Contax ii body and lens cleanup

[Crysist]

I just bought a Contax ii which includes a Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm f/1.5 and I have yet to determine whether the shutter speeds are accurate (just finishing up my first roll, so we'll see. Short ones sounded much slower, but fast ones felt right).

Regardless, is there a way I can polish or clean up the exterior metal on the lens barrel and camera body myself? I took some time wiping some imbued dirt and stuff in all the corners with some 70% isopropyl alcohol, and I used some glass cleaner on the rangefinder windows. Further, I was given some Kodak lens cleaner for the lens and I used a microfiber cloth to get rid of some dirt that had accumulated on it.

The edges of the dials are shiny, but everywhere else is quite dull compared to more pristine photos I see online. And there's some dirt caked in spots, etc. I wouldn't know how to approach the leather. Short of sending it in somewhere, what stuff can I do for it?

 

[nosmok]

For the caked on dirt (as seen on the cold shoe, say), try a (dry) toothbrush. Other than that, I got nothin'. Seems like you've got one with a lotta 'patina'. If it exposes and focuses well, I'd just enjoy it as-is; no Contax I've ever had did those 2 things.

 

[Bill Burk]

Try toothpicks and spit. Take your time and go over a small area at a time.

 

[guangong]

Don’t have a Contax II, but the post war IIa was chrome plated, so a good metal polish should work.

 

[Don_ih]

Baby wipes clean very well.

However, you have quite a bit of corrosion on that camera, which won't clean off.

 

[Crysist]

For the caked on dirt (as seen on the cold shoe, say), try a (dry) toothbrush. Other than that, I got nothin'. Seems like you've got one with a lotta 'patina'. If it exposes and focuses well, I'd just enjoy it as-is; no Contax I've ever had did those 2 things.

I used a toothbrush all around but it didn't clean much that a microfiber cloth hadn't already picked up. Nothing was too lightly caked that it would brush off. But I overlooked the cold shoe, I'll give that a pass, it might be better suited there...

Regarding working order, I'll see soon. But things are looking promising. The lens clearly works and is pretty clean with no haze, but a tiny bit of mold. I shot a roll which I'll send off to develop today, but afterwards I tested some shutter speeds using my phone's slow mo mode and they agreed quite well for the speeds above 1/25.

For 1/50, I measured the shutter to be open 5 frames over a particular area at 240fps, which is 0.0208 sec. 1/250 is the fastest I can reliably test and it too looks good. For the lower speeds, the second curtain seems to slow down increasingly fast, so I imagine if I use it the exposure will be really inconsistent from bottom to top.

I don't know how far off the rangefinder is, I did a very unscientific test checking the distance with a tapemeasure. The close focus distance does indeed seem to be around 90cm. I will need to see how good or bad it ends up in practice.

Try toothpicks and spit. Take your time and go over a small area at a time.

For some reason I only now made the connection of why certain watch restoration videos involve "pegwood" and it's similarity to toothpicks... that's a good idea. I'll try it on more stuck parts.

Don’t have a Contax II, but the post war IIa was chrome plated, so a good metal polish should work.

Baby wipes clean very well.

However, you have quite a bit of corrosion on that camera, which won't clean off.

Would metal polish also get the corrosion? Or should I try some vinegar or baking soda or something? (I forget which corrosion remedy works)

The little knob on the self timer and whatever that thing is poking out at the corner of the bezel around the lens are the most corroded parts, the rest looks as you see elsewhere. The self timer doesn't work at all, actually. Not like I have a pressing need to use it.

 

[Don_ih]

A little vinegar can't hurt. Just on a q-tip. Since the camera has clearly been in a not-great environment, I would expect a shutter ribbon to break soon. If you can use it at the higher speeds, that's great. Check the rangefinder by seeing if it matches with the lens at infinity. If the patch is responsive over the travel of the lens, and it matches at infinity, it's probably good enough to use.

The 50 1.5 is an excellent lens. I consider mine to be one of the best lenses I have - but I kinda hate using a Contax...

 

[guangong]

Reading through this thread, permit a few observations. When Contax was first introduced, Zeiss Ikon claimed that metal shutter was superior to cloth Leica shutter. Time has proved this to be a fallacy. The original shutter in my 1936 Leica IIIa is still going strong. By the way, while shutter in Contax IIa looks similar to II, it has quite different design. A more reliable Contax II for taking pictures would be one of the Soviet clones, which are quite affordable generally with good lenses. I bought one with lens quite cheap and use as my bad weather camera.
This doesn’t imply giving up restoration of your Contax II for the fun of it. In a few pre-WWII movies, to show that character was really flush with cash, he would be shown with a Contax II. A clean Contax II would look good sitting on shelf. If the lens cleans up good enough to use…use it on Russian copy!

 

[Bill Burk]

The metal curtain is superior in that leaving a Leica on its back in the sun with the lens focused at infinity can quickly burn a hole through it. My great Uncle Bill told me about this when I was just a kid, before I ever picked up my first camera.

No question the Leica is a better camera. Except in this specific way.

 

[Donald Qualls]

For the lower speeds, the second curtain seems to slow down increasingly fast, so I imagine if I use it the exposure will be really inconsistent from bottom to top.

Worth noting that for a Contax II/III (or a Kiev 2 or 3, which are near-exact copies), the entire curtain runs slower at speeds below 1/50 -- that is, instead of just delaying the second curtain, the whole mechanism is slowed.

 

[guangong]

The metal curtain is superior in that leaving a Leica on its back in the sun with the lens focused at infinity can quickly burn a hole through it. My great Uncle Bill told me about this when I was just a kid, before I ever picked up my first camera.

No question the Leica is a better camera. Except in this specific way.

How many times did anyone place expensive cameras such as Contax and Leica on their backs with lens focused on infinity and no lens cap in bright sun? The ZI pitch was that metal is more durable than cloth. What was not mentioned was the fragility overntime of the silk ribbons. The redesign of shutter for IIa is more robust and easier to work on. Which is better? All rangefinder cameras with interchangeable lenses (Zeiss, Nikon, etc) died with arrival of M3.

 

[guangong]

Worth noting that for a Contax II/III (or a Kiev 2 or 3, which are near-exact copies), the entire curtain runs slower at speeds below 1/50 -- that is, instead of just delaying the second curtain, the whole mechanism is slowed.

Interesting fact. Something I never noticed.

 

[Bill Burk]

How many times did anyone place expensive cameras such as Contax and Leica on their backs with lens focused on infinity and no lens cap in bright sun?

We've seen accounts here. Greg W set his on a picnic table and Richard S set it on the grass while taking golf shots. They didn't mention where the lenses were focused, but it is probably a worse problem if the lens is focused at a "hyperfocal" distance than if it was focused at infinity because the curtain is in front of the film plane.

Even Leica warns to avoid burning holes in the shutter!

Leica M5 manual, page 26: Dead Link Removed "Leica lenses act like burning glasses if they face upwards in full sunlight for long periods. You must therefore protect the housing and the shutter by putting on the lens cap or keeping the camera in a case or in the shade" Leica M7 manual, page...

www.photrio.com

 

[guangong]

We've seen accounts here. Greg W set his on a picnic table and Richard S set it on the grass while taking golf shots. They didn't mention where the lenses were focused, but it is probably a worse problem if the lens is focused at a "hyperfocal" distance than if it was focused at infinity because the curtain is in front of the film plane.

Even Leica warns to avoid burning holes in the shutter!

Leica M5 manual, page 26: Dead Link Removed "Leica lenses act like burning glasses if they face upwards in full sunlight for long periods. You must therefore protect the housing and the shutter by putting on the lens cap or keeping the camera in a case or in the shade" Leica M7 manual, page...

www.photrio.com

I’ll take your word for it. No way to explain behavior. I usually place camera on its base.

 

[Mr Flibble]

As suggested, a dry toothbrush and toothpicks,
Or careful wipe-downs with q-tips and alcohol.

For cleaning brushed chrome surfaces I found that ceramic stove top cleaner works great. But it will get into all the nooks and crannies if you're not careful.

Echoing the experiences of breaking shutter straps on the Contax II/III. If they are still the original ones from the 1930s, they will break sooner rather than later

 

[Don_ih]

I’ll take your word for it. No way to explain behavior. I usually place camera on its base.

I bought a Leica IIIb that must've sat on a shelf facing a window - it had the arc of the sun burnt into the curtain. In two places, actually, so I guess someone moved it once. It had a custom-mount Sonnar 50 mm 1.5 lens on it, undoubtedly wide open. I think I'll go outside and see later how quickly that lens can set fire to some paper...

 

[guangong]

I bought a Leica IIIb that must've sat on a shelf facing a window - it had the arc of the sun burnt into the curtain. In two places, actually, so I guess someone moved it once. It had a custom-mount Sonnar 50 mm 1.5 lens on it, undoubtedly wide open. I think I'll go outside and see later how quickly that lens can set fire to some paper...

So the original owner never used a lens cap? I cap my lenses to protect from dust, dirt, moisture, and, yes, the sum. Hope you were able to buy at a good price…especially with Sonnar lens!

 

[Don_ih]

So the original owner never used a lens cap? I cap my lenses to protect from dust, dirt, moisture, and, yes, the sum. Hope you were able to buy at a good price…especially with Sonnar lens!

I got it at a pretty good price. It had no lens cap when I got it - that could've been lost at any time. I bought it in Midland from a place that had bought it locally - I always imagine a Leitz employee brought it over. Speculation, of course - who knows what happened to it in the 75 years it existed before I got it.

 

[Don_ih]

I just brought my lens out. It's a very sunny day. I found a small piece of asphalt shingle on the ground (probably from when I redid my roof). The sun focused on that produced smoke immediately. A good simulation of shutter curtain.

 

[guangong]

I just brought my lens out. It's a very sunny day. I found a small piece of asphalt shingle on the ground (probably from when I redid my roof). The sun focused on that produced smoke immediately. A good simulation of shutter curtain.

Interesting. The Zeiss Sonnar was far superior to any Leitz lens for Leica at that time. However it was much more expensive. Nonetheless , those who were flush with cash bought the Sonnar for their Leica.
I believe that Zeiss marketed Sonnars in E39 mount. But get a lens cap to protect lens, not so much the shutter curtains. A lens shade is mandatory for this lens.
Most contemporary folk, buying on the used market after digita onslaught, have no idea how much these cameras cost when new.

 

[Don_ih]

The Zeiss Sonnar was far superior to any Leitz lens for Leica at that time.

There was a period during the war when Leitz had bodies and no lenses. Some Zeiss lenses were adapted to L39 for that reason. There were probably other demands for a f1.5 lens. Assuming this lens is genuine, it's an early one from that time (1941). The serial number dates from 1941 - less than a 1000 higher than this 85mm Sonnar confirmed adapted lens. And this lens is coated - although there's not much of it there....

 

[Crysist]

Well, I got a roll back so I can answer somethings more completely!

If it exposes and focuses well, I'd just enjoy it as-is; no Contax I've ever had did those 2 things.

Seems I got lucky, the in-focus photos are focused where I intended to focus at various distances. Only when I missed focus because I was trying to shoot something with little thought did I mess up entirely. And the exposure was good enough that everything, even the very slow stuff, came out fine. Not bad for nearly 90 years old!

A little vinegar can't hurt. Just on a q-tip. Since the camera has clearly been in a not-great environment, I would expect a shutter ribbon to break soon. If you can use it at the higher speeds, that's great. Check the rangefinder by seeing if it matches with the lens at infinity. If the patch is responsive over the travel of the lens, and it matches at infinity, it's probably good enough to use.

The 50 1.5 is an excellent lens. I consider mine to be one of the best lenses I have - but I kinda hate using a Contax...

Shutter ribbon? Break?? It's crazy how they made these sturdy metal bodies and yet one part here or there of their delicate clockwork can just explode when you least expect it.

Now with some examples I can say the rangefinder is accurate to low quality lab scan precision!

Worth noting that for a Contax II/III (or a Kiev 2 or 3, which are near-exact copies), the entire curtain runs slower at speeds below 1/50 -- that is, instead of just delaying the second curtain, the whole mechanism is slowed.

So is that a reflection of how the curtains travel "in slow motion", the slower speeds? If I see the 2nd curtain move a certain way relative to the 1st, would that happen in fast motion the same? Because the slower speeds seemed distinct, I heard the whirr (which I suppose was normal), but it seemed to last for so long even for the not-so-slow speeds of 1/50 and 1/25.

As suggested, a dry toothbrush and toothpicks,
Or careful wipe-downs with q-tips and alcohol.

For cleaning brushed chrome surfaces I found that ceramic stove top cleaner works great. But it will get into all the nooks and crannies if you're not careful.

Echoing the experiences of breaking shutter straps on the Contax II/III. If they are still the original ones from the 1930s, they will break sooner rather than later

Maybe I should get some masking tape before trying any of that! The closest thing I have on hand to a polish is BKF, but I never tried using it finely.

WHAT ARE THESE FIENDISH STRAPS WHY DID THEY PUT THEM THERE? DON'T THEY KNOW I'M TRYING TO USE IT 87 YEARS LATER!! Do you mean the metal slats? Or is there a separate thing that is some kind of actual strap made out of a cloth-y material somewhere??

There was a period during the war when Leitz had bodies and no lenses. Some Zeiss lenses were adapted to L39 for that reason. There were probably other demands for a f1.5 lens. Assuming this lens is genuine, it's an early one from that time (1941). The serial number dates from 1941 - less than a 1000 higher than this 85mm Sonnar confirmed adapted lens. And this lens is coated - although there's not much of it there....

Errr, I hope I didn't rub it off... I used this Kodak lens cleaning solution and a microfiber cloth. Looking at the photos, unless it's the mediocre 2MP minilab scans and the Fuji 400 I used playing a part, yeah the contrast isn't the best sometimes. But I'm not sure what else the coating is meant to improve. I do see a slight glow around some peoples' light shirts in the sun a couple times, but I don't have any outright flares it seems. I only shot a few photos directly towards the bright sky and yet I only see a glow emanating around it some.

---

I had a go with saddle soap on the leather and maybe I'm not using it right. The part I tested ended up a tad drier and less bumpy looking, with a bit less luster. Quite a bit of black came off. Maybe cleaning leather is supposed to look like that, I know cleaning the leather earcups yields yucky residue that is also very dark, but I'd just like to be more sure that I'm doing it correctly.

While shooting I got a bit ballsy towards the end and decided to try shooting a whole dozen shots around a campfire, which my phone's light meter said came to 1/5 or 1/2 sec wide open. Let me just say that wasn't my brightest idea. I had expected an uneven exposure over the frame due to the way the shutter movement looked to me, the 2nd curtain starting faster and slowing down, but the exposures look entirely consistent!

I have another roll I sent in a week ago (to a different lab) that I'm waiting to get the results back from. I shot it in more-favorable light over the course of the whole roll. And hopefully with better scans!

 

[Mr Flibble]

WHAT ARE THESE FIENDISH STRAPS WHY DID THEY PUT THEM THERE? DON'T THEY KNOW I'M TRYING TO USE IT 87 YEARS LATER!! Do you mean the metal slats? Or is there a separate thing that is some kind of actual strap made out of a cloth-y material somewhere??

They are the two silk straps on both sides of the metal slat shutter curtains. They're attached to the top curtain and on the spring-loaded roller at the bottom of the shutter crate.
And they run through friction buckles on the lower curtain, which may cause fraying over time. And they'll just snap from dry-rot / aging eventually.

On the Contax there are also very thin leather strips left and right of the curtain slats, under the folded brass ends, to keep the slats from sliding horizontally. As these dry out they'll harden and influence the shutter speeds, or they'll eventually dry rot to pieces. (At least in the Kiev they used yak hair for this as I recall).


Concerning the ceramic stove top cleaner I mentioned, it is non-abrasive. It's just good at picking dirty out of the brushed chrome surface.

 

[Don_ih]

The shutter ribbons have to be flexible, since they roll up around the spring to pull the shutter. A Leica has shutter ribbons as well, but they're more integral to the shutter. But one of the problems with the Contax is they don't last that long - because of what @Mr Flibble above said. They're under too much stress. They may last 50 years if you don't use the camera. They may break after shooting 50 rolls. I replaced a shutter ribbon on my Contax III years ago. It wasn't really difficult, although it would've helped if I had 3 or 4 hands....

 

[Mr Flibble]

I replaced a shutter ribbon on my Contax III years ago. It wasn't really difficult, although it would've helped if I had 3 or 4 hands....

Yep, I've done it half a dozen times on various Contaxes over the last few years. Hardest thing is figuring out how to get inside the shutter crate that first time.
After that it's not hard, just fiddly