Contax RX / RTS ers around here?

I do not use these particular cameras but I have an aria so I know the system a little.

RTS 1 and 2 are manual wind and smaller without the more modern tech of the RTS III and RX (which have motor wind and program modes).

You can compare details of RTS III and RX here: http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/slr/slr.html
 
Using Aria and 167MT. These are fabulous cameras.

I have two RTS, both bought recently used. One was DOA; even Mark Hama was unable to fix it (parts not available).

The Yashica ML, ML C, and MC lenses are quite good. Have a Zeiss 50 f/1.7 Planar which is terrific, but so is the Yashica f/1.7.

Enjoy.
 
I presently own and use the Contax RX and the Aria. I used to own the RTS (the first one), the 137,139, s2, and 167mt. I've never owned the later versions of the RTS (II and III) However I've seen and held thr RTS III and compared to the RX it is larger and heavier. The RTS III always felt like a studio camera while the RX, while heavy also is so well balanced that the sense of weight is somewhat mitigated. I've been using the RX and Aria for well over 12 years now. Both are excellent cameras. Both represent the most advanced aspects of the Contax SLR system since they were the latest to be released.
 
Hi Col,
I agree with you regarding the Yashica ML, ML C, and MC lenses being quite good and in fact as sharp as its Contax counterpart at a lower cost.

Only thing I found to separate them from each other: is the way the Zeiss optics having a warm color rendition to it, while the Yashica optics tend to have a "Cooler or Cold" color rendition.

I have the Contax 139 and Aria bodies. I love the Aria for its electronic and its lightness. I did handle the RTS III, but Mark Hama warn me of the sparse availability of spare parts... IN the event that the electronic parts no longer available, I have an older Yashica mechanical to continue the use of the Yashica-Contax optics!

ColSebastianMoran said:
Using Aria and 167MT. These are fabulous cameras.

I have two RTS, both bought recently used. One was DOA; even Mark Hama was unable to fix it (parts not available).

The Yashica ML, ML C, and MC lenses are quite good. Have a Zeiss 50 f/1.7 Planar which is terrific, but so is the Yashica f/1.7.

Enjoy.
Click to expand...
 
I have a mint looking RTS I on the way. What are the usual things to look out for on this model, other than GAS for Zeiss lenses.
 
I have an RTS III, II and 137MA and think each one is great.
The RTS III is magic IMO. I would think the RX or ST would be similar.
I have had the 137MA since new in the mid 80's, and have never had any issues except for the covering peeling (they all do) and some new seals.
 
I have had a RX and I still have the RTSIII. My RX was the first model which had a (unique) focus display in the view finder. The main reason I moved to RTSIII was the lack of MLU in the RX. But aside from this they are superb and unique cameras. You can't go wrong whichever you decide to buy.
Notice also that the RTS III is large and heavy like a medium format (I like that! I hate small cameras like modern digital).Built like a tank and awesome in any respect. One unique feature of the RTSIII is the Real Time Vacuum (RTV) system that sucks the film against a ceramic pressure plate. I has also a built in data back.
I love the RTSIII and I wish to find somehow my way back to film to use it more frequently
 
Last year I got an first version RTS outfit from a friend. I actually sold some of the stuff to him new when I worked at the local camera store for a while. One of the RTS bodies was a store demo model marked as such on a gold bottom plate. I recently added an Aria.

I really like the lenses (35/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, plus a couple Yashica) and am happy enough with the well used RTS bodies with the exception of the 92% (IIRC) viewfinder. I know that doesn't bother a lot of folks, but I print full frame and it drives me nuts.

The Aria is better in that regard, with I think a 95% finder that is also huge and bright, but I am used to 100% finders, plus actually prefer the handling of the RTS body. So I'm casually on the lookout for an RTS II which seems like the closest I can get to my preferences in that system.
 
I've got an Aria, two RXs and one RTS III. My Aria looked to be Excellent/Mint condition upon Ebay purchase, but died shortly after I received it. The electronics fried and it works only at a set EI. Light, small and smooth, but not particularly robust. The viewfinder is bright. Probably the most advanced 35mm from Contax.

The RX is wonderful to use. It feels much more solid than the Aria and does what you want in a SLR. Strong, smooth, relatively quiet. Really a good value, especially when you get to play with some wonderful Zeiss lenses.

My RTS III worked great for a couple of rolls and then the mirror started to hang. I've read reports of LCD failure. It is really a brick and I love the body, so I sent the camera in for repair and it went back to Japan. They fixed the mirror, updated the LCD and did a full CLA. The camera came back new and they really didn't charge much. I was really surprised. Anyway, the camera is my favorite of the three. It isn't the most advanced, but it just feels good in the hand and it is so smooth. I'm using it with the Zeiss 100-300mm to shoot soccer (football). Really a fun challenge when I leave my 1DMKIII at home.

If only my scanner hadn't bombed.. I think that there is a pattern here.
 
I have a 137 MA and a Yashica FR-I, I use them mainly with M42 lenses. It works really well, better than stop down metering with an M42 camera. The adapters are cheap, and they hold down the pin. Mybe I can ask, does anyone find the 'diopter' of the RTS or FR-I a bit weird? The 137 is fine for me but the FR-I is slightly uncomfortable, like the diopter's off. I'm trying to nail down the issue, but I've never used an RTS. Thank you.
 
I had an FR-1, RTS I and II, MA 137, and ST.

Sold all of them except for the MA 137 because I only need one body to shoot my Zeiss lenses, would have kept the ST (that's a darn solid camera) but the MA 137 is kinda special now.

If I'm getting another RTS, it would be the II.
 
Aria is not a pro camera but its tiny and light. Much lighter than all the others. All of these cameras can have problems if they were abused, but get a good copy and they will last a long time. I've used RX, ST, and Aria and still have the last two; never tried the RTS models due to size/weight.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
Using Aria and 167MT. These are fabulous cameras.

I have two RTS, both bought recently used. One was DOA; even Mark Hama was unable to fix it (parts not available).

The Yashica ML, ML C, and MC lenses are quite good. Have a Zeiss 50 f/1.7 Planar which is terrific, but so is the Yashica f/1.7.

Enjoy.
Click to expand...

I have found the Yashica lenses to be very good as well. I don't have the 50mm f/1.7 in C/Y mount, but my first SLR, a Yashica TL Super, came with a 50mm f/1.7 that was great. It never disappointed. My Contax lens is a 50mm f/1.4 T* lens. That is one really great lens. My loyalty to Fujinon lenses prevents me from saying it is better than a Fujinon 50mm f/1.4, but my what a great lens the Contax is.

I first had a Contax 139Q that died after a house fire. I then used that lens on some Yashica bodies. I have since acquired a 167mt. I like it except for the fact that there is no wind lever. You use the built in winder or nothing. Other than that, it is a nice camera with nice features. Not too big, but anyway, well balanced imho. I also find it holds well with a wrist strap, or with the regular strap on the wrist. However, I almost never carry it that way.

To me, the greatest feature of the 139Q, the Yashica I got to replace it, and the 167mt, was the otf flash. That was so accurate with Contax flashes that I was astounded. I used the 139Q inside a burned out building. I kept getting a flash confirmation in the viewfinder and was worried. I had to have the building kept under guard until I could get the film developed the next morning. Perfect exposures!

patrickjames said:
IMHO the best Contax cameras, or should I say my favorites, in order are RTS III, ST, S2 and the Yashica FRI. I have owned a lot of others over the years, but those four have special qualities. The Aria is like a Canon Rebel, not worth it. The RX has too much bling. I don't need a computer to tell me when something is in focus, I have eyes for that, and they are better trained than the computer.... I never saw the point for the RTS I and II. They are a bit antiquated at this point. Built really well though.

The Yashica lenses are nice but they are not Zeiss. I think it is worth it if you have the dough to get the real thing.
Click to expand...

Bolded above: No they aren't Zeiss, but they tend to be darn good. Surprisingly so for the price I have always thought. As far as I know, Yashica lenses are still made by Tomioka.
 
patrickjames said:
I never saw the point for the RTS I and II. They are a bit antiquated at this point. Built really well though.

The Yashica lenses are nice but they are not Zeiss. I think it is worth it if you have the dough to get the real thing.
Click to expand...

First, the RTS I and FR-I is basically the same camera.

Secondly, the T* coating on these C/Y lenses is from Zeiss. And coating makes a lot of difference in the way the lens transmit light.

I personally think the C/Y lenses are "authentic" enough for me.

3920959824_a00382aaf2_o.jpg

Distagon 35/2.8

If you have a sample photo from a "genuine" Zeiss lens, please feel free to post, so we all can objectively compare.
 
I think he was speaking of the Yashica branded lenses in that mount, not the Yashica made Zeiss lenses.

The Zeiss 35 2.8 was the surprise favorite for me when I got my outfit.
 
I found a NIB 100mm Makro. This has become one of my favorites and I'm a 35mm shooter. Just an amazing lens on the RTS III. I even purchased a ring light for my macro adventures..yet to be used.

The Yashica TL Super was my first camera. A short time after that I built a 10'x10' darkroom in my father's garage... much to his dismay and without his help.. other than helping me with building supplies.. I was 13yo.
 
The RX is one of my top five film cameras. Great ergonomics, very smooth and quiet, and an excellent viewfinder. I had the Aria, as well, but the RX is better built and is better in those areas. I have to agree on the Yashica ML lenses. The 50/1.9 is simply superb, with a wonderful IQ close-up. The 28/2.8 is excellent, as well. In fact, personally I prefer its more subdued color rendition to the Distagon's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom