Contax RX or RTSII and which C/Y lenses

G

gooseta

Established
Local time
8:08 PM
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
51
View My Gallery
I've been looking at many film SLRs and I have decided to pick up a contax body due to the quality of the lenses. I need help deciding between the RX, RTSII, both of which are priced similarly where I live. I am leaning towards the RX because it is much newer and because of the focus assist (my eyesight isn't brilliant). Which is more reliable? I cannot find a Contax repair shop in the UK...

Also, what are the best value lenses for the C/Y mount? I have read many good things about the 28mm f2.8 which I can get for less than £300. Are there any other good value lenses from 18-85mm?
 
I have a couple of RX cameras and I think that the focus assist is mostly fluff. The camera is solid. I don't have an RXII, but do have a III, which is much heavier and built like a tank. When I shoot DSLR, I mostly use the RTSIII. Recently, I mostly shoot soccer with the Zeiss 100-300mm... a nice lens. Shooting sports with manual focus is a bit of a challenge and I'm not very good at it, but the RTSIII is a great film camera for sports, given the limitation of no autofocus. For wide angle to 90mm, I mostly use rangefinder, or on occasion the G2.

I'm in love with most of my Zeiss lenses, but not sure of how to answer the question of value. I purchased a NIB 100mm Makro and it is both my most expensive lens in that it cost double what I paid for the RTSIII, but it is also a great value. It is up there with the Leica 90mm APO ASPH in terms of image quality. The Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar is a classic and probably a good buy first, or second purchase for your RX/RXII. The only Zeiss that I own that is of lesser quality is their 45mm compact lens that was marketed with the Aria. Zeiss lenses mounted on a Contax G2 are really first rate. The 'G' series includes both 28mm and 90mm. The G2 is also much more compact and pretty nicely priced. Of course, it isn't an SLR. I understand that some of the Yashica C/Y lenses are pretty good and probably a good value, but no first hand experience here.
 
The Rx, which I still use is a great camera. I have the zeiss 50 1.4 Ae, 50 1.7 mm, 45 Distagon mm, 35 2.8 mm, 25 2.8, 85 2.8 ae and the 35-135 vario sonar. All are great lenses. It depends on what type of photography you are doing. I shoot mostly street so it is the 50,45 & 35 for me.
 
the star lenses in the range you listed are the 21/2.8, 28/2 hollywood, 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, and the anniversary f1.2 lenses.

Id get the 50/1.4 and 21 distagon, if I were you.

the best value is the 50/1.7. it's cheap as dirt and if you like to shoot test targets it's got about as high a terminal resolution as any lens ever made.
 
I would suggest not disregarding the 139 Quartz. The RX, ST, RTS3 are all excellent but much bigger/heavier. The 139 has a super large viewfinder and is quite small and light. See below pic compared to M3.

Plus, there is a specialist in the UK who can refurb it for you. I highly recommend Peter Robinson.

I picked up a like new 139 Q from him, it's fantastic and it was quite a bit less than an unserviced RX or RTS3 would cost. I asked him to keep an eye out for a super nice copy and refurb it for me, took about a month but he found one that was near perfect, and then he serviced it.

As for lenses, there are all excellent from 18 to 85mm. I have the 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/2.8, and 135/2.8 and the 60/2.8-C Makro. I used to own the fast ones (28/2 Hollywood is amazing; as is the 100/2 Planar.) Superb, but larger/heavier and I didn't want to tie up that much money in glass for an extra stop.

010460a.jpg


8516469737_5b07cc1498_c.jpg
 
I too got a 139 from Peter Robinson (you can see mine among the recent examples on his For Sale page; it's the one in black lizard pattern leather). I bought it to shoot alongside my Aria and like it very much (more than I imagined I would). Well worth considering if you want a small and simple and well-designed camera. Peter does a fine job.

The Contax lenses are excellent quality but I'm sorry to say the days of them being excellent value are gone. Too many Canon SLR and Sony NEX users want them and there are too few lenses in circulation so prices have inflated. That said, they are worth current prices if you have the cash. There are no duds in the line up (certainly among the primes) so pick the focal length and aperture that suits your needs and buy with confidence.

Some of the Yashica lenses (ML versions) are worth considering. I have the 28mm and 100mm macro. Both are good but the quality difference between them and my Contax 50mm f1.7 is clear to see in the negatives.
 
RX has motor wind, DOF indicator, faster shutter speeds, interchangeable focusing screens, DX support, programmed auto, etc. Bigger/heavier. Has dials/switches similar to other period Contaxes included the G series and 645.

Viewfinders are similar: great. Some say the RX is dimmer, side by side it's hard to tell. The 139Q is more like an OM or FM, small with a separate winder.

Never used an RTSII.
 
The 139 is very tempting. It's the cheapest, best looking, and easiest to get repaired. One question : is the "exposure check"button on the front like a half press on other slrs to start the meter?
 
No data for me regarding reliability, although a refurbed/restored 139 has many, many years of use f its not abused, and perhaps less chance of failure due to simpler design (manual wind.) Just guesswork here.
 
I bought a Contax 139Q and 50mm f/1.4 lens many years ago. The camera failed after about 7 or 8 years, but that was likely due to being in a house fire. The lens remains an excellent photo taker. I really loved that camera. It was small, light, and the otf flash was so incredibly accurate with a dedicated flash that you have to try it to believe it. I also got a winder and felt empowered because of the whir when I took a photo. But I soon stopped using it because my thumb worked quite well the camera was lighter without the winder. The winder is good if you like them.

I have since purchased a Contax 167mt. I was afraid I would be put off by the weight since it has a built-in winder. I wasn't as it doesn't feel that heavy at all. It is also one of the easiest to hold cameras I think I have ever owned or tried. The 167mt has shutter speeds up to 1/4000 but I have yet to really need them.

I am very happy with my 167mt, but if I had still had the 139Q I doubt I would have bought the 167mt, even though I got it for a good price.

gooseta - check you PMs.
 
I've found a 139 for a good price with new seals which I'm going to pull the trigger. I think the easy repair, size, and price beats the electronics of the RX.
 
I currently have three C/Y bodies, a ST, a 139 and a FRI.

The 139 is a little jewel, especially with the winder mounted. I had issues with a 139 back in the late 90's. The camera would stop winding the film so I would get double exposures and overlap. I sent it back to Contax twice over a few month period the the third time it happened I was so ticked off that I was going to throw it into some rocks at Joshua Tree until a friend stopped me. I ended up taking it apart and fixing it myself (there was an issue with a spring IIRC). I wouldn't call it the most reliable camera... The current 139 that I bought a while back (it was attached to a lens I wanted) is working fine. No complaints. If you do buy a 139 you will have to replace the covering on it if it hasn't already been done. The original falls apart.

For reliability I would say the FRI takes the cake. I have had it since the mid 90's and it has gone through hundreds and hundreds of rolls of film without a problem. It is a solid camera. I wore most of the paint off it in fact. The FRI has aperture priority plus manual exposure modes. The meter switch is in a perfect place and the meter doesn't go off until the wind lever is returned to the body. It has a needle for the metering which I really like. Old school. Just a simple straightforward camera.

The ST of course is an excellent camera. It was designed to be just under the RTSIII and it shows. The only thing I don't like about it are the red display numbers for aperture and frame number on the bottom (kind of like an old calculator) and it doesn't have mirror lock up. (The only bodies that do that I am aware of are the RTS series). It is a little small without the winder. The ST is a wonderful camera to use though.

If you really want the best get an RTSIII. In my opinion it is one of the pinnacles of 35mm photography.
 
gooseta said:
I've found a 139 for a good price with new seals which I'm going to pull the trigger. I think the easy repair, size, and price beats the electronics of the RX.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt you will enjoy your 139Q. I hope you let us know how you like it and show is photos from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Anyone using Contax C/Y Mount SLR lenses on mirrorless (Nikon, Sony etc.)?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
6K
Godfrey
Godfrey
jaredangle
Nikon Z or Sony E for Leica M, Contax G, and Nikon F lenses?
Replies
5
Views
3K
monochrome_joy
M
J
  • Article Article
The Kowa SET R2: A leaf shutter SLR for $150 or 7 lens cine set only $111, 000 KOWABUNGA !
Replies
1
Views
375
NIKON KIU
NIKON KIU
peterm1
Leica SL (first version) AF adapters for Canon mount lenses?????????
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
trix4ever
T
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
Back
Top Bottom