[rollei_list] Re: "different types of black boxes" (was: OT / prove it !)

 --- Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
>    I did not mean to suggest that the Contax was
> inferior 
> because it is more complex. That does make it more 
> supportable. There is something attractive about
> design 
> which is simple but effective and the Leica fits
> that 
> description. The Contax is also an elegant camera.
> The 
> shutter evidently stems from a design used by ICA in
> earlier 
> cameras, for instance, the Mirroflex. It works on a 
> different principle than the Leica shutter.
>    I agree that the Zeiss lenses for this camera
> were 
> excellent and some were innovative designs.
> Bertelle, who 
> designed the Sonnar worked with variations of the
> Cooke 
> Triplet. The f/1/4 Sonnar has seven elements but
> only six 
> glass air surfaces. The Zeiss Biotar/TT&H Opic, both
> based 
> on the Zeiss Planar of Rudolph, has some fundamental
> 
> avantages over the Sonnar for fast lenses, however,
> at its 
> simplest it has eight glass air surfaces and much
> more flare 
> than the Sonnar. Because lenses of the time were
> uncoated, 
> the Sonnar was the superior design. BTW, they must
> have been 
> hell to build with many cemented surfaces and
> steeply curved 
> surfaces.
>    One feature of both the Leica and Contax cameras
> was 
> their accurate rangefinders. Fast lenses are of
> little use 
> if they can't be accurately focused.
>    A last word on the shutter. If one can achieve
> the same 
> end with two mechanisms, one relatively simple, the
> other 
> complex, the simpler one is usually considered to be
> the 
> superior solution. That, and not build quality,
> life, or 
> performance, was the basis for my remarks. The
> Contax was an 
> outstanding and astounding piece of machinery. I
> wonder how 
> many thousands of dollars it would cost to duplicate
> one 
> now.
>    I am aware of Henry Scherer. His website has some
> 
> interesting things to say about the Contax. I gather
> than he 
> thinks many of them were never really tuned up to
> peak at 
> the factory. He obviously loves these cameras.
> 
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 

But the Contax and Leica shutters did NOT have equal
performance. The Contax shutter was capable of 1/1250
- the first FP Leica shutter managed 1/500, I think.
It is generally accepted that Leica lenses were
inferior to Zeiss until the mid-50s introduction of
rare earth glasses. In my personal experience, the
Jupiter 12 Biogon copy is every bit as good - and
faster - than my 35mm f3.5 Summaron - and that's a
pre-war design, manufactured under lower QC
conditions, against a 50's design. Mind you, the
Summaron is beautifully compact, and the Jupiter
doesn't fit on the Contax IIIa. 

Nick

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Other related posts: