| Author |
Message |
    
CJ
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 10:08 pm: | 
|
Hi All,
I don't know much about either of these marques, but I distinctly remember as a kid seeing Contax camera ads on US television in the late 70s and early 80s. At the time, I took it for granted that Contax was yet another Japanese camera manufacturer. Recently, I happened to be leafing through an old issue of National Geographic c. 1975, (the issue with the Truk lagoon cover story, if anybody wants to check it out) and noticed a Contax RTS ad on the inside 3rd cover.
The ad copy explains that the electronics are by Yashica, optics by Carl Zeiss, etc.
Years on, I of course understand that Contax is/was a German camera company, having read about their well-known RFs, etc.
But it begs the question: Did Yashica/Kyocera buy Contax at some point, or was this perhaps a joint venture, as in the Leitz/Minolta connection? In my experience, Contax seems not to have as much of a semi-legendary reputation that the Leitz/Leica names evoke. Can anybody explain this pairing?
-CJ |
rick oleson
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 07:38 am: |
|
Contax was never a company, either Japanese or German. The original Contax was a rangefinder camera made by Zeiss Ikon in Germany. Before World War II, the Contax and its lenses were generally considered to be at least equal and in most technical respects superior to the Leica equivalents. The camera was somewhat larger and heavier though, and Leica was still the market leader.
The original Contax manufacturing facility was destroyed in 1945 by British and American bombers; what was left wound up in East Germany, not the ideal place to launch a commercial revival, and the Soviet Union in any case demanded and received the Contax camera, lenses, a new manufacturing facility and engineering support as war reparations, and moved the whole thing east to become the Kiev camera.
In West Germany, Zeiss Ikon introduced a new Contax camera, similar but smaller and lighter than the original, and had some success with it. However, the Contax did not evolve in the postwar period and so it was overtaken as new models came out from Leica, Nikon and Canon. By 1962 the Contax was dead. Zeiss Ikon ceased camera operations in the early 1970s.
In the 1970s, Kyocera bought the Contax name and, in cooperation with Zeiss Ikon and Carl Zeiss Optics, introduced the Contax SLR series (there had been another Contax SLR, made by Zeiss Ikon VEB in East Germany in the 1950s, but that was unrelated to the later effort). The relationship between Zeiss and Kyocera was similar to that of Leitz and Minolta, except that the Contax cameras were more heavily a Kyocera product and had no relationship to any former Zeiss Ikon SLR. There was no Zeiss Ikon camera operation in existence to oversee the Contax in the sense that Leitz oversaw the Leitz/Minolta efforts.
The Kyocera Contax cameras were good cameras by all accounts. It's interesting to observe the extent to which the Contax image failed to rub off on the Yashica brand, which continued to be perceived as a second-tier brand at best despite the fact that some Yashicas were functionally virtually identical to some Contaxes. |
charlie
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 08:10 am: |
|
I was a kid in high school in the early 1940's in tha camera club (plastic Kodak Bullet) and the faculty adviser had a Contax III. We all oohed and ahed when he brought it in. At that time Zeiss optics were reputed to be the world's best, microscopes, binoculars, cameras. Yes, we had heard of Leica but then anyway it played second fiddle.
After the war when Germany and some of its industries were split between East and West there was a habit, unfounded or not to consider East German products inferior and Leica, in the West, became more prominent. East Germany produced the Contax S SLR (first pentaprism?). |
CJ
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 01:49 pm: |
|
Rick and Charlie: Thank you both very much for the information! The quality and quantity of perspectives and experiences make this forum a great resource.
-CJ |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 03:18 pm: |
|
From recent reports in UK Photographic Press Zeiss have indicated that Contax name will continue with some other manufacturer,now that Kyocera have stopped 'proper' camera production.Does this indicate that it was a license agreement in the 70s or did Zeiss retain intellectual property rights and just sell the production tooling? |
CJ
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 04:19 pm: |
|
FWIW, didn't I see a Sony digital camera on the cover of some photo mag with the "Carl Zeiss" name around the front lens bezel?
And on a related note, on that same cover is an Epson-made digital RF camera. (??)
Weird. I sold Epson printers years ago, but having owned one recently, I can attest that the quality of their products has declined precipitously. But I digress... |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 04:51 pm: |
|
I believe it was a license agreement that is now terminated. Not sure who owns the Contax name now, possibly Carl Zeiss? I'm sure the name will be back.
Yes, Carl Zeiss does sell lenses to other companies, and I think Sony digitals are one. Also, I think Schneider makes lenses for Samsung, and I think Leitz sells them to somebody too -- Panasonic?
 = |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 07:38 pm: |
|
My understanding of the Leitz situation is that they sell/license the manufacturing and more importantly the quality control/test specifications to Panasonic.The Panasonic literature makes specific reference to the quality control they carry out.I would think it makes sense for companies like Leitz and Carl Zeiss to design and license manufacture and let somebody else worry about actual production.Owning excess factory/production facilities in a market as fickle as photography must be a nightmare for the accountants.
