Contax Aria vs. RX a few observations for the few considering these cameras

B

bwcolor

Veteran
Local time
3:51 PM
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,346
I expected to love the Aria, but have fallen for the RX. The Aria is wonderfully small and light, but I think that the 45mm Tessar is best left on it. (If I only had one.) Even the 50mm f/1.4 is a bit much and I just don't manage to steady the Aria in low light. The RX is smoother, quieter and a better balanced camera for the 50mm. The RX is of more solid build.. or so it seems. I can't tell that it has a 20% dimmer viewfinder and I like the focus confirmation when light is adequate. I get many more keepers when shooting low light with the RX. It has to be the nicest SLR that I have ever used and so tonight I picked up a second one. Thanks to everyone here that pointed me in this direction. Don't exactly know what I will do with three bodies and two lenses, but I'm pretty sure I better do it quietly and without the knowledge of my wife. Again, no Fujifilm X100 for me, but happy on this end.
 
I have both and prefer the Aria for the weight but I can easily see why you like the RX. My personal favorite is the ST with it's ceramic pressure plate, led meter readout and lit external controls. It's a very well kept secret, you don't see many and I miss mine.

Enjoy your Contax equipment, great stuff!

Kent
 
I think that the Aria would have trumped the RX if I didn't have so many great rangefinder lenses and cameras. I'm sure that once I get that 45mm... it will really shine.

I wanted the ST, but was already worried about purchasing old electronics and the ST was even older than the Aria and RX. Otherwise, I think that I would have gone that direction. Love the vertical grip.
 
Congrats. The RX is on my acquisition list, but other Real Time cameras keep getting in the way! Am currently hoarding three RTS III, Aria, 139Q. 159MM, and S2. Also have 17 CZ and Yashica ML lenses. Some might call it a sickness. :)
 
Rico.. I was looking at the RTSIII, but was scared away by the viewfinder LCD fading issue. I gather that these cameras can still be repaired in Japan, but that kept me from bidding on the RTSIII. What do you think and how does the RTSIII compare to the RX?
 
Thanks for the post.
I`ve just picked up a 139Q to replace a failing Yashica FDX.
Considering another body sometime in the future.
 
RX is really beautiful body, but sooo heavy
shooting RX with VS 80-200 was a real gym for me compared to leica m3 with rokkor 90
:)
 
bwcolor said:
Rico.. I was looking at the RTSIII, but was scared away by the viewfinder LCD fading issue. I gather that these cameras can still be repaired in Japan, but that kept me from bidding on the RTSIII. What do you think and how does the RTSIII compare to the RX?
Click to expand...
LCD deterioration is by no means inevitable (mine are A-okay), but RTSIII should be repairable in the US via Tocad (they'll ship to Japan if needed). No experience with RX, but the RTSIII is a weighty beast: good for events, less fun for walking around. The build quality, ergos, design, and VF precision are world-class. While the brain is digital, all controls are analog - dials and levers - and that allows the settings to be determined by eye (by touch in most cases). The inbuilt vertical grip is superb. For reasons of weight, I do prefer one of 139/159/Aria for casual purposes.
 
I had both Aria and the RX.

In my opinion, the Aria is somewhat inferior in terms of build quality if compared to the RX. The finish is somewhat less rugged and the one I had has scarred back as the rubbery surface became sticky like blue tack. The Aria also feels very light but it can be bad if you hand hold in low light situation. Not to mention the louder film transport and the mirror slap.

The RX meanwhile feels solid with the mostly metal construction. I have no problem handling it in low light conditions; due to the heavier body and the refined mirror slap. I had handled the RTS III before and it feels exactly like the RX and the weight difference is not that significant (at least to me).

In the end I decided to get the RX as the RTS III still command a high price. And that LCD bleeding issue will likely to affect its resale value.
 
Rico:

It seems that the six pluses of the RTS III are speed (FPS), 100% viewfinder, 1/250 sync, pre-flash, vertical shutter trip and the claim that the pressure plate results in sharper images. The speed is a given. The 100% viewfinder is a bit curious. The spec sheet claims that the viewfinder is 100% with a -1.0 diopter lens. Other Contax cameras are not rated in this way. I'm sure that the viewfinder is first rate. The last claim is of more interest.

When using high resolving films, such as Velvia, do you find that your RTS III provides sharper images than your other Contax cameras?
 
