Katz eye replacement focussing screen for 350D

dirk

CI-Founder
Hi

I am considering to sell all my Contax N gear and to switch to Canon DSLR with Zeiss lenses combined (is there a buyer out there?)

I just read in another posting about the Katz eye replacement focussing screen for the 20D.

Is it also possible with the Canon 350D to replace the focussing screen?

Thanks in advance

P.S.: Any more solid rumours about new Canon DSLRs?
 

deshojo

Well-Known Member
Hi Dirk,
You'll be pleased to hear that you can replace the 350D focussing screen, the website is here
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It's made a BIG difference on my 20D.
 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
Dirk, just when I thought to dump my Contax N gear, I get back a couple of rolls of B&W that are absolutely outstanding.

Be forewarned that the Katzeye screen is extremely difficult to install if you don't get it right the very first time. I almost gave up, and when I did get it in there was dust in the finder ... but I wasn't about to try it all over again ...and just live with the dust.

The 20D is a nice camera, but it isn't a Contax even with Contax lenses on it.
 

dirk

CI-Founder
Hi Marc,

"...The 20D is a nice camera, but it isn't a Contax even with Contax lenses on it..."

yes, you put salt in my wounds...

If I look at the current alternatives on the market, there is nothing that comes close to Contax feelings - except maybe Leica. But I do not want to make the same experience twice, so I will avoid Leica at the moment (and the DMR is too expensive for me anyway).

I wish there would be no need to think about alternatives. The more I compare all current offerings of Canon, Nikon et alii, the less I can believe, that the Contax N-System was not a "homerun".

canon will most likely come out with a DSLR between the 20D and the 1D Mark II with crop factor 1.3. Availablity probably in December/ January. Price level above the 20D.

But hey, where is the aperture ring of the Canon lenses, where is the solid feeling while holding the lens and why all Canon users push now the prices for used Zeiss lenses up into the sky?

Why did they do it not right from the first moment on and bought a Contax N?

Life is unfair...
 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
Frankly Dirk, it's not worth the loss, both in money and in quality. All the marketing hype and stuff has everyone all worked up and chomping at the bit to lose money on perfectly good gear, to replace it with plastic feeling cameras with really shitty lenses that don't even have an aperture ring on them.

I got the Leica DMR and already used it at 2 weddings. It seems really well made and very easy to use. The RAW files open right up in PSCS. The difference from Contax is that Leica turned to Imacon to make it work. It's a CCD so it looks more film like in results. If it holds up then Leica has a winner on their hands IMO. The battery went all day on one charge.
 

ulfah

New Member
To be a CONTAX FORUM, there is a lot of Canon discussion! Is there something I have misunderstood here? Canon should be discussed in a Canon Forum! I believe Carl Zeiss should have an all positive feed back from this CONTAX FORUM so that they feel strong in the position to bring back the CONTAX brand name (which actually belongs to Carl Zeiss but is contracted to Kyocera for a certain period of time). I just can't believe that the contract allows Kyocera to "kill" the brand. We, the fans and customers, should tell them with a strong voice that we still want CONTAX. May be in a slower pace and may be not all of the models produced lately, SLR, Medium Format, Rangefinder and Digital. But we want it to survive. We should not discuss, in the CONTAX FORUM, to which brand one should go from CONTAX!
 

dirk

CI-Founder
Hi Ulf,

I can totally understand your feelings, let let me assure you (since we tried it over 3 years) that it is not in our hands anymore what will happen with the Contax brand. As long as Zeiss does not find a new coopertaion partner and Kyocera changes its mind, there is simply no hope for new developments.

So the only hope is to continiue to use the Zeiss lenses. At the end of teh day, the majority of Contax users bought Contax because of the lenses, right?

So it is natural, that we discuss also in a Contax/Zeiss Forum new possibilities to adapt our Zeiss lenses on something that can make digital shooting possible. We of course can still make images on film with a Zeiss/Contax combo, but at the moment there is no DSLR option. I just tried to contact today Zeiss and Kyocera again, but the responsible persons were not reachable/did not pick up the phone.

So I do not give up on the Contax dream and I will continue to be a pain in the neck of some decision makers, but we should not be too optimistic. If you look at the photo industry, there are only losses except for Canon and recently Nikon. Kodak tumbles, Olympus tumbles, Minolta was sold to Konica, Pentax tumbles... you name it. And the fact that Nikon just had a great last quarter does not say that they will survive longterm.

To be honest I do not see at the moment any way out for Zeiss. No big player will be interest in continuing the N-system. This would be a too dramatic competition. And for the analog Zeiss lenses, most users alraeyd switched to Canon to use their zeiss lenses with an adapter on the Canon DSLR.

This means that those users have

a) no money anymore near term for a DSLR
b) will always get a cheaper and more advanced Zeiss compatible (!) DSLR from Canon, in case someone tries to offer a Contax DSLR with C/Y mount.

If you reflect additionally that it takes at least 2 years from the planning of a DSLR until you see it in the shelves, you can count how likely you will see a new Contax DSLR soon, even if Zeiss finds a partner tomorrow.

So the goal is in the mean time to enjoy the Zeiss lenses - no matter what kind of box is behind them.

But I agree, ideally we should talk 95% about Contax and Zeiss. But extreme situations lead often to extreme behaviour
 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
Ulf, it is good to have strong support for the Contax products.
A vast majority of my professional gear is Zeiss equipped.
Which includes Contax 645, ND, N-1, RX, ST and 3 Hasselblad Cameras with a total of about 40 lenses ... most of which cost more than I'd care to admit (at least to my wife ; -)

But I make photos, not lens collections ... nor am I blindly loyal to any company ... any of which would drop you like a hot potato if they decided to get out of the business like Kyocera did.

