

FTR: I am a long term Pentax k-mount guy. When I got curious about the RF experience, 3 Soviet made LTM bodies made their way to me. I started with 35, 50 85mm - the 50s seem to work OK the rest isn't stellar - the 35mm seems to need a lot of stopping down the 85mm has focusing issues. - From what I read it should be way better in Kiev / Contax mount. I later replaced these with a pair of Leica M beaters with budged 21 35 50 90 135mm + a 15mm that works on LTM too. I'm quite happy with the results I am getting. The longer lenses aren't the real strength of a RF system but I can shoot a musician placed somewhat statically behind a microphone or a sitting person quite well with these.<br>

To me it always felt awkward to focus anything wide on a SLR's screen, so I am much happier with RFS there. - Especially in dim light - i.e., borderline handholding conditions with fastest film - I am happier to have a bright RF instead of guesswork on a dim screen.<br>

Back to evaluating your current collection: If you have 20 35 85 180 for the Nikons you are fine & future proof, if not keep an eye on the market. <br>

35mm photography has its limitations. Usually I can't print these visible into an average newspaper. Thats why all the journalists shot 35mm back in the pre-digital days. - If you lick blood in your own BW darkroom you might get interested in larger formats and neglect the current gear for serious landscape photography. While a 35mm 1600 ISO neg is kind of maxed out on a 5x7" print, a 6x6 one looks still fine on an 8x10". - I do no way suggest to get MF / LF gear for out of house printing and processing, I just mentioned it as a sane and comparably cheap way out, if you ever feel hitting the wall image quality wise. - Hunting down the "bestest lenses ever made" for 35mm tears a way deeper hole into your pocket than a MF / LF kit. And not every legend the collectors fight over is really worth it results wise.<br>

Usefullness: I started serious photography with a handheld meter and got used to it. I see no drawback in this - some might shout: "inconvenient", others will argue: "real control, entire environment awareness..." - I am in the 2nd boat. My everday backpack held a tiny Kodak Retina !! <- folding RF and my good Gossen meter. I pulled the meter first and checked the environment lets say f5.6 1/60 ISO 1600 @ work. So what? - Bring the Pentacon to take a quality headshot on pushed film or pull out the Retina pray to nail focus on an environmental portrait with ISO 400 loaded? If you have your exposure set before you raise your cameras, you appear as fast as any other guy shooting more modern gear and won't dissapoint anybody uttering "fudge, too dark" after that person froze in their "I'm getting snapped" smile for way too long.<br>

As a rule of thumb: any coated prime of not too exotic focal length seems to compete well against modern zooms in the same price range and is likely to last longer than them.<br>

I'm fine with classic SLRs & TLRs outdoors. Indoors with flash I am hitting a point where I don't see my focusing results or framing anymore, way too frequently. <- Your F2s are "sufficiently modern" & excluded from this statement. - Anyhow: that issue "sold" RFs to me. Since I never handled a Contax I can't imagine how good your RFs still are. - With Leica M3 there is the issue of silvering on a beam divider aging away and RF patches turning dimmer. One independent repair shop in the UK offers resilvering of that prism and results are great enough to make that repair worth it. <br />IF your RF patches are brightness wise OK I would stick with the Contaxes.<br>

You are probably packing a bit of extra load with your equipment but as long as you can carry it, who cares? Only significant weakness in the 35mm realm: no TTL flash for you. - Does it really matter? - If you aren't shooting slides you should get along without it.<br>

Future: Zeiss Ikon repair people might die out. / OTOH maybe self help instructions get published? there are some for my Soviet LTM gear but I honestly confess that I am lacking the watchmaker hands & allures to dive into them.<br>

Classic Nikon gear should get serviced a while longer. The youngest techs should be 2 decades younger and maybe they even trained others while your F2 was already discointinued? - I believe that any mechanical item is easier to be kept in a working condition than another depending on electronic parts that are no longer available. So yes as long as there will be film you should be fine with your Nikons. - About (hybrid) digital: the least expensive film-"scanner" was 15 Euro and probably good enough to post results here on photo.net with it's image size limits. - Higher levels cause hassle.<br>

I doubt the comparable parts of my own gear collection to be in a relevant way different from what you got, so I 'll stick to them and not hunt down yours, since "what shall I pack?" already grew over my head.<br>

Cons of all your cameras: I guess if we jump into a pool with yours laying on a blanket next to lets say my (dedicated to this chore) beat up Ricoh KR 5 Super / Vivitar V2000 / FED 5c / beat up FED 2, I fear yours will vanish first and mine might attract a scribbled note if I'd like to buy something better. But honestly: thats no big issue. We can both hope the thief will get hooked by a Leica with DMR or webbok tethered Nikon D70 on a 3rd blanket nearby.<br>

Contax: might be good, pardon "the best" in theory. + Huge supply of pretty inexpensive mid range quality Kiev lenses. Cons: shorter supply of other, western & Japanese lenses than for example Leica where stuff is still getting made and elbowing older versions out of some folks' bags.<br>

Nikon con: There are DSLRs that can use the lenses you want too, so prices don't drop far enough.<br>

But lets stay serious: I guess the entire old lenses market gets swallowed by curious & playful Nex with adapter users...</p>

[brett_rogers]

<p>Conta<strong>rex</strong> and Conta<strong>flex</strong> are quite different cameras. I believe Kevin mentioned owning the latter...</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>In my experience, any Zeiss product be it leaf shutter SLR, rangfinder with roller blind shutter can be difficult and expensive to repair. I now avoid these for use. The Nikon is a camera usually not prone to repair issues and is somewhat reasonable to be repaired if needed. I still use mine.</p>

[chuck_foreman1]

You seem to liek the Contax and I do too.. but it's like love makes us blind to the many pitfalls. AS Many

mentioned getting them serviced is present and future problem. The IIa problems are signs of a needing

service. This shutter is definitely a future problem as it was purposely over-engineered. I'm not

recommending this fellow but a lot of reading on the maintenance of these Contax camera is Henry

Scherer. http://www.zeisscamera.com/about.shtml

[Julio Fernandez]

<p>In your position I'd get rid of the Contaflex and look for Soviet (Kiev-mount) lenses for your Contaxes. You will have to play the Russian Roulette on the auction site but it usually comes out well. The Nettar is a sweet little folder. The Nikon F2 is one of the best SLR ever, so get lenses for it. And get busy taking pictures. With the Contax set you have a solid RF instrument; keep the F2 for SLR work and the Nettar for 120 if you want it. </p>

 

[kevin_weimer]

I have the following lenses for these platforms: Nikon F2 - Nikon Series E 1:1.8 f=50, Nikon 1:2.8 f=135, Tonkina macro

SD 1:4 f=70-210 ; Contax - Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1:2 f=50, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1:1.5 f=50 ; Nettar is fixed with a Nettar

Antastigmat 1:3.5 f=10.5cm, Contaflex has a Carl Zeiss Tessar 1:2.8 f=50 as well as a close range 4 lens set for 0.1m

,0.3m ,0.5m and,1.0m.

The statement learning photography as a hobby means in my spare time I'm working to learn as much as I can of the

process starting with taking pictures and eventually moving to processing my own work once I'm taking good photos. I

plan to photograph mainly landscape, daily life scenes (street photography) and wildlife.

[craig_shearman1]

<p>The two Nikon F2's are among the best SLRs ever made. Anything that's wrong with them can be repaired back to factory specs -- google a guy named Sover Wong who works on nothing but the F2. I own five of them myself, two with motors, and they used to be a big part of how I made my living. They are not collectibles and I would hate to see somebody put them on a shelf. They are working cameras meant to be used. The Series E lenses were one of Nikon's early plastic embarssements, one of their first attempts to cater to consumers. Usable maybe but something to be sold or swapped. The 135 is actual professional Nikon glass but not a focal length I ever found useful even though I've got one I inherited from a friend. The Tokina (not Tonkina) is probably so-so at best. But with all of these you can still use them while you're learning.</p>

[kevin_weimer]

Yes Tokina is correct I misspelled it before. I'd like to add a leica m3 to my set eventually but it's not in budget at the

moment, I'm budgeting 1200 for a nice m3 with a lens and case. I do like my Contax and other ZI cameras too though I do

suspect problems down the road for service few will work on the contaflex now and the only one I know who services all

my ZI cameras is Henry Scherer his site is very informative and I have heard good things of his work, just wish the waiting

list wasn't so long, I'd love to have my cameras restored sooner but if the results are as good as I imagine they will be it'll

be worth waiting for.

[aplumpton]

<p>An interesting collection, but it depends what lenses you have for the Contax IIIa and Nikon F2, which could determine which you might find the most valuable. Given similar lens availability and similar states of functioning, the Nikon would probably give longest service without need for repair.</p>

<p>If your Contaflex shutter is working well, by all mens use it as it is a great image maker, even if fixed lens. It depends upon whether you can live with only a standard lens. I did for a long time. If it is like my former Contaflex I (which had a very fine 45mm f2.8 Tessar lens), it has no automatic mirror return, but that may not bother you. The Nettar is likely the pre-WW 2 model with uncoated lens (and the potential problems of adequate contrast) and it may be fun to work with as a 120 film camera if the bellows are in good condition.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Kevin, thanks for the lens info which I missed somehow (probably not reading the last page...). Apart from the Contaflex, I agree with others that the Nikon F2 is a fine machine, like its predecessor. Even the budget series E normal lens in plastic mount is a quite decent lens.</p>

[kevin_weimer]

Arthur, I've got the contaflex super dialed in and working great in settings 1 second up although b and shutter hold time

(green) settings are giving me fits only holding the shutter until release half the time. But as a daylight camera I imagine it

will be fine. I'm hoping to get more lenses for the Nikons (affordable) and the Contaxes (expensive) in the future and

depending on the camera working well the contaflex pro tessar series lenses (very affordable) as well. The nettar is

indeed is a pre war camera has excellent bellows and wears an uncoated lens but half the reason for buying it is shooting

vintage looking black and white photos and getting my feet wet on medium format 6x9 frame 120 film. I'm loving shooting

film mechanically in the digital age where cameras think for their owners and eat batteries it makes me feel more

accomplishment in my photos as I've got to meter the scene and then choose my own lens, focus and aperture. I have an

older Japanese made skylite meter that works pretty well and hope to gain a zeiss Ikophot soon. I'm still using flash bulbs

on my cameras right now and hope to bring the nikon up to date with a strobe flash in the near future as bulbs I don't

forsee being any easier to get as time passes. I have a nice Ikoblitz 4 fan flash for the Contaxes and contaflex and also

have an older bulb flash gun can't remember the maker at the moment that mounts to the camera tripod lug for larger

bulbs, although I'm looking into finding a Zeiss Ikoblitz III as well, I'm looking at a bc-7 nikon model to complete my bulb

flashes and an older nikon speed light strobe flash to modernize the Nikons which are my proposed primary after dark

system.

[Jochen_S]

<p>Good luck with the Nettar. - Maybe go for the contrastier processing suggestions with it. But old folders are a nice way to get started with MF, which feels pretty rewarding in the darkroom.<br>

Not sure about your wildlife plans. - They shout for pretty expensive & also heavy glass (which I skipped so far).<br>

Let me also utter a few M3 related warnings: 1st: I already mentioned the 50mm lenses paved yard, didn't I?... 2nd: The M3 will probably do mostly the same as your Contaxes. - OK it has frame lines for 90 & 135mm too, but the long lenses are the weaker side of RF photography and a 35mm with goggles is nasty to pocket, while not used. - I recommend looking for an M2 / M4-P instead, but still: if your Contax RFs are in good shape: why should you? - <strong>It is way more important to get the lenses you might like together, than the fanciest & most famous cameras to hold them.</strong> Last not least: the RF prism resilvering issue with M3. - Its about 300GBP for us foreigners. - Still cheaper than getting M6 parts installed at Wetzlar but... - I don't know whom this concerns. The service exists - A friend of mine had one M3 done there and sold me the other in a "somewhat still usable" shape. - I haven't had the chance to look through others that are still fine after all these years.<br>

I don't want to appear Leica bashing. - I like mine.. its just: Although grandmaster HCB stuck to a 50mm lens on one, I believe that system really rocks when you grab the big bag. If you intend to shoot just a 50mm why spend a lot on a camera that could do more? - I mean you can grab any other decent RF with a fixed 50mm and get pretty similar results for way less money.* The longer lenses are luckily the cheaper ones in Leica realm. - I believe I paid 80 or 120 euro for my 135mm f4 and a heavy 90mm f2 isn't necessarily more expensive than SLR counterparts. - OTOH its tempting to burn roughly 1K on each wide... (still budged shopping!) - My crystal ball might be fogged, but I do believe that Leica film body prices will drop further, while lenses might not. Correction the lens field might split into 2 realms: one "good for digital" and another "film only", which might go down or stay stable.<br>

Leica bottom line: Without an interest to get into wides I'd suggest staying away from Leica M, considering what you already have. Saving nickles & dimes, I'd hit a lens bargain first and the camera to hold it later.<br>

Meters: Maybe look above the ZI plate rim at Gossen? - Their (not too) old Profisix (Called Lunapro in th US? - I am talking about the one taking 9V batteries, not the older ones for discontinued mercury batteries) is huge, but there are attachments for any imaginable task floating around. - Here I have a TTL metering sensor to be used in front of 4x5" & 5x7" groundglasses and also a quite handy spot metering attachment for mine. - I love the latter for concert photography, since most of my cameras have no distinguishable spot metering characteristic (if at all) and would get fooled by stage lights. - Sekonic make a nice alternative to it that just eats too many luckily common batteries.<br>

Back to my bold sentece above: importance of lenses: I'm not sure what to suggest. One natural thought would be getting a tad deeper into Nikon. The usual suggestion to beginners: get a pair of inexpensive zooms - you have the long one already - Find out which focal lengths you like, buy these as a prime and stick to 3 or 4 of them. - Big issue: the system change on your horizon. - 35 & 20mm Nikkors might be dead capital if you 'll get RF counterparts later. - So maybe just zooms on the short end since there are none for RFs? - Maybe you'll spot another compromise in a bargain bin.<br>

Flashes: Over here Nikon speedlights didn't gain popularity until maybe the mid / 2nd half of the 80s, when their AF bodies came out and competed with the F3s. - I'd go for a Metz instead - There used to be Metz 40 which fit on the odd Nikon mount around the rewind crank. Metz 45 flash guns were very popular and became really cheap by now.<br>

Why Nikon after dark? - I'd grab the Contax or does it lack X-sync?<br>

*= I try to dodge all discussions about "Leica glow" etc. - I believe Zeiss are offering remakes of both your current 50mms in M mount right now. They have their fans, do their job etc., so I assume its enough fun to dabble with what you have. The M3 would really shine above all other Leicas if you placed a bet on Leica's more expensive stuff like Noctilux or Summilux where it benefits from its greater RF base, but If you go for something affordable, like maybe the old Dual Range Summicron, it might make more sense to have the wider finder of an M2 to watch the scene around your frame. </p>

[kevin_weimer]

My Contaxes all have flash sync so they are viable at night as well just a matter of having more night experience with slr

cameras in the past. I was looking at the leica simply for the service life (more people service leica than contax these

days) more than lenses as I can get great zeiss glass in every option I can get for leica. The Nikons were indeed more for

long range zoom photography than up close or wide I feel the rangefinder cameras do better for those applications

although the contax 35mm Biogon is another lens in the 1000.00 market. I have found good prices that don't break the

bank in the Nikon Ai and AiS series lenses in a variety of sizes from 50-300mm so far so I'm gonna go out on a limb and

say for all intents immediately they will be the most complete kit first but I do seek options available for the contax line as

well, the contaflex lenses are available dirt cheap but I don't want to invest much in it until I get it's shutter working reliably

100% of the time at all speeds even at that lens options are limited. I have a desire to get an older Graflex Speed Graphic

4x5 to mess with in the future as well they seem fairly common and have focal plane shutters, I can get set up nicely in

large format for under 500.00 it looks like using that platform and the availability of instant film for that size makes it that

much more appealing to me. One thing above all else I love having creative options and vintage equipment.

[Gus Lazzari]

<blockquote>

<p>"if the results are as good as I imagine they will be, it'll be <strong>worth</strong> waiting for" <em><strong>Kevin W.</strong></em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>In <a href="/neighbor/view-one?subcategory=1&neighbor_to_neighbor_id=346240"><strong>my experience</strong></a> <em><<< click</em><br /> and as a technician, <strong>it's not worth</strong> putting good money towards professional repair if you plan on loading them <strong>with film</strong> for real world photography. <br /> It's another matter if you wish to have these early Contax RF camera(s) restored so it dry fires as it should; then you can pull it out of the showcase to <strong>only</strong> admire, fondle & "click"... (Unfortunately, that's how I have to treat my "serviced" units)</p>

[AJG]

<p>If you want a 35 mm wide angle for your Contax cameras, be aware that the Nikon RF cameras shared (mostly) the lens mount. Lenses 50 mm and longer won't focus accurately (unless they are the versions marked with "C" on the lens barrel), but 35 mm wide angles from Nikon are fine on the Contax--I have a 35 mm f/2.5 which focuses accurately enough and is quite sharp. It will cost a lot less than a 35 mm post-WW2 Biogon, and unlike the pre-WW2 Biogon and Russian copies will fit and function properly. Good luck.</p>

[kevin_weimer]

Gus, I definately have desires to use my contax cameras perhaps more than look at them but am looking for a reliable

repair person who can also help me restore cosmetic deficiencies and lens troubles as well since I love the look of the

platform and wish to have good looking and more importantly good functioning equipment. Andrew, I will keep the nikon

close lenses in mind going forward as well.

[aplumpton]

<p>Have you considered opting for a more modern light meter rather than the Ikophot? The latter is a beautiful meter to look at and handle (I almost replaced my earlier one but had second thoughts in view of the age and consequent condition of most available used ones) but I wonder how durable these 1950s gems can be today or how useful they are for low light photography. I bought a more recent and mint condition used Gossen meter, a Luna Pro digital, for about $100 or $125 (cannot remember the exact used price). it is compact and versatile and very functional and accompanies my meterless 6x9 Fuji RF camera or Leica M4-P (a more reasonable priced Leica).</p>

<p>You may like the rendition of some older interchangeable optics for your Contax or Nikon, but I think it is key with these older lenses to consider their optical condition which in some cases is not as good as one might wish (haze, scratches of soft coatings, possible de-centering of elements due to possible rough handling, fungus if used often in tropical/humid climates, etc.). Sometimes, a more modern V-C optic for Nikon SLR or RF cameras (there was a series produced for Contax/Nikon rangefinders (www.cameraquest.com)) as well as their usual line for Leica M and LTM mounts and their Bessa cameras) is a good option and to also avoid costly servicing. They are often available new or mint condition in the same range of prices charged for some of the older optics.</p>

[kevin_weimer]

I have considered another light meter primarily the gossen meter you mentioned but desire the ikophot primarily because

I like taking a "vintage day" from time to time and use period equipment from the 40's and 50's it wouldn't be my primary

meter by any case due to age and the selenium cells deterioration over time. The lenses I buy outside of package deals I

look over very carefully to ensure they are mint condition optically with no haze, scratches, fungus or issues. Some of my

package deals have left me with lenses that are sub par that need repair but when they're practically free it's hard to pass

em up cost of repair is often less than the lens is worth or I simply discard the damaged lens an find a better one. I

appreciate everyone who has replied to my post as it's giving me perspective on where I need and want to be in terms of

equipment I believe I'm done buying cameras for a while and now need to focus on lenses for what I have as well as any

repairs needing performed on what I have. I need to get the gossen light meter and a couple other tripods I'm currently

using Ising tripods made in Bergneustadt Germany because they have a ball mount head and interchangeable studs for

European and American mounts. I have a large Star D tripod for pan and larger cameras as well. I do have one camera

left I'd like to buy, a Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 and it's related accessories. I will need to stock up on flash bulbs for my

ikoblitz 4, Heiland Research Synchro-Mite, and am looking for an Ikoblitz III for the Contax cameras due to a weak shoe

issue they have requiring a base mount flash, I'll also be looking for a modern flash for the F2 cameras for the inevitable

time where flash bulbs are no longer practical.

[Gus Lazzari]

<blockquote>

<p>"I definitely have desires to use my contax cameras" <strong><em>Kevin W.</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Kevin, it sounds like you've misread or misinterpreted my posting.<br /> Simply put, you're wasting money if you repair these early Contax rangefinder cameras in order to put film in them to reliably take pictures. <br /> <strong>They're film waste'rs !</strong><br /> <br /> <strong>i.e.</strong> If you ever get your hands on a Contax II (early version of the IIa) that has been professionaly repaired, put it on the highest speed, remove the back (as the take-up spool falls in your lap), remove the lens, and then <em>squeezing slowly</em> the shutter release (as we are all taught to do when taking a real picture), and see what happens. The 1st curtain slowly begins to open - what, overexposing the bottom 3rd of my image? You see, slowly isn't supposed to be part of a high speed shutter mechanism 'action'. <br /> <br /> In fact, on your IIa or IIIa, if one puts it on a quality 3 sensor shutter speed tester, good luck achieving anything close to within spec tolerances. Even with proper exercising during idle periods, check it in a few months, <strong>it will go off even more !</strong> This is no joke, this is not an opinion, *it's a fact.</p>

<p>If you re-check my provided link, you'll see that I had two completely different models (The 2 middle ones pictured below - *None of the four function properly), built in different years do exactly what I'm citing. As a result of having spent hard earned big bucks getting them repeatedly <strong>professionally repaired</strong> by supposedly the best tech, I've come to the conclusion that either they <strong>don't age well</strong>, or a <strong>bad choice of materials</strong> coupled to <strong>overly complex design</strong> makes them flat out "film waste'rs"...</p>

<p>Inescapably knowing that providing a warranty for these can kill a good service reputation, I refuse to take them in for repair...</p><div></div>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>www.collectiblend.com for pricing of cameras & lenses</p>