hmm. Have never noticed that, either.
This RX has a slightly different pitch on the shutter actuation than an earlier RX I owned.
This RX has a slightly different pitch on the shutter actuation than an earlier RX I owned.
Rico
Well-known
I have a grid in my S2, and it does seem darker than standard Contax screens (w/split-image RF, microprism collar, matte surround). I believe the grid minimizes vignetting and maximizes focussing effectiveness throughout the frame. The standard screen assumes you will focus/recompose. The Contax screens are cheap ($25), but increasingly hard to find. If you don't score the FV-1 from eBay or KEH in a month, I'll send you one of mine: I have meant to install the FV-3 matte for several years now.
bwcolor
Veteran
Thanks.. I'll keep an eye out. In an month, if I don't find one, I'll give you my address as long as you allow me to send you the money.
MikeAUS
Well-known
What are your early impressions of the ST,RX and Aria? I'm sure many are interested to hear ...I have an ST, an RX, and an Aria. I like them all. But I don't need 3.
I have not shot with the ST yet, and only one roll with the RX.
Initial impressions are: the Aria is small, and very light compared to the RX. The RX is heavier and more solid. There is no clear 'winner' in this aspect, because it depends on what you are looking for...heavy duty use, or a camera that is light enough you don't notice it around your neck when you carry it all day.
I have not tried the DOF indicator on the RX yet, on the one roll I shot. I would prefer the RX to have matrix metering, in general, although for all practical purposes a center weighted meter is more than good enough (I am shooting the new Portra 400 which has tons of latitude.)
Viewfinders are very similar: large, and bright. I would venture there are few SLR viewfinders that would be better (although there are several that are as good.)
Aria is quiet, the RX has a different sort of higher pitched shutter sound but it is also quiet.
In terms of operation and controls they are nearly identical, so it's easy to switch from one to the other.
The ST has red LEDs in the viewfinder, which are probably more easily visible in a wider range of conditions. I also like that it uses standard batteries (in this case AAA in the battery grip, which also has a vertical shutter button which I like from my Nikon days.)
These cameras are inexpensive enough that I will probably keep two, if not all three...just switch cameras instead of lenses.
And that's the real reason to shoot Contax...all that Zeiss goodness.
Initial impressions are: the Aria is small, and very light compared to the RX. The RX is heavier and more solid. There is no clear 'winner' in this aspect, because it depends on what you are looking for...heavy duty use, or a camera that is light enough you don't notice it around your neck when you carry it all day.
I have not tried the DOF indicator on the RX yet, on the one roll I shot. I would prefer the RX to have matrix metering, in general, although for all practical purposes a center weighted meter is more than good enough (I am shooting the new Portra 400 which has tons of latitude.)
Viewfinders are very similar: large, and bright. I would venture there are few SLR viewfinders that would be better (although there are several that are as good.)
Aria is quiet, the RX has a different sort of higher pitched shutter sound but it is also quiet.
In terms of operation and controls they are nearly identical, so it's easy to switch from one to the other.
The ST has red LEDs in the viewfinder, which are probably more easily visible in a wider range of conditions. I also like that it uses standard batteries (in this case AAA in the battery grip, which also has a vertical shutter button which I like from my Nikon days.)
These cameras are inexpensive enough that I will probably keep two, if not all three...just switch cameras instead of lenses.
And that's the real reason to shoot Contax...all that Zeiss goodness.
Well the RX has some sort of film transport problem...spacing between frames is wonky, as the first roll revealed:
A few of the frames overlapped slightly. So, it's going back.
The viewfinder is also dimmer than the Aria or the ST due to the DOF indicator, although in practical use it's not enough to make a difference, I only noticed when comparing them one after the other.
ST is loud, but after all this is the clunky SLR forum right?
ST takes AAA batts standard, or AA with the grip (to clarify the previous post.)
The grip is actually called 'Battery Holder P-7.'
A few of the frames overlapped slightly. So, it's going back.
The viewfinder is also dimmer than the Aria or the ST due to the DOF indicator, although in practical use it's not enough to make a difference, I only noticed when comparing them one after the other.
ST is loud, but after all this is the clunky SLR forum right?
ST takes AAA batts standard, or AA with the grip (to clarify the previous post.)
The grip is actually called 'Battery Holder P-7.'
mathomas
Well-known
Well the RX has some sort of film transport problem...spacing between frames is wonky, as the first roll revealed:
A few of the frames overlapped slightly. So, it's going back.
