Blackmagic Forum

Hey guys,
Here is a video about my vintage Contax Zeiss lenses and why I decided to get this set for my BMPCC 6K.



In this video I go over the kit that I own, Why I decided to get the Contax Zeiss specifically, the pros and cons of vintages lenses, how do they compare to the Canon FD and wether or not I would recommended these.

Out of the all the lenses I shoot with and own these are the ones most special to me and the one that I enjoy using the most as well.

What lenses do you guys use and do shoot with vintage ones?

Let me know if you have any questions in the comments .

Cheers,
Flo

Good video! - (your Antarctic and letterpress films nudged me into getting the P6k BTW and I'm glad I did)
I would add that although these are old their optical performance (mostly) is very modern in terms of resolution (stopped down a bit) and flare resistance. I'm still not convinced the 18mm is in the same league as the other 3 and you may well find if you get the 21 you will see why it's much more expensive.
Other Contax glass I have which I can recommend is the 35 2.8 which is similar to the 28mm but not quite as good away from the center. The 50mm 1.7 which is I think better and cheaper than the 1.4 and has really nice Bokeh at 2.8 and the 35-70 3.4 zoom which although a bit of a handful to operate as it's '1 touch' is as sharp as any prime when stopped down to F8 and has smooth focus fall off for a zoom. It's only optical weakness is it flares a bit into the light compared to modern zooms and the mechanism is delicate so only buy if you can handle it first and check for looseness. I regret that I sold my 85 2.8 and may have to acquire another. The 135 2.8 is well regarded but I find at the longer lengths zooms are more practical and I'm not sure I'd like the 80-200 F4 over my 2.8 or f4 Canon zooms and again I'd worry about the mechanical integrity of an old zoom.

John Griffin wrote:Good video! - (your Antarctic and letterpress films nudged me into getting the P6k BTW and I'm glad I did)
I would add that although these are old their optical performance (mostly) is very modern in terms of resolution (stopped down a bit) and flare resistance. I'm still not convinced the 18mm is in the same league as the other 3 and you may well find if you get the 21 you will see why it's much more expensive.
Other Contax glass I have which I can recommend is the 35 2.8 which is similar to the 28mm but not quite as good away from the center. The 50mm 1.7 which is I think better and cheaper than the 1.4 and has really nice Bokeh at 2.8 and the 35-70 3.4 zoom which although a bit of a handful to operate as it's '1 touch' is as sharp as any prime when stopped down to F8 and has smooth focus fall off for a zoom. It's only optical weakness is it flares a bit into the light compared to modern zooms and the mechanism is delicate so only buy if you can handle it first and check for looseness. I regret that I sold my 85 2.8 and may have to acquire another. The 135 2.8 is well regarded but I find at the longer lengths zooms are more practical and I'm not sure I'd like the 80-200 F4 over my 2.8 or f4 Canon zooms and again I'd worry about the mechanical integrity of an old zoom.

Thanks man and glad you like the cam !!
And yes I know the 21 is supposed to be loads better but couldn't afford it haha. The 35mm is definitely on my list for sure.
When it comes to zoom I also think I would rather stick with my Canon.

Everyone needs to stop talking about these lenses. We need to get the word out that they're terrible. People need to get rid of these old lenses and buy new Zeiss, Sigma, Fuji, SLR Magic, DZO, Meike, etc. The more people talk about them the higher the prices go on ebay. There was an increase with the popularity of the Survival Guide on reduser, but prices stabilized and came down a bit over time as people sold them to get whatever the flavor of the month is. But now there's a spate of new youtube videos because people click on those like crazy and now prices are going up again. I still need the 85 1.4 (if I can find one without spiders or scratches or haze) and even the 2.8 is nearly the same price. Ugh.

I know what you mean

Regarding zooms, they are problematic since all Contax C/Y ones are one-touch. If you desperately need a zoom (or two), I'd go with Sigma Art. Colorwise they are not so hard to match with Contax, you may need some diffusion, though.

If you can rack focus on a push/pull zoom without sending the whole pony into space, then and only then, are you ready to leave the monastery.

Good Luck

Chris Leutger wrote:Everyone needs to stop talking about these lenses. We need to get the word out that they're terrible. People need to get rid of these old lenses and buy new Zeiss, Sigma, Fuji, SLR Magic, DZO, Meike, etc. The more people talk about them the higher the prices go on ebay. There was an increase with the popularity of the Survival Guide on reduser, but prices stabilized and came down a bit over time as people sold them to get whatever the flavor of the month is. But now there's a spate of new youtube videos because people click on those like crazy and now prices are going up again. I still need the 85 1.4 (if I can find one without spiders or scratches or haze) and even the 2.8 is nearly the same price. Ugh.

Haha sorry about that, it took me a while to find mine too and I spent a bit. I do own Canon and Sigma lenses too so I share the love .

Uli Plank wrote:I know what you mean

Regarding zooms, they are problematic since all Contax C/Y ones are one-touch. If you desperately need a zoom (or two), I'd go with Sigma Art. Colorwise they are not so hard to match with Contax, you may need some diffusion, though.

Yeah I agree with that, I only have the Contax primes and use my sigma and canon when it comes to zooms.

The 'Contax craze' is 15 years old and dates back to the introduction of the Canon 5D which was the first affordable full frame sensor. People (me included) didn't like the poor performance of the Canon EF wide lenses and the 21mm and 28mm 2.8 Contax lenses filled the gap. Also worth mentioning was the 28mm 2.0 'hollywood' and the 35mm 2.8 PC Distagon shift lens. Their use as modern cinema lenses is therefore a 3rd reincarnation......

I could kick myself for deciding to pass on Leica R lenses when I purchased Leica's M (Typ 240) camera. This is the Leica camera, released in 2012*, that could be used with Leica R lenses and brought them back from the dead. Prices for R lenses kinda went up from that point

* While officially released in September 2012, Leica had a lot of trouble meeting demand and the M (Typ 240) was available only via a long waitlist until well into 2013.