Switching to Contax Zeiss: need some advice

[JCarter180]

Dear forum members,

I am trying to build a Contax Zeiss lenses set. As for MF lenses I have the amazing 35-70/3.4 in Contax line, and a Voigtlander 40mm Ultron II. My AF lenses set is made by:

Canon L 24-105 IS
Sigma 85 1.4
Canon L 200 2.8 II

all mounted on a Canon 6d with Eg-s screen.

As soon as I started to use the 35-70/3.4 I basically stopped mounting any other lenses on my camera – apart for the VG (street use) and sometimes the 200mm prime from Canon (landscape mainly).

Now I am thinking to buy more Contax primes and maybe selling my AF set - so far the less used is the 24-105 IS.

My main use is for documentary/reportage work and landscapes. I would like to make a smart move to Contax Zeiss without overloading my bag with lenses and emptying my pockets with redundant purchases.

On the wide side I already opted for a CZ 28mm MM – I am in the process of buying it (slightly OT: is it worth considering a 21 3.5 Olympus OM as a possible UWA option? )

I found a decent price for one of the most praised CZ, the 100/2 Planar MM (around 700£ in mint conditions), and I thought that it could be a good substitute for my Sigma 85/1.4 and a great landscape/portrait lens as well.

On the other hand, for the same price of the 100/2 Planar, I could get:

50/1.7 AE
85 2.8 AE
135 2.8 MM
100 3.5 MM or 80-200/4

( I do not need to buy them all, I was just comparing prices and utility for my needs)

A third option could be a 100-300 zoom with some of the prime lenses listed above.

Considering my needs and my actual lenses set, which choice would you make?


Thanks for your help,

Chris.

[iangreenhalgh1]

The Sonnar 3.5/100 is a truly superb lens and a lot cheaper then the Planar 2/100, so I'd recommend getting the Sonnar 3.5/100.

The Sonnar 2.8/85 is another truly superb one too.

Unless you actually need the speed, the slower lenses are the better purchase.

The 100-300 is an amazing lens, can't imagine regretting purchasing one.

[rbelyell]

hi chris

just an fyi, i used a lot of cz and mf lenses on my old 5d and found the c/y>eos adapters with focus confirmation chips to work just great. the green light pops on in the vf and the cam beeps to confirm focus. seldom missed.

to your question: first, i had both the 50/1.4 and 1.7, and honestly i didnt find either really special. maybe save a few bucks and try a cz biotar 50/2, which i personally liked better, though its not in c/y mount. i think exakta and m42 if memory serves me.

the contax cz 85/1.4 was literally one of the finest lenses i ever used. i cant vouch for the 2.8, though i cant imagine it would be a 'bad' choice. but the 1.4 is one of those 'special' lenses we nuts are always chirping about. if it was me, i'd spend the bulk of my money there.

on the long end the 135 is awesome, but for a lot less money, the 120/2.8 cz biometar is imo every bit as good. it comes in pentacon six mount, and once in a while in m42, and its easily adaptable to canon--i used a P6>m42 + m42>eos with a confirmation chip, and it worked great.
tony

[iangreenhalgh1]

I have the Biotar 2/58 and Biometar (not Biotar) 2.8/120. They are good lenses but if the OP is looking for the technical excellence of the later T* Zeiss, then they won't be what he's looking for.

[ManualFocus-G]

If you can find a Vario-Sonnar 100-300mm, then I'd definitely recommend that. Also, I would snap up an 85/1.4 as soon as you find one That said, the Sigma 85/1.4 is also superb and has a lovely rendering (plus AF if you need it).

I prefer the 50/1.4 over the 50/1.7 as the minimum focusing distance is shorter and you get the extra speed of an f/1.4 lens.

Personally, I don't use the 135/2.8 on full frame...I just don't like the focal length (personally). The 28/2.8 is a cracker though and I'm sure you will enjoy it!

[versanteest]

Hi.

Like you, I'm making a Zeiss set in Contax Yashica mount.
Your 35-70 is a fantastic zoom ! (is MM version?)
You spoke about reportage: I would say that you need to cover a focal length from 25mm to 200 mm.
If you want stay on zoom way, you can buy Contax MM 80-200/4, so you will cover 35-200mm range.
Another chance is to monetize your 35-70 and to buy a set of prime.

With a little patience, you also can find prime lenses at a good price.

This is my experience (purchased in the last six months between ebay and private sellers):
25mm f2,8 = € 250
50mm f 1,4 = € 160
85mm f 2,8 MMJ = € 150
135mm f2,8 MMJ= € 150

The choice depends on what you prefer: convenient carry kit lenses (set of zooms) or many lenses in the bag.

Regards

Pasquale

[Mark]

+1 for VS 80-200mm. Probably 100-300mm is better, but its performance/price ratio is not bad!

You should also get a Leitax conversion kit for the heavier lenses. It is rock solid!

[JCarter180]

Thanks for all your insights and kind answers.

100-300 is surely an amazing lens but when compared the MTF chart of the 80-200, I do not know if the optical difference is worth the price difference (250£ vs 600£ or more - the latter only available for reasonable prices on the Japanese market; in EU prices rise up to 800-900£!!).

The 85/1.4 is a nice lens and I can easily imagine that is better than my Sigma 85/1.4 - however I thought that the Planar 100/2 was the "special" one, and more suited for both, portrait and landscape.


135/2.8 is really tempting considering the low price, as well as the 50/1.7 - I cannot find a cheap 50/1.4 so far.. plus I already have the Voigtlander 40mm in that focal length. I will keep waiting on ebay and local sellers..


Thanks also for the insights on other lenses that I did not considered in my original list.

Chris

[wuxiekeji]

135/2.8 is definitely a LOT of bang for buck. Highly recommend it. Very sharp, really easy to nail focus, and cheap enough that you're willing to actually take it everywhere and shoot with it. It does cause some purple fringing but not terrible. All shot wide open:





It's also a fantastic portrait lens for crop cameras too. (It doesn't focus very close so it may be less good for portraits if you're shooting full frame)

[JCarter180]

Thanks for the samples! It seems a nice glass!

Chris

[asterinex]

The zoom you have is amazing. Just a little big and heavy , just like most fast contax zeiss lenses.
I would concentrate on the slower, smaller, cheaper ones;
Tessar 45mm, 50mm f1.7, 28mm f2.8, 85mm f2.8, ...

[frenched]

I vote for the 80-200, mainly because I have one and it's a spectacular zoom. I suppose if I had the 100-300 I'd vote for that too.

I suggest getting the less costly 80-200. Then you can apply the savings to the 35-70 (or 28-85), which is an excellent but pricey complement to it.

[JCarter180]

Thanks again for your replies and hints,

yes, the 80-200 seems a good bargain and the price for a 100-300 is more than double, if not 3x.

In the 100-200mm range do you think the two lenses can be more or less comparable?

I will use the zoom for landscape work mainly, and in all these years I noticed that 200mm at the end of the tele-lenses is more than enough for landscapes (of course it is a personal taste ) .

Thanks again for your attention,

Chris.

Ps: nobody suggested the 100/2 Planar in the previous answers. I guess investing all the money in that lens - when there are other good options - it is a bit limiting.

[hoanpham]

Planar 2/100 is an awesome lens, only if you can afford.

[fattyu]

I owned a few Zeisses. SOme CY.

I had the 50/1.4 and 50/1.7 planar as well. I honestly say get a yashica ML 50 1.7 I truly belive it to be better lens. It marginally sharper then the planar 1.7 and a lot sharper then the 1.4. But the real deal is that I actually truly really hate the slr planar bokeh. its nervous. THe yashica is better. Still not very good. But better

Now on the other hand if you are sold on CY zeiss lenses please do not miss the 28/28. its truly the bestest perfectest glass I ever used tested owned. I sold all my zeisses. Kept this one. ( oh and selling the ZM planar 50/2 was stupid... )

[Mark]

[barryreid]

I'm rebuilding a C/Y fit Zeiss set at the moment. In the past few years I've owned and sold ona number, my thoughts are as follows -

18/4 MM - Great lens, wish I'd never sold it could be sharper at the corners but has a special character and great on canon crop cameras.
25/2.8 MM - A fine lens and a nice focal length.
28/2.8 AE - Really sharp always felt a touch too big.
35/2.8 MM - Sharp nicely balanced on a 139/159 type body.
45/2.8 AE - Never liked the handling. results OK.
50/1.7 AE, 50/1.7 - MM I like the late model MM the best, agree with the comment that the Bokeh can be hard however, IMO, that works well in some high contrast situations.
50/1.4 AE, 50/1.4 MM - as above, the MM is subjectively better. SMC-M Pentax 50/1.4 is prob better all round tho'
85/1.4 MM - Awesome.
100/3.5 MM - Sharp enough, but I've never got on with the 100mm focal length, so should have known better than to buy it...

Also the following Yashica ML lenses
21/3.5 - OK, but not quite the lens it's hyped to be - not quite as good overall as Canon's 16-35 mk1 at 21mm.
28/2.8 - Ditto
50/1.7 - Perfectly good and TBH you don't get much more from a Zeiss, but then again, is any multi-coated 50mm lens really that bad?
35-105/3.5 - Very good as a walk around zoom.
28-85/3.5-4.5 - not quite as good as the 35-105 IMO.

What I'm going to end up with, having worked through most of the sensibly priced lenses is the following set - 18/4, 28/2.8, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 & Mutar I. At the telephoto end the Tamron 70-210/3.5 SP remains my trusty companion, but I may go for a Zeiss 135 as well.

I'd also recommend the FR-I as a cut price film body, as long as you don't need a frame counter

[extra|ordinary]

My only contribution at this point, contrary to popular opinion, is to consider the 45/2.8 Tessar pancake. I have this lens and love it. I owned the CV 40/2 prior, and while the extra stop is nice at time, the Contax 45mm pancake is a clear winner for me. The CV 40/2 is a very sharp lens, but I always hated how it rendered. For me, the Contax is every bit as sharp, but still renders beautifully.

I remain interested in other lenses in the Contax lineup, but have no other personal experience to contribute at this time. That said, I have just recently acquired the 35/2.8 PC-Distagon that I am very eager to use. I have been waiting for a Leitax mount to arrive.