The viewfinder is also dimmer than the Aria or the ST due to the DOF indicator, although in practical use it's not enough to make a difference, I only noticed when comparing them one after the other.
ST is loud, but after all this is the clunky SLR forum right?
ST takes AAA batts standard, or AA with the grip (to clarify the previous post.)
The grip is actually called 'Battery Holder P-7.'
Oh, too bad. I hope you can get one that works better!
I was fortunate to get a really good RX from popflash. Mine came with the 50/1.7, and I added the 28/2.8 from eBay. I recently shot some Ektar 100 on a sunny day with the 28mm and was absolutely blown away by the results. I do need a hood for it, though.
I love the feel and smoothness of the camera and the logical layout of the controls. It's so solid when taking a shot, it's hard to believe there's a mirror flapping around inside the body. The thing sounds like a high-end robotic pair of scissors.
Last edited:
MikeAUS
Well-known
Hey, that's cheating
You said you were only going to keep one! Keep us posted as you learn more ...Thanks.
bwcolor
Veteran
Sorry to hear about the film spacing. I assume that the battery is fresh.
I now have the 45mm f/2.8 permanently attached to the Aria. It is the perfect lens for the Aria. I was concerned regarding the quality of the optics, but my first roll has eliminated these concerns. The lens is sharp and contrasty once stopped down by one or two stops. I will be using it with ISO 100 slide film and a B&W polarizer. The 50mm f/1.4 was just too big. The RTS III also uses AA batteries. It is substantially noisier than the Aria, or the RX, but the mirror return is the fastest that I've ever used, but that isn't saying much. I was planning on using this camera mainly with the 100mm Makro, which is taking forever to get here from Australia... express my foot. It seems that the flat field of the Makro and the flat pressure plate should work well together. I ended up with two RXs. I never intended to buy the RTSIII, just like I was going to wait six months to buy the X100...well as Robert knows... that may be exactly what will happen. So, I will probably sell one of my RXs. So far, I've been lucky with the cameras. I will say that I have to look long and hard in the right light to see the differences between the Arias' viewfinder and that of the RX. My RTSIII has a matt/grid viewfinder and it seems substantially dimmer. I will still reach for a rangefinder for anything 90mm and under where I'm not shooting slide film with a polarizer, or where I don't need close focusing. I really like the Contax and have no intention of buying another DSLR, so I will also be selling my 1DMKIII and a ton of L glass. I'm perfectly happy with Zeiss and manual focus. The date function on the Rx and RTS III is pretty nice. Well executed. I'm also liking the film leader being left out upon rewind. That makes loading the reels a snap.
I should add that I picked up an inexpensive TLA360 from KEH and it works like a charm on all cameras. I'm using it with Gary Fong on the flash, or for daylight fill flash. I don't use flash much.
I now have the 45mm f/2.8 permanently attached to the Aria. It is the perfect lens for the Aria. I was concerned regarding the quality of the optics, but my first roll has eliminated these concerns. The lens is sharp and contrasty once stopped down by one or two stops. I will be using it with ISO 100 slide film and a B&W polarizer. The 50mm f/1.4 was just too big. The RTS III also uses AA batteries. It is substantially noisier than the Aria, or the RX, but the mirror return is the fastest that I've ever used, but that isn't saying much. I was planning on using this camera mainly with the 100mm Makro, which is taking forever to get here from Australia... express my foot. It seems that the flat field of the Makro and the flat pressure plate should work well together. I ended up with two RXs. I never intended to buy the RTSIII, just like I was going to wait six months to buy the X100...well as Robert knows... that may be exactly what will happen. So, I will probably sell one of my RXs. So far, I've been lucky with the cameras. I will say that I have to look long and hard in the right light to see the differences between the Arias' viewfinder and that of the RX. My RTSIII has a matt/grid viewfinder and it seems substantially dimmer. I will still reach for a rangefinder for anything 90mm and under where I'm not shooting slide film with a polarizer, or where I don't need close focusing. I really like the Contax and have no intention of buying another DSLR, so I will also be selling my 1DMKIII and a ton of L glass. I'm perfectly happy with Zeiss and manual focus. The date function on the Rx and RTS III is pretty nice. Well executed. I'm also liking the film leader being left out upon rewind. That makes loading the reels a snap.
I should add that I picked up an inexpensive TLA360 from KEH and it works like a charm on all cameras. I'm using it with Gary Fong on the flash, or for daylight fill flash. I don't use flash much.
Last edited:
fuwen
Well-known
The 45mm Tessar is a very interesting lens. Although I use my 50/1.4 more due to higher speed for general purposes, the Tessar has a very unique way of rendering and I find it very special and like its rendering very much. To me it seems to produce images with very 3D feeling .............
bwcolor
Veteran
The 50mm really is an exceptional lens and I can see how it makes more sense for general shooting.
I just received the 100mm Makro. It was advertised as new/old stock, which I had doubted, but now that I have received it.. well.. it is new. I guess that the world is a large place and strange things happen. How a lens like this can get forgotten in some corner is a very curious event. It sure is a nice lens. The lenses available for this line of film cameras is really amazing.
I just received the 100mm Makro. It was advertised as new/old stock, which I had doubted, but now that I have received it.. well.. it is new. I guess that the world is a large place and strange things happen. How a lens like this can get forgotten in some corner is a very curious event. It sure is a nice lens. The lenses available for this line of film cameras is really amazing.
ta152c
Newbie
Contax RTS II is my favourite, great camera.
bwcolor
Veteran
& My Aria' electronics failed back in 2011. The RT series are nice, but I wonder about getting them serviced. Sent my RTS III to Japan in 2012 for CLA, but I think that the servicing has ended, or is about to end.
Trask
Established
I've got a 167MT which is going strong after 20+ years, and I've picked up two RTS II that have a problem with how the lens inputs its maximum aperture to the camera body electronics. I see the reference to TOCAD as a repair place -- any other shops or experts who can fix RTS II cameras? I don't mind sending in two bodies and getting just one back, if that's what it takes to get a properly operating RTS II body.
philosli
Established
This seems a common problem to Contax bodies and CY lenses. It's not clear whether it's the lens or the camera body. Some people have complained about similar issues on various forums, like this one:
http://www.forums.camera-info.com/t...with-my-contax-zeiss-distagon-2-8-25-ae.2422/
I had a similar issue with my 28mm F2.8. I'm pretty sure it's the lens. I have 2 bodies and 4 lenses. Both bodies show incorrect aperture readings when 28mm is mounted, but no issue when the other 3 lenses are used. To me it's not a big problem (yet) since most of the time I manually set aperture and shutter speed. A couple times I used Av, I set the ISO or used exposure compensation to correct the aperture misreadings.
JeffL
Well-known
I had great service from TOCAD.
I hope a Contax repair specialist surfaces.
You can get great service for Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Rolleiflex, Hasselblad etc. Just need one for Yashica/Kyocera Contax.
I hope a Contax repair specialist surfaces.
You can get great service for Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Rolleiflex, Hasselblad etc. Just need one for Yashica/Kyocera Contax.
oftheherd
Veteran
My first Contax was a 139Q. Did I ever love that camera and the 50mm f/1.4 lens! Did you ever get another body?
I picked up a Contax 167mt about 10 years ago, with three inexpensive but good zooms from 18mm to 150mm (Vivitar and Phoenix). So far it is working well. I was amazed at how well balanced it was. Mine had the battery bottom, but I still find it fairly light, and have quite gotten used to not having to put my thumb to work to advance the film.
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
Is it a parts problem?
Mark Hama can fix many things, but is stymied by lack of parts sometimes.
He's done great work for me, but was unable to fix an original RTS with a metering problem.
Mark Hama can fix many things, but is stymied by lack of parts sometimes.
He's done great work for me, but was unable to fix an original RTS with a metering problem.
osborne
Newbie
from 2 months I've got a ARIA and I "fall in love" with it
Now, I look at a RX and this thread correspond me. Just a question : is the focusing screen of the RX so bright and luminous than the Aria one ? Is it right that is dimmer and is it a problem for the everyday usage ?
It's very important for me because I wear glasses and have difficulty to look at the majority of SLR's finder.
Nota : excuse my bad english ; I don't exceed english spoken.
Now, I look at a RX and this thread correspond me. Just a question : is the focusing screen of the RX so bright and luminous than the Aria one ? Is it right that is dimmer and is it a problem for the everyday usage ?
It's very important for me because I wear glasses and have difficulty to look at the majority of SLR's finder.
Nota : excuse my bad english ; I don't exceed english spoken.
Dirk
Privatier
I had both the Aria and the RX. The RX's screen is actually brighter than the Aria, not the other way around. The rare RXII is brighter still. Overall, other than size and weight, the RX is much superior to the Aria. Better built, quieter, smoother and more ergonomic.