Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Small Contax SLRs
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:11 pm    Post subject: Small Contax SLRs Reply with quote
I'm just getting into Contax. Apart from the Aria, does anyone know which are the smallest Contax SLRs? Any recommendations?

Thanks,

Simon.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Take an Aria.
I love it!

As for manual winding Contax. The RTS II is without equal.
Not too small though Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:18 am    Post subject: Re: Small Contax SLRs Reply with quote
I have the 137a (in fact two, one with and one without data back) which is not too huge.. and both the f1.4 (MM) and 1.7 (AE) 50mm Contax primes.

One of the 137a and 50mm is up for sale, reasonable offers considered, hint hint..lol

Doug.



quote="wintoid"]I'm just getting into Contax. Apart from the Aria, does anyone know which are the smallest Contax SLRs? Any recommendations?

Thanks,

Simon.[/quote]


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I received an Aria in the post a few days back, and am currently waiting for the lens. All purchased together, but he shipped them separately, and the lens hasn't arrived yet.

I have a Yashica ML from a broken FX3 which I'm trying on the Aria, but the metering seems all over the place. I'm hoping it's the lens and not the Aria.

I'm just kicking ideas around at the moment. I need to work out what I've got before considering any more gear seriously, but the Aria seems so nice that a second, less pretty workhorse would be nice. I did find a shop offering a very tatty Aria for £100, but haven't as yet bought it.

So, is a 137 small like an OM1?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
wintoid wrote:

So, is a 137 small like an OM1?


Yes, similar size.

JJ


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi,

Yes I have most of the OM range too (OK I am an addict, what did you expect?) and the 137a is not that much larger than an OM though a bit heavier...

I'd say it's in the Minolta X700 range (yep got 2 of them...) and is a nice camera. The leatherette on the bodies rots and turns into fuzz, but both mine have new coverings (sensible black leather not purple died dayglow ostritch skin!) from Camera Leather Co.

Nice units both... Smile Smile Smile

Doug.

PS If you want more details / info / pics of them Private Message me and I'll forward them on. I have 41 bodies and 27 lenses of various types (all in A1 working order) for sale, to fund my purchase of a new Canon 1D MK lll with appropriate 'L' glass....


wintoid wrote:
I received an Aria in the post a few days back, and am currently waiting for the lens. All purchased together, but he shipped them separately, and the lens hasn't arrived yet.

I have a Yashica ML from a broken FX3 which I'm trying on the Aria, but the metering seems all over the place. I'm hoping it's the lens and not the Aria.

I'm just kicking ideas around at the moment. I need to work out what I've got before considering any more gear seriously, but the Aria seems so nice that a second, less pretty workhorse would be nice. I did find a shop offering a very tatty Aria for £100, but haven't as yet bought it.

So, is a 137 small like an OM1?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
wintoid wrote:

I have a Yashica ML from a broken FX3 which I'm trying on the Aria, but the metering seems all over the place. I'm hoping it's the lens and not the Aria.



The Aria should meter just fine with any ML or Native C/Y lens.
If you did not receive a user manual or have any questions regarding the different modes. Please feel free to ask.

The Camera has a couple of different metering modes that could give you erratic readings.
For example if you had the meter set to spot metering and did not know it. Moving the camera around and watching the values change rapidly would appear odd.
Also if you had the camera set to exposure bracketing it could give confusing readings as you fire of "blanks" that are different each time.

If you are familiar with the camera. Please forgive me if I sound redundant Wink


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks everyone.

Yeah I got a manual and read it (unusual for me, but then I was getting weird results). I think I might have just been expecting too much. I'd set the ISO to 1600 (pushed Neopan) for some indoor stuff, and then ended up outdoors for a few frames. I set it to f16 for the outdoors stuff, and assumed the shutter speed would cope (aperture priority).

The f1.7 Planar arrived today, and the 2 rolls I've done today seem to be OK, metering wise.

I'm thinking about a second body, without motor drive. What about the 159MM, anyone have any opinions on that?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:34 am    Post subject: Re: Small Contax SLRs Reply with quote
wintoid wrote:
I'm just getting into Contax. Apart from the Aria, does anyone know which are the smallest Contax SLRs? Any recommendations?

Surprised not to see a mention of the Contax 159MM. It's almost identical in size to the Aria, and doesn't have some of its features, like ABC or built in winder, but it's a little peach, and it sits better in the hands - at least, it sits better in my hands. I'm not sure how it compares with the 13x bodies, but with the Pancake Tessar mounted, it's about as compact as can be.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Alex,

No question, I will be getting a 159MM when my funds recover. I don't really want motor drive, but I do want small, and I do want a grip. The 159MM looks perfect Very Happy

Simon


PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If it doesn't have to be Contax, the Yashica FX3 is good and pretty small...


PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks, Puplet. I picked up a FX3 Super 2000 actually, but I am not keen on the metering, and it really has a lot of mirror slap.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've never owned an FX3 - but it was the camera I really wanted when I was 10 years old Smile


PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 6:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think there is also Contax S2 but I don't know if it was made in black too.


PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 6:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
montecarlo wrote:
I think there is also Contax S2 but I don't know if it was made in black too.


I think yes.
But not great quantities (at the time most people wanted the automation in cameras), andd so the price is high even for used.
S2 also has a limitation, in it's first release, it can only meter spot.
Sure it's good to have spot metering, but _only_ spot metering makes it not really comfortable to use.


PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The S2 is an interesting camera and a bit of a novelty from Contax.
It was intended as a Camera that would be similar the the Nikon FM/2/n.
Burly Titanium construction, manual only, mechanical shutter (battery only for meter).

I did not find the construction to feel as robust as say the RX or some of the other pro models (not as heavy/tough as the Nikon FM's to be sure).

As to the models there where 2. The S2 with a Spot meter as Orio mentioned and the S2b with a center weighted meter.

The damn things still bring $700 on ebay Shocked It seems that it is mostly a camera for collectors.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi

Th ST model is very close to the Aria in terms of construction and lightweightness... That last as soon as i got more money i buy it !!

Anyway those bodies are very classy and the Zeiss lenses... Cool
i plan to begin with a 139 and the 1.7/50mm

any owner reviews ? much appreciated thanx


PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hexi wrote:
Hi
Th ST model is very close to the Aria in terms of construction and lightweightness... That last as soon as i got more money i buy it !!
Anyway those bodies are very classy and the Zeiss lenses... Cool
i plan to begin with a 139 and the 1.7/50mm
any owner reviews ? much appreciated thanx


If you want a fully manual camera then perhaps a Yashica like the FX2 or FX3 could be a better (and less expensive) choice than the Contax 139 because they will shoot also without batteries whereas the 139 can not shoot if the batteries are dead.
On the other hand, the 139 is better build. So it's up to you to choose.

The 1.7/50 is an excellent lens to start with, but since today in the used market the price difference with the 1.4/50 is not that big anymore, I would perhaps go for a 1.4/50 which will give you more of the "zeiss look" compared to the 1.7/50 which is probably sharper but maybe with not as much personality.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanx for the info. I'd go for the better build and the Contax on the front of the camera is more appealing Very Happy.
I know that a 1.4 is brighter and all, but a 1.7 will do for the moment ( i can sell it afterwards ) after i'd look for a 135 2.8 which prices are cheaper by now.

I also saw the contax m42 adapter, but no clue on that on one, the focusing is microprism split image, and for my X700 i found a all matte screen which is my fav, cos focusing is easier to me at least.

thanx again


PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wouldn't disagree on the 139's build quality, but it shouldn't put the FX-3 out of consideration on durability either. I've had my FX-3 for nearly thirty years, and it is still as fully functional as the day I bought it. It goes on and on and on. It's an incredibly reliable camera, very light, yet robust, and moreover it works without batteries. The shell may be polycarbonate but the chassis is metal. Mine is the original FX-3, not the FX-3 Super (though I have that too), which has the separate button for activating the exposure meter, and I prefer that to the half-shutter-press of the FX-3 Super.

If you want an f/1.4 without paying the Zeiss price, the Yashica 1.4 ML is tough to beat. In my neck of the woods, it tends to go for just a little less than the 1.7 Planar, but a heck of a lot less than the 1.4 Planar.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Its done : i bought the Contax 139 that was auctioned , it came with the 50mm 1.7, but i don't mind. i'm impatient too see this stuff at work.

as about switching to th 1.4 lens, i'll do it later surely. with an addition of another Contax body, an Aria could be fine and this would be the more recent camera i'll have Cool


PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
The damn things still bring $700 on ebay Shocked It seems that it is mostly a camera for collectors.


I saw few days ago a new and boxed S2 60 years edition.... meh if i'd had the money i would have bought it right away. costed some 600$ if i recall.

As i'm very pleased with my 139, despite the leatherette dissapearing at the slightest touch ( hopefully i'm expecting a case soon ) i would have some infos about the RTS. I've watched all over the net so far, and know many things already at least the most important to me, but any users infos would be much appreciated , thanx.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
Page 1 of 1