USSRPhoto.com

Forums / Collectors and Users Open Forum

Examining a 1950 Jena Contax II

33 posts in this thread showing replies 1-20 of 32
Reply with Quote Edit Topic Delete Topic
Just on 24.12. a packet arrived here :-) It contains a Jena Contax II made in 1950 concerning to the "conkie" documents. I was very exited and after having a nice XMas with the family I inspected it yesterday and today.

Let's start with this picture, the camera just out of the packet. Ugly and full of dirt and green rust.




Look at the feather of the rewinding knob. It looks different as on all my other Contaxes and Kievs:




Under the top plate. Looks like new, as if it was made on a new production line:




Inside is an engraved "55":




Inside of the front mask there is blue/white ribbon arount the viewfinder window hole:




The shutter. No scratched number like on early Kievs. Looks the same as on my other Jena Contax. On the first two pictures you can see something like a C combined with an A scratched in:










Inside the shutter back there is a number engraved:




The feather on the selftimer release knob:




Removing the green rust from the back and the leather. The back is much heavier than a back of a Kiev, it's made of brass:






After reassembling all:




Bill, you said in the TSVVS thread that you would not clean such old and rare cameras because of devaluating them. I don't think that I devaluate the camera when I remove the green rust, sand and old dirt from the cameras. I reuse all parts of the particular camera and do not mix any parts from later cameras. I only replace missing or wrong parts.

What do the others think? Is a careful CLA devaluating an old camera?

Ulrich




http://fotos.cconin.de
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hi Ulrich and Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you and your family!

Actually I was just giving my opinion and advice to Ad with his TSVVS cameras because I thought he did not know how to work on them himself and might give them to someone (a repair person) who did not understand the historical significance of these particular cameras. Someone who might put in a new set of shutter curtains or parts from a different camera. My profession for the past 35 years has been as an art dealer in antique paintings (and also antique objects of many kinds), and I have learned to be very careful with having old things restored, especially if they are very rare, valuable, or historic. I have seen many good paintings ruined from poor or medium restoration at sometime in the past. Of course cameras are different, but this is the experience where my perspective on restoration comes from.

I think you probably know what you are doing with the disassembly - assembly process and have an understanding of the historical significance too. But I am concerned a bit about the removing of the covering (where I can see scratches on the metal of the exterior of the back plate, if they were caused by the removing of the covering) and also whether or not once glued in place again, after cleaning, the covering still has the same 'Contax bumps' that are common on Contax cameras, as well as on Kiev and TSVVS cameras.

That being said, of course an owner can clean and repair his own cameras. But .. I think this Contax Jena camera is very beautiful in your first photo!

Regards, Bill

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Thank you Ulrich for the great illustrations! You have a photo there of the backside of the front plate but this camera does not have the Contax stamped on the reverse side like the early Kievs. Can you or someone else comment to this fact?

Thanks,
Vlad.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hi Ulrich,

Glad you've got the camera, I was on the list ;)
The lower curtain has a broken latch pin (left side). So the shutter won't work correctly.
Jean
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Bill, thanks for your opinion. The covering of the back was partially loose and the green rust comes out of it. As far as I know the bumps filled with green rust are a process of the interaction of the brass and the glue that was used in that days. For re-glueing I used a simple glue like an UHU stick (used for paper and also useful for leather). This can be removed easily if neccessary. The interesing thing will be if the bumps come back now or stay away.

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Vlad, as far as I know the front masks for the Jena Contax were made for these cameras. The "Contax" engraving is a bit different compared to the Dresden Contaxes. But on both of my Jena Contaxes it looks the same.
Another thing that I have noticed on both of my Jena Contaxes is that the chrome seems to be very thin. On some parts it looks as if the brass shines through the chrome, there is a slightly yellowish color that can be seen.
What about other Jena Contaxes here? Can anybody see the same thin chrome?

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Jean, I have noticed that there is a missing part on the lower curtain. I think it was removed during the installation of the additional flash sync, I have seen this on other early Kievs or Contax before. And by the way, the shutter works fine. There were only some small film pieces in the shutter housing and beneath the gears that I have to remove.

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Dear Ulrich,

I highly recommend the Lawrence J Gubas book "Zeiss and Photography". You can find the photo there and a lot of interesting information about Zeiss cameras and lenses. Believe me, this book is worth of its price.

Happy New Year to everybody!

altix
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Congrats, Ulrich! And happy you had it!
And you are right: the arrow on the rewind button is very curious...

To Vlad: The covers which have "Contax" on the reverse (and Kiev on the front) were originally made at Dresden and used by Arsenal in 1947/48 for their first Kievs.
The Jena-Contaxes used parts only made at Jena. We find some of these parts too in 1948 for Kievs: the black disc under the selftimer, for example, is a typical Jena made part.

Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hi there - some observations.
Your rewind knob engraving is the same as Jena Contax 27868, illustrated in 'Contax to Kiev' by Minoru Sasaki. Also Jena Contax 6070/47010, and Jena Kiev 5905/47030.
The shutter appears to be a Dresden original, based on the shape of the casting and angle of the shutter curtain latch release lever. Also the shutter curtain is Dresden with the leather heal.
The focus mount is I think Jena as it has a '3' with a rounded top rather than a flat top as per Dresden originals.
The chrome shroud with 'Contax' is most likely Jena as the engraving matches other Jena examples.
The self-timer release is Dresden; the Jena ones were quite narrow at the base where they screw to the mechanism.
The flash sync is a typical installation; my Contax III shutter was similarly modified.
The lens serial number appears to be in keeping with the camera - 1945 - 1949.

Chrome was in short supply around this time and possibly the coating was thinner/softer causing it to rub through. The chrome on my 1948 Kiev is very thin.

You can only have improved the camera with the servicing; it looks fine in the second photo. Is the shutter accurate enough to make it useable? With a coated Sonnar you should get some great results.

Cheers,

Steve
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Steve, thanks for the detailled information. The lens is according to Thiele from a batch of 1400 2.0/50mm Sonnars that was ready made on 4.12.1947.
And yes, it's a good idea to put a roll of film into the camera. I have some Ilford films in the fridge. When the weather gets better I will try it out.

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Ulrich, Jacques, thank you for the information regarding the reverse Contax stamp! Good to know, I thought those came from Jena and not Dresden, thus my question.

Altix - wow! That is an amazing bit of history right there, blown away! Thank you for that post!

Best regards and Happy New Year!
Vlad
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Very nice find indeed! I haven't got that much Contaxes and Kievs to compare. Bit of a pity is the afterwards build in flash-sync, you find them too often on these camera's.

Henry Sherer keeps persisting that Contax production never took place at Jena. While there is plenty of evidence.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Re. Jena production, evidence suggests that after the failed attempt by the Russians to start production from components/tooling recovered from Dresden, Carl Zeiss Jena were tasked with producing parts and tooling plus complete cameras before the new facilities were moved to Arsenal. The camera was originally to be called 'Volga' (âîëãà)and the blueprints show this. They also provided engineers to support the Arsenal workforce. Its an interesting story of triumph-over-adversity, considering the destruction both Germany and Russia suffered during the latter years of WW2.

Cheers,

Steve
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
I think a good, careful CLA of a camera that brings a non-working camera back to life adds to the value.

If a camera has particular story to tell, such as a bullet hole in the front which did not go all the way through and so shows that the camera stopped someone dying, then a CLA (especially if it removed the bullet hole), would ruin the 'value'.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by SteveA

Re. Jena production, evidence suggests that after the failed attempt by the Russians to start production from components/tooling recovered from Dresden, Carl Zeiss Jena were tasked with producing parts and tooling plus complete cameras before the new facilities were moved to Arsenal. The camera was originally to be called 'Volga' (âîëãà)and the blueprints show this. They also provided engineers to support the Arsenal workforce. Its an interesting story...

Steve, sorry, you yourself have come up with this story? Some phrases, separately, are true, but together they are false. Sorry again.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hi, nope, I have read this in various publications - some interesting information including the blueprints with VOLGA on them are at www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/zconrfKiev.htm

There are a number of different representations of what happened, hence why I said 'evidence suggests' :)

Reply to Topic

Forum code enabled