Contax RTS vs 139

[Range-rover]

This is a good thread, I just picked up a RTS off ebay for a great price, the seller said
it worked and when it arrived it all seems good, the low shutter speed were slow so
I took off the bottom cover and cleaned the magnet assembly and it works better
now. I did replace the leather and now I have it loaded with film.

Range

 

[oftheherd]

Hi everyone. I don't mean to resurrect a dead thread, but since I now own a 139 and FX-3 (thanks oftheherd for the recommendation) I thought I'd give an update.

First off, the 139 is beautiful. Much better looking in person than I expected - the black finish in combination with the minimal design makes the camera look understated and sleek. The viewfinder is big and very bright, brighter and larger than the RX but does not have the same amount of contrast. The RX is probably better to focus in fairly bright conditions, where the 139 seems easier to focus at night. Shutter quiet (sounds sort of like a robot sneezing) is very well dampened, which is just as well since there doesn't seem to be any mirror lockup. Shutter button is extremely responsive and I much prefer it to the half-press of other cameras. Second button on the front for metering in manual works very well. Lots of other things to mention, but otherwise a really well designed camera. The only negative is that the film advance lever wobbles slightly, which I find a bit annoying. I've tried to tighten the screw that fixes the lever to the body but it doesn't make any difference, I'm assuming that there's some spring or rubber pad in there somewhere that has flattened with age and produced some slack.

Surprisingly I really like the FX-3 in spite of it being so cheap and having so much plastic. I'm not sure if the viewfinder has as much coverage as the 139, but it seems just as bright and even larger. I prefer the 139 finder, if only for the horizontal rather than diagonal split screen, otherwise there isn't much in it. The shutter is really bloody loud with significant mirror slap and the body rings slightly, which I find to be a bit of a dealbreaker - though it has mirror lockup once self timer is activated (which the 139 doesn't have). Both the self timer lever and the film advance lever wobble a lot and don't improve with screw tightening. It's very light, but only a bit lighter than the 139. Shutter release action is quite long and not great but does have a cable release thread. Even though it's plastic, seems to be extremely robust (reminds me of those indestructible Nokia cellphones from the late 90's) and I have a suspicion that it'll probably keep ticking along well after all my other cameras have needed overhauls. It's not the camera of choice for when I head out the door but it seems to really be the ultimate backup camera - light, reliable, takes my good lenses etc. I'll probably pick up a second one if it's cheap.

Anyway, thanks again for the tips!

Sounds like your FX-3 may have had a busy life. But if it works, and it probably will for a long time more, I would keep it and use it. Glad there are things about it you like. Of course, the Contax 139Q is for sure a fun camera to own and use. Enjoy them both.

My FX-3 doesn't really get a lot of use other than to sit in my Contax 167mt kit as a back up. Once in a while I take pity on it and use it for a roll or two.

 

[oftheherd]

The 139Q was my first SLR...I bought a rebuilt one from Contax139.info and can recommend them as well.

Thanks for that info. I hadn't heard of him before. Whatever his unavoidable circumstances are I hope they work themselves out well in his favor.

In the meantime, he has a great DIY section there for the 139Q.