Why is Conterex so more expensive than Contax IIIa?

[sruddy]

I recently purchased a Contax IIIa from a woman I know from work. It came with the Carl Zeiss Jenna Sonnar 50mm f1:2 T, Zeiss Opton Sonnar 135mm f4 T, and a 3.5-13.5 viewer. I paid $150 and see online the cameras are not going for much more. However I’m constantly seeing prices for the Contarex Bullseye of $1000. What makes the Contarex so much more valuable? I’m ending up being a bit of a camera collector when I can find them free or for a few hundred at most. I’m finding I’m partial to Carl Zeiss lenses. My first experience with these lenses was on my Fathers Rollieflex T that has a Tessar and another I purchased with a Planar. now I have the Sonnar. I thought it would be fun and economical to own a few cameras in which I could use the same lenses. Hence my interest in the Contarex. I’m also interested in a Contax RTS but I’m not sure if my Contax lens will work.

 

[BMbikerider]

I think rarity has a lot to answer for the price for what was an absolute gem of a camera back in the late 1950's early 1960's. The build quality was simply superb but the mechanical operation was somewhat clumsy, given the camera was almost a pioneer in SLR manufacture it was one to aspire to. Unfortunately the likes of Nikon, Pentax, Canon were ahead of the game so the Contarex quietly slipped away in to rarity

 

[nosmok]

The Contarex is a very complicated SLR system that uses lenses that share only names with your Contax-- the back-focus distances are incompatible, as are the mounts. The high prices are for 2 reasons: 1) The lenses were awesome, some of the best glass Zeiss ever made, and 2) the cameras were heavy and complicated and broke down frequently, so working examples are at a premium. The Bullseye was the original and lowest cost body, with its large circular selenium light meter; the Super Electronic the latest and TOTL IIRC. The one to get if you must have a Contarex body would be the Professional, which lacks a built in light meter and so removes a common failure point. But they were not made in large numbers like the Bullseye.

 

[btaylor]

No, your Contax llla lenses will not work on a Contax RTS slr. The Contax line of rangefinders from back in the day (‘30’s-40’s-‘50’s) was one of the best (with Leica) 35mm camera made. They are not expensive today, partly because if you actually use it a CLA by a competent technician generally starts at about $300, and they almost all need a shutter service if they have been sitting in a closet for decades.
Ah, the Bullseye! I have found them fascinating since I saw a used one in a camera store window in about 1970. What a beast! Ugliest camera ever? But strangely beautiful at the same time! Gorgeous lenses. All crazy expensive as they sold few of them and they are now collectors items. Google the Scherer guy at Zeiss Ikon Contax Repair, he has a long and interesting story about the Bullseye. His CLA price is an astonishing $1250. I thought about putting together a Bullseye set, but frankly had to admit I would never use it, so it seemed rather pointless for me. I don’t use my Contax IIa for that matter, the Leica M2 being a much more practical shooter.
Have fun collecting, there is a lot of interesting stuff out there.

 

[guangong]

The time to buy Contarex cameras was right after Zeiss Ikon announced that they were going out of the camera business. Cameras and lenses went for discount prices. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how you look at it, no matter how cheap, I had no money. As pointed out, extremely complex, heavy and clumsy....conceived as a camera that could do everything.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

The Contarex lenses were reputed to be the finest 35mm format lenses ever made. I do not know how they would compare to the best of the contemporary digital lenses for the 24×36mm format. Fotodiox makes a Contarex to Leica M adapter, so there is a way to get new life from these magnificent lenses. The Contarex camera bodies were staggeringly complicated. Warranty repairs almost bankrupted the company.

 

[Pioneer]

The Contarex lenses were reputed to be the finest 35mm format lenses ever made. I do not know how they would compare to the best of the contemporary digital lenses for the 24×36mm format. Fotodiox makes a Contarex to Leica M adapter, so there is a way to get new life from these magnificent lenses. The Contarex camera bodies were staggeringly complicated. Warranty repairs almost bankrupted the company.

I'm confused...don't worry it is a continual state of affairs with me. But how do you mate a Contarex lens with no aperture with a Leica M? Not only that but the difference in distances between the lens and the film in a Contarex is huge compared to that distance in Leica M.

