Contax or Leica?

PatrickT

PatrickT

New Rangefinder User
Local time
2:51 PM
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
796
I've been thinking about getting either a Leica or a Contax SLR. What are your opinions as to the better cameras/lenses?

It seems to me (without ever using either) that the Contax SLRs are a bit more advanced, well built, etc. Glass is probably a toss up.

Which bodies to go for for either system? Ones to stay away from?

Anyway....thoughts?
 
Contax SLR (C/Y mount) is made in Japan. So expect better electronics. I'd recommend RTSIII if budget permits, the flagship of Contax SLRs. Exceptional quality, convenient to operate, bright viewfinder, great film flatness. You can't go wrong with it.
 
Thanks for the input (and holy crap, kudos on the camera collection!).

Additional question: Is there a good site that compares all of the Contax or Leica bodies and what features they have, etc? In perusing KEH, there seems to be a decnt number of options...
 
I am a Leica fan, but have only used their rangefinders (I own an M8 and an M2). I've handled an R8 only a couple of times, so take what comes with a grain of salt.

My film SLR is a Contax RX, and I would highly recommend it. I got it off eBay for $450 with the 50mm f/1.7 included. I was kind of wanting an R8 before getting the Contax. Not interested now. The RX is an insanely great camera that I appreciate more every time I pick it up. Be sure to get a 28mm Distagon, whatever Contax you end up with. Love that lens.
 
Last edited:
Can't A/B Leica/Contax. Have Aria (dead), RTS, RTSIII (may have mirror problem). That said, I love the RTSIII. It is heavy, but what a nice camera. I might have to send mine back to Japan for CLA, but such a nice camera. RTS, fine camera also. Aria..plastic.
 
Patrick,
What do you want to do with the SLR? I am all for the Contax line -- awesome cameras and (obviously) awesome glass, but while the RTS III (and the RX) is an absolutely phantastic piece of professional camera engineering, it also a beast sizewise. Unless you need pro-level options and capabilities, definitely look at the Aria as well. Super-light but still superb quality and ruggedness, and as such a great body for travel etc.
 
If the Contax SLRs I see for sale are anything to go by, Yashica's main aim seems to have been to keep cameraleather in business.
 
PatrickT said:
I've been thinking about getting either a Leica or a Contax SLR. What are your opinions as to the better cameras/lenses?

It seems to me (without ever using either) that the Contax SLRs are a bit more advanced, well built, etc. Glass is probably a toss up.

Which bodies to go for for either system? Ones to stay away from?

Anyway....thoughts?
Click to expand...

Patrick, in case you haven't noticed, there have been quite a few Contax SLR related posts in this sub-forum as of late. Both reporting good and bad, actually.

For me, the Contax SLR lineup is far more interesting than Leica's, plus I can't justify getting the more expensive Leica R's just to try them out.

As for bodies, I recommend 137 MA for starters and I have recently purchased a Contax ST, which is basically an RTSIII with a few omitted features that I can live without.
 
ruby.monkey said:
If the Contax SLRs I see for sale are anything to go by, Yashica's main aim seems to have been to keep cameraleather in business.
Click to expand...

I'd take a goo covered 137 MA and pay $17 to replace the leather myself any day.

Those are dirt cheap because most people judge by the cover... ba da bum :)

Unlike Konica, which has excellent lenses but mostly fragile and weird bodies, Contax SLRs are actually good cameras that are fun to use.
 
Contax for sure. The lenses available are outstanding. First decide if you want auto advance or no. If yes then RX if you shoot any tele lenses. Aria if you keep it under the 85mm sonnar and shorter. The best classic SLR ever in my opinion is the RTSii. Beautiful finish, great screens for focus on a huge VF, excellent metering, and manual advance without a MD. If you don't need autowind go for that one.
 
I'll happily vouch for Contax in the SLR area. Both Leica SLR bodies and lenses bored me. Contax slr's on the other hand are so well ergonomically designed and I love how each model catered to a specific niche of the market, you get a camera that is perfectly suited for you. The lens line up is exceptional, CZ c/y lenses are a dream you can't go wrong.
 
Thanks for the input guys!

mathomas - The more I read, the more I hear about how the RX is a great camera!

mbisc - I'm actually not sure what I'd want to do with it :) Just kind of speculating here. In an ideal world, I can imagine that I'd want to use the 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4, but that's going to empty my bank account, and then some :)

zhengpeng - Thanks for the link!

shadow - your recent post is what got me thinking again about these. The ST looks like a phenomenal camera, as does the RX.

The bodies seems to be relatively inexpensive ($200ish for a BGN RX), but the lenses seem like quite a lot. I would love to start out with an RX/Aria and the 50/1.4!

Let's keep the discussion going :)
 
the main reason for buying contax was always the zeiss glass that went on it. Since you can now buy zeiss glass to fit canon, nikon and pentax bodies the choice of which camera body to buy is much bigger. so you could go for a Nikon F6 and Zeiss manual focus lenses.

But if you want a contax body, then from the older ones a 159 which is basic all manual, or RTSII which has mirror lockup or from the later contax bodies the ST, RTSIII or for leightweight small the Aria which also has good matrix metering. And there were also two late S2 models which were totally manual and will work without batteries. The light meter requires batteries. One of them has center weighted metering the other spot only metering.
 
The RX is the best value of the bunch. The RTSIII is a more solid camera, with the weight to prove it, best viewfinder, but much more expense and from a practical point of view, not much more functional. In fact, it is less functional with flash. You need to set the f-stop yourself. The Aria was my first Contax and the one I expected to love, but I didn't. What it does have is the matrix metering and great communication with the Contax flash. What it lacks is solid, sturdy build. It also is overwhelmed by anything other than a really small lens. Of course, mine tanked within two rolls of film, so not happy about that and the rubberized finish pealed..not so happy about that, but many swear by this camera. Wonderful size for lugging around with a small lens mounted...ie the 45mm.. I purchased the SLR for an alternative to my rangefinders. I use them for macro.. 100mm Makro is the best of best lenses and tack sharp for anything that a 100mm can do. Actually, found one NIB. The 100-300mm lens is really sharp.. but big. The 50mm f/1.4 is one everyone's best lens list, but I shoot mostly rangefinder in this focal length and wider. What I wanted with the Aria and the RX was the ability to shoot Velvia with a polarizer. So, as others have said, ask yourself why and what you are doing.
 
Now that this has moved on to lenses. Don't miss out on the 2 sort tele sonnars. Both tge 85 and 100 are beautiful sharp lenses with silky bokey. Excellent sharpness even wide open. The Tessar 45 is also a do not miss. Tiny it's a perfect match for the Aria with a sonnar 85 making a very nice light kit.
 
even Leica R8 and 9 have come down in prices, since the system was discontinued. nice cameras and terrific Leitz R-glass, but age starts to show. batteries and compatible memory cards (for DMR) are getting rare.
 
I've shot with a 139 and 137MD Quartz. I haven't used a Leica SLR. General comments on the two cameras:

- You'll almost certainly have to replace the foam seals and quite possibly the body covering. I bought replacements from Aki-Asahi.

- The Yashica/Kyocera Contax have very good focusing screens. Much brighter than other manual-focus SLRs.

- The build quality of the lenses is very good, as is the optical performance.

- If you want a smaller body, the 139 is very good. There is a winder available for it.

- The 137MD uses AA batteries. It's fully automatic and offers just one manual shutter speed for flash synch.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom