Contax AX

[Guest]

WHOA! Stop the <font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">• presses! Contax AX + Contax Hasselblad adapter + Hasselblad CFE 350 Sa=35mm autofocus with super 350? Oh, God, please say YES!

 

[Guest]

And if you add a Mutar II you get a 500mm/8.0 manual fucus lens MUCH better than Mirotar 500/8!!!

 

[Guest]

But will the autofocus work in conjunction with the Contax Hasselblad Adapter? What about automatic aperture?

 

[Guest]

No automatic aperture with Hasselbladoptic. And only autofocus on 5,6 and better!

 

[Guest]

I have a question about the metering accuracy of the AX. I recently bought an AX body, but in comparison with my old 167MT (and Pentax V spotmeter) it consistently reads 2/3 stop underexposed, which has led to some rather dark slides. The lenses used are 50mm f1.7 and 85mm f2.8. Is this a problem with my AX, or do they all read slightly on the dark side? If this is "normal" I'll just tweak the exposure compensation dial.

 

[Guest]

Without automatic aperture, I'm kind of stuck. Autofocus on f/5.6-->f/22 and beyond, or autofocus on f/5.6-->f/2.0 and beyond(!)? That is, larger apertures (smaller numbers) that 5.6 for autofocus, or the inverse?

 

[Guest]

The darker it gets, the more difficult to focus! So no autofocus on f/5.6-->f/22. Actually there's no warranty that f5.6 is sufficient (The manual says it is but my experience says it depends...). You might even need to use f4 or less.

Mike

 

[Guest]

> Posted by Dr Robert Barker on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 4:35 pm: > > I have a question about the metering accuracy of the AX. I recently > bought an AX body, but in comparison with my old 167MT (and Pentax V > spotmeter) it consistently reads 2/3 stop underexposed, which has led > to some rather dark slides. The lenses used are 50mm f1.7 and 85mm > f2.8. Is this a problem with my AX, or do they all read slightly on > the dark side? If this is "normal" I'll just tweak the exposure > compensation dial.

My AX meters perfectly. Check that the aperture is being displayed correctly in the display, as in, when you mount a 1.7, and it's set at 1.7, that it displays 1.7, and check the entire range.

Do you have a handheld meter you can compare it to? Is there a difference between spot and average?

Austin

 

[Guest]

Contax AX vs 60mm/100mm Planar Macro lenses for other Contax Users

Hi AX users,

this thread is really intriguing me; I gather the AX is as expensive (or less than) a 100mm Planar Macro lens and or the 60mm equivalent. Whereas it isn't as cheap as an extension ring, it doesn't cause the reduction of light-transmission using manual focus lenses.

It would be fascinating to hear from AX and macro lens users about their relative experiences with respect to the macro function; the thought of acquiring a new body for macro-work instead of a new lens is relatively new to me.

Best wishes,

Joe99

 

[Guest]

> Joe,

I still use the macro lenses for critical macro work as they are specifically corrected for the closer focusing ranges. The real advantage for the AX is that it gives some extension to all of your lenses and allows closer, but not necessarily macro, focusing if you want a tighter crop of a subject. As this can be just as effectively, if not as conveniently achieved with an extension tube at a much lower cost I would not buy an AX for this feature alone. It is the AF for manual lenses that is the significant feature of the AX and that is enough to justify it until such time as Contax makes the N-series lens line as comprehensive as the C/Y mount. I think this is unlikely for some time to come, and perhaps never.

Gary