Contax Vario-Sonnar 35-70: wow!

[Rolf]

Congrats ! Nice that you got this lens.


I saw the auction and thought to make a bit by myself. But I have in the meantime to much lenses so I have renounced. Hopefully I will not think that this was a mistake if you will show here the first images.

[Olivier]

and what about the vario-sonnar 3.5-4.5/28-70mm ?

[zeissfan]

Hi guys, I am new to the forum, what a pleasure to read about MF lenses ! I had this and other CZ lenses for a Contax RX, which I still use. I wanted to try all of them on my Canon 5D MkII, but did not want to order an expensive adapter in case there was a problem. So with minimal outlay I managed to find a cheap one, about 20 euros or so. The Vario-Sonnar works well and I was amazed at the results, few pics included. The 50 mm Planar 1.4 and 28 mm Distagon 2.8 lenses however don't seem to work....is the Leitax converter the best option ? Any other suggestions ? Apologies if these topics have been covered recently

[Aanything]

I've been using a distagon 2.8/28 on a 5dIII recently with a 10 euros adapter and everything worked just fine. What it's wrong with yours?

[Olivier]

[Langstrum]

Wow wow wow, much more than I can expect before clicking to your thread

Congrats, this lens can replace few primes for sure.

[Lightshow]

This lens has the reputation of being one of the best zooms ever, beats many primes, the biggest downsize for me is it's size.

[scottgee1]

Seems fitting to add to a newly revived thread because I'm just returning to the forum after a long absence.

This may be common knowledge but in case it is not . . .

Zeiss kindly continue to maintain a download center of datasheets and info for historical kit:

http://www.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center.html

Germane to this conversation are the sheets for the Vario-Sonnar zooms under 'Contax-Yashica' that include MTF charts. Whilst the 35-70 is very good indeed, the 28-85 is better, especially at wider apertures.

Even more detailed evidence is available at the venerable Photodo site:

http://www.photodo.com/browse-lenses

Filter for Manufacturer/Contax and navigate to the 'Images' tab for a lens to see even more detailed MTF charts -- well for most if not all lenses.

All that said, I own both a 28-70 and a 35-70 and find I use the former more than the latter because I prefer the way it handles. The surprise is that despite clearly inferior MTF results, I also like the way it renders; perhaps I simply have poor eyes. For the record, I bought and returned a 28-85 many years ago. Optically excellent of course but so cumbersome I considered it a tripod only lens.

[calvin83]

[doomed-forever]

The 28-85 is a true Zeiss Gem, but very huge & heavy...the Yashica ML 28-85 is not that far from it, but does have a macro mode,
and is lighter, comes with a 67mm filter thread...and a rare lens, usually all few years comes one on ebay into mint condition.

Sadly, the 28-85 ML Yashica is like the Contax Zeiss Original just a Push-Pull Design, not a 2-way Zoom like the Contax 28-70/3.5-4.5
for example, which was especially built and the so called "Kitzoom" for the Contax Aria back into 1998. I remember quite well these days,
and when the Aria Brochure came out. The Yashica ML 28-50/3.5 onto the other hand, introduced in ca. 79, is like the Contax Zeiss 28-70
also a coventional Zoom Design...not a Push-Pull Zoom, too....but it's built like a tank, mechanically better than the Contax Zeiss 28-70.

[scottgee1]

doomed-forever, it's interesting that you bring Yashica options into the discussion.

A sometimes knowledgeable dealer with whom I've done business over many decades insists that Kyocera "made the Contax and Yashica lenses on the same line." His point being that the purported superiority of Contax lenses was nothing more than marketing hype. Discussion of higher quality glass, better optical formulas and tighter tolerances fell on deaf ears. Honestly, I never made the time for a side by side comparison.

As we all know, Kyocera did indeed offer similar lenses under both names; is he correct? Should I have bought Yashica lenses instead and given my extra $$ to a proper charity?

[doomed-forever]

The Contax Zeiss Lenses are of some higher Quality compared to the Yashica ML (MultiLayer Coating) Lenses,
but for comparsion, many Yashica ML Lenses are very good, especially compared to their Zeiss Originals....
for instance, the Yashica ML 50/1.7 prime is about 85 to 90% the IQ of the Zeiss Planar 50/1.7 AE Type lens,
just a very little bit softer, by a margin (if you get a decent copy) and a bit cooler colours - but way much
cheaper. The MM Line from Contax Zeiss is newer (since ca. 84 being made) and something better than the AE Series
from Zeiss. I do have many Contax Zeiss C/Y lenses, and they equal parts from Yashica ML - there is often only
a slight difference, the haptics, optics from Yashica ML Series is quite well made, and so is the IQ, often.

For example, there is a 1:1 Zeiss Contax Planar 50/1.7 comparsion vs. the Yashica ML 50/1.7 onto fredmiranda.com,
you've just to figure out that specific forum thread post with sample images. Many Yashica ML lenses are great
bargains, but unfortunately, since the Sony NEX/E-Mount Cameras came into play, especially the full frame A7-Series,
the prices have been raised quite a lot, as many people are hunting them on ebay and other online auction forms.

Stay away from the cheaper Yashica DSB series, they're not multicoated, older design, and not really compareable
to the Yashica ML Series - for Kyocera, the MLs where the "HighEnd" Lenses, whileas the DSB Line have been the
Bred & Butter Lenses back into their heydays. On top of the MLs came the Zeiss lenses into game.

The Contax Zeiss 35-70/3.4 is a very good Zoom lens, i do own a decent copy myself, too. It can easily rival prime
lenses, and it basically contains a 35, 50 & 70mm Prime all into one very decent Zoom lens.

The Contax Zeiss 35-70/3.4 is worth every penny, and better then for instance the Leica-R 35-70/4 Lens,
which is in fact an optimized Minolta 35-70/3.5 Design...and the Minolta let alone is a very good lens,
but it can't compete with the Leica-R 35-70/4 Version, and not with the 35-70/3.4 Contax Zeiss Lens.
(Leitz used the optical Minolta Calculation from their 35-70/3.5 Zoom lens back into it's heyday for Leica,
because there was a huge demand for Zoom lenses, not only Leica(R) prime lenses)..and later they've had fine-tuned it,
and released the bit slower aperture 35-70/4 Lens Zoom Leica-R Design.


Kyocera have had an agreement with Zeiss and produced some lenses under license.