Dirk, as far as I can tell the new DMR has properties similar to the ND in that it has a nice dynamic range compared to the Canons. So it does B&W quite nicely. It is a beautiful piece of equipment that's easy to use.

Ulf, pardon me while I show Dirk a shot made with a Leica DSLR.
Leica is a long time rival of Zeiss, but they are sort of in the same boat in this digital world so a couple of shots couldn't hurt huh???

 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
BTW, that B&W was shot available light at ISO 400 using the 28-90 R Zoom.

Here's one in color where the light was extremely harsh on a very very bright day ... the bride was sitting in the shade near a window. ISO 400, 28-90 R Zoom.

 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
A final one, available light at ISO 800, 50/1.4R lens... better exposure than the last two ... positively 3D wouldn't you say?

No comparison to the 20D or the ND I think ... but I can't say anything definitively until I learn how to get everything out of this camera possible... and use it longer to find it's short-comings ... which there are sure to be some.

 
D

djg

I really do hope you get somewhat better images with the DMR than you get with the 20D - I mean, it's only 5+ times more expensive
. And the extra 2MP may not be a huge advantage but it can't hurt either ...

Where the 20D may get a nod is in the 800+ ISO range. Maybe?
 

albert4321

Well-Known Member
Dirk, the 20D is really a good camera for the money. Build quality is no way like the Leica, ND, EOS 1D or 1Ds, but the image quality is similar to the 1D mark II.

S&le pics taken with 20D and the cheap 17-85IS lens couple months ago...

I know, no comparison to the Lecia. :)

 

dirk

CI-Founder
oh guys, you give me a hard time. The equipment question I think is my smallest problem.

I think I have to take first a class in photography from Marc, Irakly et alii


The problem is, once I have a DSLR with Zeiss lenses on it, I have to show images and I am afraid, that will be embarrassing at the beginning compared to the shots you alle showed already.

Until now, I had always the excuse of lacking time to use my Nikon Coolscan 4000 and learn photoshop
 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
Dirk, organize a seminar in Germany with Irakly (he does them all over the world ... he's in Russia as we speak, and did one in San Francisco a few weeks ago). If my schedule permits, I'll come with him, and we'll do it together !!!! Irakly's talent is without question, and his enthusiastic teaching style is positively infectious. We'll even provide you with some side lessons in PS ; -)

I must agree that the 20D is a very good DSLR for the money, but it has it's known shortcomings. My only point is that unless you are cranking out a lot of quick turn-around images, it's hard to beat a N-1 equipped with Zeiss lenses... and scanning with your Nikon 4000 ... all of which you already own.

Putting Zeiss glass on the 20D or any Canon DSLR is an improvement for sure (as DJ can also probably confirm). But it's a pain in the rear doing stop-down metering and not easy to manually focus the 300D or 20D due to their smaller viewfinder window ... even with the Katzeye screen. It's a pain worth enduring to get the better images the Contax C/Y lenses provide. However, the price of the C/Y glass has soared to new highs because so many Canon users are snapping up everything in sight. $4,000 for a 21/2.8? Come on now! For $4,000. you can buy a Hasselblad SWC and blow away anything taken with a C/Y 21/2.8 ; -)

Anyway, I for one am not ready to abandon the pictorial qualities of film shot with these fabulous lenses for the pixel perfection of digital. I also resent sitting here processing hundreds and hundreds of digital wedding images ... and have returned to shooting more film with 35mm and 6X6 cameras sporting Zeiss optics. I get my film back in a day which is faster than I can process that many digital images even with PSCS2's new RAW developer.

Here's a grab shot Irakly took of me being a bad boy by smoking. He did it with my N-1 and 50/1.4. I still like the pictorial feel of film, so I keep on shooting it.

Not knocking digital, but it just doesn't have that basic emotional pictorial feel to me.


 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
Oh, by the way, I am selling my 20D & 17-85 EFS Image Stabilized lens(with dusty Katzeye screen), and a Canon 1DMKII.

I disagree that the 20D is similar to the 1DMKII. The 20D is a 1.6X lens factor sensor, and the 1DMKII is a 1.3X. Meg count isn't the end all, and a bigger sensor makes a significant difference in image quality.

For ex&le, the Canon 1DsMKII is 16 meg and so is the Kodak digital back for the Contax 645. There is no comparison between the two, the 645 with the bigger sensor is clearly superior. That's why the Contax ND, while only 6 meg, still can produce excellent images ... because it is a full 35mm frame sensor. Don't confuse image processing faults of the ND with it's ability to make great photos ... including the ND in the list of cameras supported by PSCS RAW developer solved many of those issues. Leica totally avoided that problem by adopting the Adobe DNG RAW file format. You just pop the SD card into the reader and open the DNG files in the PS RAW converter.
 

dirk

CI-Founder
Hi Marc,

thanks for your input. At the current state of sensor developments, which image quality do you prefer:

- Canon 20D with Zeiss MM lenses or
- Contax ND with N lenses
 

fotografz

Well-Known Member
I've already gone on record as liking the ND images more than the Canon. But I seem to be able to get more out of it than others can. Irakly is even better then I am at getting great quality from the ND.

But I don't want to mislead you. The Canon 20D is very good, and with Zeiss lenses even better. It has a much higher ISO ability than the ND, and shooting at 800 is easy to do, without much consequence. It also can be used with a few pretty good Canon lenses for fast AF work (24/1.4 is my favorite on that camera and the 100 macro ain't all that bad).

For general shooting and all around ease of use it's the 20D hands down. The batteries last a looooong time, and it is fairly painless to process the images. The ND is an acquired taste, and those who use it are use to it idiosyncratic ways.

Either way, to get Zeiss quality with digital, you simply have to put up with less convenience and speed.
 
Top