I have the Aria http://www.fuwen.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=115&Itemid=182

and the Contax RTS III http://www.fuwen.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=116&Itemid=183

What I am using most of the time (other than my rangefinders) is the Aria, mainly due to its light weight, and because I have the databack I am able to document all the shooting settings on the negative. From many Contax users Aria is probably the most reliable body Contax ever made, with also the mirror slip issue solved in this model. To me the main issue of Aria is the balancing when using with heavy lens, and the apparent 'shutter lag' feeling although it can clocks 3 fps.

As for RTS III, you have the very obvious feel of speed when using it. However, the LCD issue is evident and not cheap to repair.

In terms of focusing, the Aria view finder actually is slightly better with higher magnification as the RTS III has a 100% finder for high view point viewing.

RTS II probably is a good compromise between the Aria and the RTS III, but its using older technology with no spot metering, flash sync at 1/60.
 
I understand why you carry the Aria, when not shooting rangefinders and I can understand not carrying the RTS III.

Aria is easier to carry, but it is even front heavy with the 50mm f/1.4, but in all fairness, rangefinders are also front heavy with fast 50's. I think the reintroduction of a mirror after a couple of years shooting rangefinders has me aware of the felt lens slap with such a small camera. I believe this is the reason that I did much better shooting my RX with slow shutter speeds.

I forgot to mention mirror lockup above (previous post), but really, the only advantage that I see for me of the RTS III over the RX is the 1/250 sync and the extra level of sharpness with films like Velvia. The other advantages are not so important to me. The problem is that I have yet to hear of someone that suggest that they get sharper images with the RTS III.
 
Some other RTSIII features of lesser or greater value: inbuilt diopter control, 1/8000s shutter speed, bulb exposures with no battery draw, choice of AA or 2CR5, 2-sec timer. I use the latter to reduce blur at lower speeds. As mentioned by fuwen, the camera operates with real urgency (shutter response, mirror return, film transport). Never noticed the effects of film curl in the other Contax cameras, although I'm sure the vacuum back is even better. :) Don't get me started on film flatness in the Hassy!
 
Rico my friend. Please don't tell my wife, but your post put me over the edge and I picked up a really nice RTS III from a wonderful Japanese Ebay vendor. I've always found their offerings better than stated. In a few weeks I picked up an Aria, two Rxs and now the RTSIII. Also three lenses and a TLA 360. One if not two of the cameras will need to go, but these Contax cameras are great... I forgot.. I've had a G2 system and three lenses for years. My wife will kill me. I've got to put a few cameras and most of my Canon L glass up for sale. Most of it is next to unused, including my 1DMKIII. I just have really gone over the analog deep end. I never found any passion in digital. Just my way of saying thanks and thanks to all that participated in this thread.
 
Mum's the word, as the English say. No need to burden your wife with these small technicalities. :) I was shooting (and souping) film before the RTS system existed. Later, I went with Nikon and Hasselblad, but always thought Contax was the coolest. I also have a hulking Canon DSLR (1Ds), and using it is a sterile affair. Please report your RTSIII experiences later!
 
Question Re: RTS III Focus Screens

Question Re: RTS III Focus Screens

I just received the camera and it is in great shape and is very heavy. It has a grid focusing screen, which is dim and I just don't see how one can focus accurately with such a screen. I searched for focusing screens and for $199.00 I can buy a screen from BrightScreen. Any other suggestions as to how to find a good split image/microprism screen?
 
bwcolor said:
I just received the camera and it is in great shape and is very heavy. It has a grid focusing screen, which is dim and I just don't see how one can focus accurately with such a screen. I searched for focusing screens and for $199.00 I can buy a screen from BrightScreen. Any other suggestions as to how to find a good split image/microprism screen?
Click to expand...

Maybe my eyesight is still OK although I'm already 46, I find my RTS III matt screen OK for f2.8 lenses. All my cameras if I can I will change to full matt screen instead of screen with focusing aids.
 
fuwen said:
Maybe my eyesight is still OK although I'm already 46, I find my RTS III matt screen OK for f2.8 lenses. All my cameras if I can I will change to full matt screen instead of screen with focusing aids.
Click to expand...

Interesting... I, on the other hand, agonize over getting the focus just perfect. Of course, I shoot a good bit with fast lenses wide open. I think that I'll need to adopt Zen and the art of focusing until I can find another screen, or decide that this one is OK. We will see how the 50mm F/1.4 and Makro work with this screen.
 
I have an ST, an RX, and an Aria. I like them all. But I don't need 3.;) It will be an interesting decision of which one stays... Never heard mirror slap on this Aria...it's very quiet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom