Contax III v post war Contax IIIa

[dee]

I sure hope that my Ukrainiain Tech is good as I have entrusted several dead Contax cameras to his care . LOL .

 

[furcafe]

I actually find the pre-war cameras to be more robust & "M-Leica-like," which isn't surprising since the Contax II was the true inspiration for the M3. I agree that the post-war cameras have a nicer finish & easier-to-use shutter speed dial, but I don't think the build quality is better. IMHO, it's that most surviving pre-war cameras seem to have been used very hard (& are older to begin with) that accounts for their relatively poor condition today.

I've owned or own and use all the models under discussion here. The post-war Contax is clearly superior to the pre-war Contax and Kiev which are not bad cameras at all (and can make good backup bodies if you own a IIa or IIIa). The IIa/IIIa is closer to a Leica M2 or M3 in terms of fit, finish and build quality and the prices generally reflect this. Of course the M2/M3 finders are better, but then again one still pays more for an M and Leica is a different universe in many other respects. Prewar Contax bodies in good repair are hard to find, while there are still many good working post-war bodies not in pressing need of a CLA.

A Contax IIa or IIIa in proper repair has a whisper quiet shutter, a silky smooth film advance, is light and easy to handle, and is a master work of finely finished metal and precision mechanical engineering. Need I say more???

 

[dee]

... on that note - given that it's considered that an early Kiev II or III is of Contax quality - the best comparison with a post war Contax IIa / IIIa maybe my near contemporary , almost ' new ' , 1952 KNeB II - a Contax II minus wear ... or even my considerately used , silky smooth 1951 . K II .

Fascinating ! It's just leapt in ' value ' to me , irrespective of the £60 pre CLA purchase cost .

 

[dee]

Of course , that shutter speed dial can be rectified with a Kiev IV top plate , meter and controls . LOL ...