Dating a hasselblad lens rules for dating my friend

I have been a strong proponent of Contax Glass on REDUSER for a while now. So I figured I would write up a little CONTAX SURVIVAL GUIDE that tries to answer them all at once... Note - I've been writing and editing this for over 3 months. If you disagree with something, be classy, and I'll try and update this guide if I feel I have, in fact, made an error. remained behind in the ruins of the city of Jena, trapped behind the Iron Curtain.

Also bear in mind I've written this on countless different nights after my night shifts (at 2am), or when I had some down time, and clearly on some sittings I was in a foul mood as some sections are riddled with curse words, which I think is hilarious, and for now, I've left them in...intact..a momento to how long this took me to write. Like ZF/ZE’s, they have fantastic barrel rotations (often 180 degrees or more).

Over the years, Zeiss has added new, fantastic designs, this can not be overlooked.

The 35 f2, 25f2, 50 f2 lenses are all completely new and completely superb.

However, the optical quality of the Contax’s is certainly very close to ZF/ZE’s and many of the designs appear to have only subtly changed over the years, in particular the 21 2.8, 34 1.4, 50 1.4, and 85 1.4.

The one main difference I can see is..stated above...

Perhaps the most famous use of the Hasselblad camera was during the Apollo program missions when man first landed on the Moon.

Almost all of the still photographs taken during these missions used modified Hasselblad cameras.

One reason is a reputation for long service life and quality of available lenses.

I’m sure that approach had similar benefits with cinema lenses and Hasselblads.

Again..is just a hunch on my part, don’t shoot me...

I think the Contaxes cinemod slightly BETTER than ZF/ZE’s (because they ALL focus the right way, and ALL have an aperture ring), and also ALL they have that wonderful older T* coating that I believe looks better on digital than the newer T* coating (renders more organically). Also ZF/ZE's tend to break down into purple splotches when they flare, which doesn't look ideal on video (whereas Contax will generally flare white, which can be more forgiving, and cinematic). Contax is more low-con, and more organic, to my eye.

On almost all shoots we’ve done with Contax lenses, where we have used other glass, be it Leica R’s or Canon EOS, every time the DP has noticed that the waveform’s “jump”. I prefer it, cuz there’s an honesty there I appreciate..

Leave a Reply