52yo Zeiss Ikon Contina, fixed Pantar 40/2.8, Kodak Gold 200

skida

This camera cost £4 at a car boot sale and is spotless. The exposure was calculated by "Sunny 16" method and the manual focus was mainly guesswork. The lens isn't pin-sharp but good to A4 blow ups and the colours are better than expected.

Sox hunting flies by skida, on Flickr

Ziggy in camouflage gear by skida, on Flickr

This was the only shot that required work due to the white cat in direct sunlight

Grrr... by skida, on Flickr

Neighbours by skida, on Flickr

Blyth Terraces by skida, on Flickr

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

Lovely result, that's a charming old lens without 'vintage' IQ issues

skida · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:39 pm Post subject:

Thanks Jussi. I think the DOF scale on the lens is a bit inaccurate as you will notice in the last shot with hyper-focal range set, the distant areas are oof. I am very happy with all other aspects of IQ and colour rendition.

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

Great result. I wonder if the film is that much better today than 50 years ago ? If that was the result back in the day, it was damn good !

skida · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:43 pm Post subject:

Dunno - I was three-ish when the camera was made Shocked

Thanks Lloydy

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Nice set of photos, you got a bargain! Love 3 (tickle tummy) and the candid group in 4, well done.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Great results !

The lens is a triplet, and a good one too. I have the same Pantar in a Contaflex Beta.
A triplet absolutely doesn't have to be less sharp than any other lens.
The problems if any are in the corners and the limited aperture.

BTW, look for the 30mm f/4 - Yes, your camera has interchangeable lenses - or lens elements.
The 30mm is actually a 7-element, when mated up with the two fixed in the camera.
These aren't rare, not expensive, and rather good.

skida · Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:11 pm Post subject:

I have looked very closely but I can't see an easy way to take the front of the lens off. It isn't really important, though, as I will only be using the camera for fun and maybe to use up some out of date film.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

You learn something every day.

It turns out there were quite a few later Contina models with the Pantar that are not interchangable.
I thought the Pantars were, and the Tessars and Novars werent. Not the case.

Minolfan · Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3438 Location: Netherlands

Most Contina models did not have (partly) changeable lenses; so it depends on what model you actually have.

skida · Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:55 pm Post subject:

Apologies. I thought I had put the model number in the title (I did everywhere else that I posted photos). It is the 1c model from 1958-1960.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Lovely cats! Great results!

skida · Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:25 pm Post subject:

Many thanks Attila!

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, looks plenty sharp enough to me, the shot of the neighbours shows that.

As for old film vs modern, in some cases they are the same, Kodachrome 64, Tri-X spring to mind, although I think they have made improvements in other films. Then again, you can only really find 200 and faster film these days, whereas I remember 100 and 50 ISO being common in the past. You can still buy crap grainy film though, just try some Kodak Colorplus 200... awful stuff.

skida · Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:17 am Post subject:

In the dim and distant past (late 70s), I seem to remember Kodak announcing a new type of negative emulsion, which had a different crystal structure and was going to give us sharper, less grainy images. I think it was launched as VR200. Not so long ago, on a film forum, some posters were trying to find out what Colour Plus actually was. It was manufactured in Mexico, packed in the US, and the codes on the edge suggested that it was the now-forgotten VR type film. All this is from my poor memory and I have no idea where to look to find this info again, so please forgive any inaccuracies.

I find Colour Plus to be very grainy and it gives really drab colours, giving lie to the name. Gold is a consumer film also, but I find it vastly superior to its budget brother.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Yes, I found the same with Colorplus, it is grainy and has drab colours, it has a vintage look to it but not an attractive one imho.

I think I have a few rolls of Gold, I do have a load of MAX 400, not tried it yet.

My favourite cheap colour film is Fujicolor 200.

Today I'm going to shoot some more film, I'll see if I have a roll of Gold to try, thanks for the tip.

philslizzy · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England

The contina lll had interchangeable lenses (will work on the Contaflex too) they are identified by the little 'tab' below the front of the lens