Having used an Epson R-D1 extensively over the recent weeks,all I can say is that it functions well and has a solid feel to it.I await the Leica M digital with interest,the fact that I shall probably never be able to afford one is something else all together!The R-D1 is at least affordable.My Epson 2100 printer has produced dozens of A3 prints with total reliability.As this is an area where technology/ink chemistry is still advancing at quite a rate,I am not sure that I would be willing to pay for the 'extra' quality as reliability is more than adequate.The fact that the new 2400 printer offers genuine improvement confirms this.When development slows down and I want a printer that lasts 10 years,then quality will become a more important factor.
I only mention the unmentionable because I am primarily a photographer that repairs cameras to use.I have found that scanning/digital printing has allowed me to escape from the darkroom and I am exposing more film.However I would like a digital M with a fullframe sensor-Dream On! |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 08:16 pm: |
|
yeah, i imagine you're right: i don't suppose they're actually grinding digicam lenses in oberkochen and kreuznach.
i wouldn't hold my breath on your chances of maintaining the 'repair cameras to use' method once you've gone digital, though......
: ) = |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 09:05 pm: |
|
I can honestly say that film,especialy B&W has played such a part in both working and private life that I will never stop using as major format.My son is studying photography and obviously went straight down the digital slr route.The main reason for this is that he is a wizard on the Apple G5 and thus it was more natural for him.However I have just brought him a small M2 outfit for his 21st, because I found that my Leica kit was never available when I wanted it.He has found like I did many years ago that the M2 and a couple of lenses go un-noticed,to the photographer who has to carry the camera and more importantly the people in the street.For me to go digital it must have fullframe sensor,so I can use my Leitz wide angle lenses at true focal length and be a range finder.I do not see this happening in the foreseeable future.
Also I really enjoy modifying/adapting lenses to fit the Zorki 1.So I need my fix of tinkering just as much as the actual photography. |
rick oleson
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 10:57 am: |
|
me too.
in fact, i'm afraid the tinkering kind of took over the front seat over time......
: ) = |
Alex
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 02:20 am: |
|
Rick's comment that the Contax image did not rub off onto the Yashica stablemates is interesting (though Ebay sellers are trying to highlight the association - only when selling Yashica of course), and very much something I approve of, for purely selfish reasons. There's some very fine Yashica glass out there, and the relative lack of popularity of Yashica compared to, say, Pentax and others, means that this fine glass can be obtained for shockingly low cost. So I don't want to see the Contax image rub off on Yashica, I want this to be a well-kept secret. Yashica glass isn't Zeiss glass, but it can come close, and 80% Zeiss for 10% of Zeiss prices is a Pareto principle I thoroughly approve of.
I have several Contax cameras, from RTS through to the RX, and I think they're superb. But it's good to have a stock of cheap - and cheap-looking - Yashica bodies as backups. For example, I never replace the leatherette covers on my Yashica bodies, I'm happy for them to look as unappealing and untheftworthy as possible; but with, say, a Planar 50/1.4 or a Yashica ML 50/1.4 on the front, they are stonking performers.
Just don't tell anybody. I only mention it to you guys because I know you can keep a secret. |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 08:59 pm: |
|
yeah, the internet is one of my favorite places to hide secrets : ) = |
Ron
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 23, 2005 - 10:46 am: |
|
"In the 1970s, Kyocera bought the Contax name and, in cooperation with Zeiss Ikon and Carl Zeiss Optics, introduced the Contax SLR series"
- Not true at all. "Secret Project 130" was a collaborative licensing agreement between Contax and YASHICA to produce Carl Zeiss lenses and Contax bodies at YASHICA factories under Zeiss inspection and control. Porsche Design Group also became a party for purposes of design for the original Contax camera produced under the agreement, the 1974 Contax RTS. KYOCERA had no involvement with the brands Yashica and Contax whatsoever until 1984, when it merged with Yashica and took over control of that company including all license agreements with Contax.
"The relationship between Zeiss and Kyocera was similar to that of Leitz and Minolta, except that the Contax cameras were more heavily a Kyocera product...The Kyocera Contax cameras were good cameras by all accounts. It's interesting to observe the extent to which the Contax image failed to rub off on the Yashica brand, which continued to be perceived as a second-tier brand at best despite the fact that some Yashicas were functionally virtually identical to some Contaxes."
-Again, Kyocera wasn't involved at all until 1984. It is true that Yashica had a fairly successful marketing plan up to that point which involved designing and 'pairing' similar, less full-featured but generally well-made SLR models along with the Contax line. However, once Kyocera took over, they began to gradually but perceptibly move Yashica to a lower-level price-point camera brand further and further apart from the newer Contax models being then being introduced. The 1985 Yashica FX-103 was about the last 'paired' camera model with a Contax cousin. Yashica SLRs gradually became cheaper, flimsier, much less sturdy, and less full-featured than their previous models.
After the Kyocera takeover and introduction of newer Contax SLRs, complaints about defects in Contax bodies began to rise noticeably. This may have been in part due to the increasingly complex bodies being produced, but the complaints rose nonetheless. Under Yashica, both Yashica and Contax SLR cameras had developed a reputation as very durable and long-lived cameras - for example, the Yashica FR, Yashica FX-D, (early production) FX-3, and the Contax RTS, RTSII,and 139Q were regarded as extremely reliable cameras. By the time of a 1989 camera repair survey however, Contax SLRs were ranking number one in number of defects listed by owners of Contax, Yashica, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta, Leica, and Ricoh SLR cameras. |
|