 

[Pioneer]

BTW, if you believe that only Dentists can afford a digital Leica kit nowdays, try assembling a fully serviced Contarex kit with all the lenses and accessories. Henry's $1200 charge to clean, lube and adjust a Contarex is only valid if nothing in your camera needs repair. And if parts are needed you need to be prepared to pawn your first born child.

EDIT - Since these cameras were tools for professionals, not too many others could even afford them, they were usually pretty well used up before they were turned loose to the rest of us. As a result they usually require some serious work to get them back in working order. I bought three several years ago and sent all three to Henry. He got two running but the third was only good as a parts donor.

Just joking about pawning your children but the Contarex is an expensive proposition. But those lenses are truly awesome, both in performance and in build. Zeiss Ikon built them to perform beautifully right from wide open and they are pretty consistent across the entire frame. But they were obviously intended to be used on film, not digital. I do think it is possible to use them on the Sony full frame digital cameras but they won't wow you there like they do on film.

 

[darinwc]

I'm confused...don't worry it is a continual state of affairs with me. But how do you mate a Contarex lens with no aperture with a Leica M? Not only that but the difference in distances between the lens and the film in a Contarex is huge compared to that distance in Leica M.

To answer your question.. I am not familiar with contarex lenses. I assume they DO have apertures. But even if they did not, you could just use them wide open.
Now regarding lens mounts. Rangefinders usually have very short lens mounts. They are similar to mirrorless digital cameras in that respect.SLR' s have long mounts because of the space needed for the mirror box. So you can easily mount an SLR lens on most rangefinders or mirrorless digital cameras. The adapter fills the gap between the two. Most adapters also press the aperture lever of the lens, so it is in "stop down" mode.

However adapted lenses do not link to the focussing of the rangefinder. But wide-angle lenses are pretty easy to focus using the distance markings on the lens. Especially when using small apertures like f16, where just about everything is in focus.

 

[sruddy]

The Contarex lenses were reputed to be the finest 35mm format lenses ever made. I do not know how they would compare to the best of the contemporary digital lenses for the 24×36mm format. Fotodiox makes a Contarex to Leica M adapter, so there is a way to get new life from these magnificent lenses. The Contarex camera bodies were staggeringly complicated. Warranty repairs almost bankrupted the company.

Good info, I'm keeping my eyes open for a Leica M3

BTW, if you believe that only Dentists can afford a digital Leica kit nowdays, try assembling a fully serviced Contarex kit with all the lenses and accessories. Henry's $1200 charge to clean, lube and adjust a Contarex is only valid if nothing in your camera needs repair. And if parts are needed you need to be prepared to pawn your first born child.

EDIT - Since these cameras were tools for professionals, not too many others could even afford them, they were usually pretty well used up before they were turned loose to the rest of us. As a result they usually require some serious work to get them back in working order. I bought three several years ago and sent all three to Henry. He got two running but the third was only good as a parts donor.

Just joking about pawning your children but the Contarex is an expensive proposition. But those lenses are truly awesome, both in performance and in build. Zeiss Ikon built them to perform beautifully right from wide open and they are pretty consistent across the entire frame. But they were obviously intended to be used on film, not digital. I do think it is possible to use them on the Sony full frame digital cameras but they won't wow you there like they do on film.

Thanks Pioneer, I'll keep my radar up for one then. I actually like the looks of the professional model the best, and it would be a plus to be able to use the lens on a Leica M. However unless one falls in may lap. I won't be purchasing one at today's prices. I need to chill and be happy with what I have!

 

[BradS]

.....What makes the Contarex so much more valuable?.....

supply and demand ?

 

[campy51]

I bought a Bullseye body at an online auction but not knowing if it worked or not. I love the look and I would add it to a small collection of cameras I have on display. Everything appeared to work when I got it but without a lens I didn't know for sure. Some weeks passed and at a camera show someone was selling the 50mm so I decided to buy it, but when I mounted it and fired the camera the aperture blades wouldn't close even though they moved freely with the lens off the body. I decided to pull of the lens mount to see if it was something simple but now when I fire the shutter the mirror doesn't flip up unless you manually flip it up and down first then it works. I wasn't going to spend the money to have it fixed so now it sits in a glass cabinet looking pretty. It's in great cosmetic condition and I figure when I buy a mirror less camera I would use the lens with an adapter.
The picture is showing a 35mm lens that came with the 50mm but unfortunately the focus is frozen which I understand is not that uncommon.