| Author |
Message |
    
Contax_crisis
Tinkerer
Username: Contax_crisis
Post Number: 1
Registered: 08-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 04:35 pm: | 
|
Hi there,
I'm losing track of how many times I'm repairing this as well as my login details!
This is how far it's got:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26368665@N06/2778729669/
from being:
http://www.luxcamera.co.uk/images/Repair/Contax%20II%20screw%20assembly.jpg
after:
https://kyp.hauslendale.com/classics/forum/messages/13061/10414.html
The shutter chassis was broken after one professional repairer attempted it, then after that, I posted it to Steve Ash for repair, during which it sustained damage in the post. So I decided to repair it myself and sourced a second Contax II body for parts (a lot of spare parts now).
Unfortunately I didn't do a very good job of the shutter CLA. It still only works effectively at 1/125th second. I forgot to re-clean the rangefinder unit (bear in mind, the original restoration clean started over 2 years ago...) before reconnecting the Contax II.
Whereas I love the Sonnar 5cm f1.5 lens, I'm not sure it's really worth the effort of going through all of this again, opening up the camera, after it's now reassembled and working. This has got to be the slowest and most painstaking restoration I've ever attempted... and its outcome isn't great.
I'm wondering if it's worthwhile transplanting the Sonnar f1.5 to a different camera body, perhaps a Leica IIIf and forgetting about the Contax altogether. The countersunk rear element of the Sonnar looks like it might fit in a Leica 39mm threaded mount.
Any suggestions welcome.
Kind regards,
RJ |
Rick_oleson
Tinkerer
Username: Rick_oleson
Post Number: 654
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 04:41 pm: |
|
Ouch. I wouldn't remount the Sonnar, personally, though it might be possible using a barrel from a screw mount Jupiter-3. While we're on that subject, though, have you thought about picking up a cheap Kiev body for your Sonnar? I've had pretty good results with those, except for the light leak around the film sprocket that can be a bit frustrating... anyway, they're cheap, and you don't have to bugger up your lens to keep using it. |
Rick_oleson
Tinkerer
Username: Rick_oleson
Post Number: 655
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 04:44 pm: |
|
sorry.... i'd completely fogotten that we had already HAD this conversation...... |
Contax_crisis
Tinkerer
Username: Contax_crisis
Post Number: 3
Registered: 08-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 04:57 pm: |
|
Hi Rick,
No worries - I guess you're probably shocked that I'm still labouring over the same issue after all this time. Many thanks too - your notes were indispensible for putting the Contax II back together again.
I already have a cheap Kiev IV body for my Sonnar:
http://www.luxcamera.co.uk/pages/Antiqua/Kiev%20IVa/IVa.htm
I must be really challenged: I can barely load film using the metal bomb canister in any of the Contax/Kiev cameras, whereas I can bottom-loading Leica IIIf on the go. I think if I could work a method, I'd rather use the Sonnar 5cm f1.5 on the Leica IIIf. As classic as the Contax II is, it isn't a camera I find easy to hold or use.. |
Rick_oleson
Tinkerer
Username: Rick_oleson
Post Number: 656
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 06:14 pm: |
|
The problem that most people have with holding the Contax is that they are thinking it should be like a Leica. You have to hold a Contax differently, but when you do, it's at least as quick and comfortable as the Leica is in use. My first reaction was that this was sort of characteristic Zeiss-think: we know best, the user must change to suit our machine.... but if you think about it, you wouldn't try to hold a Rollei or an Exakta with a Leica grip and expect it to work.
Obviously, the Leica is nice too. I recently saw a 50/2.0 Sonnar remounted in a Jupiter-8 barrel for Leica use, and it seems reasonable to hope that the same treatment might work for a 1.5 Sonnar and a Jupiter-3 barrel, but I haven't tried it.
I don't know if this link will work, but here is the 50/2.0 treatment: http://www.nelsonfoto.com/v/showthread.php?t=16165 |
Contax_crisis
Tinkerer
Username: Contax_crisis
Post Number: 7
Registered: 08-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 09:06 am: |
|
Hi Rick,
You're probably right: I've not spent long enough trying to work the Contax II. After a few rolls of 35mm film, none of the negatives seemed critically sharp at 10x loupe enlargement. I think this is related to the lack of film flatness. For example - with a Contax RTSIII, the vacuum back enables 30" enlargements across the field.
Is there a specific way to load film? I've removed the metal canisters which fit in the film chamber and use a free end take up spool. They just never seem to turn as required. Perhaps the tension then is insufficient.
The link to Brian's modification looks fascinating. I haven't seen many Jupiter lenses in LTM mount either. Brian has a collimator which makes this lens challenging too. I doubt I could ever reach his level of precision. Maybe remounting a lens in a less well made aluminium barrel doesn't appeal.
Whilst looking for an alternative, I came across a number of Contax to LTM adapters by Kindai (Japan), Orion (Japan?) as well someone in Venuzuela. These seem to emulate the older vintage Contax-Leica adapters which are now extant. There seems to be some positive reports from users with these adapters for the Sonnar f1.5 5cm, however not so with the Biogons (rear element clearance). Granted, that these cost more than a Contax II camera....
Maybe I just need to take a deep breathe and just start disassembling the Contax II again to get it right. |
Rick_oleson
Tinkerer
Username: Rick_oleson
Post Number: 657
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 07:57 pm: |
|
Film flatness shouldn't be a problem in the Contax II, I wouldn't think... maybe it depends on just what "critical sharpness" is, but Contaxes were well known to outperform Leicas in that period. The advantage was the Zeiss lens designs, but it couldn't have produced the results it did if it couldn't hold the film flat. Certainly I've gotten results that I would consider sharp with them.
I don't use Contax cassettes. The Contax takeup spool is much like the spool in a 35mm cassette but the flanges are larger in diameter... you can make one by gluing the end of a film can onto the bottom flange of a cassette spool and cutting a slot in the spool for the film leader.
If the Contax cassettes are not seating properly in the camera this might cause a flatness problem, so a plain spool like this might improve it.
I agree that a Jupiter barrel is not quite the same as a Zeiss or Leitz mount, but probably the best chance for the money. You can use any good camera as a collimator, I especially like using a Pentax Auto 110 with the 50mm telephoto on it:
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-123.html
You will need an LTM camera with a removable back, though, to get a view through the lens.
Personally, I think the nicest way to use a Sonnar is on a Contax II, if you have a prospect of getting it going. |
Contax_crisis
Tinkerer
Username: Contax_crisis
Post Number: 8
Registered: 08-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2008 - 04:49 pm: |
|
Rick,
I think you've hit the nail on the head. I've just been using a strip of tape to hold the leader against a spool.
This came with the Contax II,
however I haven't been able to figure out how to fit it inside the chamber, nor how to use it. I'll have a go with your suggestion and see if that improves the sharpness/film flatness instead.
The Contax II does work at 1/125th second - coupled with f1.5 upwards. I can see how attractive these IIs' can be to work with. It's putting in the work which is daunting. Looks like I'll be stripping it down again in another few months... |
Rick_oleson
Tinkerer
Username: Rick_oleson
Post Number: 659
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2008 - 05:20 pm: |
|
I've had a couple of those cartridges, may still have them .... I've never used them. As I recall, they couple to the back lock keys in the bottom to open and close as you lock and unlock the camera back. Never having used the things, I don't know if there is some possibility of misalignment in that area that could cause a problem. The regular spool is easy to make though, and it works very well. |
Contax_crisis
Tinkerer
Username: Contax_crisis
Post Number: 10
Registered: 08-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2008 - 06:37 pm: |
|
It sounds like these cartridges are too much.
Nothing I do will align them precisely in order for the back to lock down tightly.
I'll test drive your solution to see whether it's fast reloading and working with over the weekend. One reason why I found the Leica IIIf very practical, relates to its back, which does not come off, making it easier to change a film without having to align the film within the Contax II chamber, and then the film back. |
|
