Contax S2 vs S2b vs Aria to improve my photography?

redimp

redimp

Member
Local time
12:18 PM
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
41
I know the premise is sort of weird – I know gear does not improve the pictures you take, but hear me out:

I have started taking photos on film in 2005, my first camera was a Fujica AX-5 with a 50mm 1.2 EBC Fujinon (rebranded as Porst). I always shot it in aperture priority, but the exposures were very far from consistent. It was a mix of me being not familiar with the meter, and camera malfunctioning. It really put me off for some time, because I got a bunch of bad rolls out of it.

Recently I was shooting a lot of contax autofocus cameras – G1 and T2 mostly. G1 gave me quite nice results actually but I hated the viewfinder, couldn't get used to it and sold the camera just recently. The T2 so far gave me the best results of all cameras I own, but I find the process of using it somewhat mindless – I only have to frame.

I've decided to sell a bunch of gear I don't need and only get myself one film body and learn to use it. I was looking at a lot of cameras and decided I want to go with Contax SLRs. S2 and S2b caught my attention because they are all-manual, and I feel that that is exactly what could force me into thinking more about exposures and learn how to evaluate and meter the scene.

I could sell the T2 and have enough funds (in addition to funds from G1 sale) to get myself any of the bodies and some lenses, a 45/2.8 for daily carriage, plus a 35 and a 80.

I repair and rehouse lenses and cameras and remembered that I have a 167MT body laying around that I got for 5 bucks, broken. Dug it out, did some work on it and sort of revived it, works great, only issue is that the screen inside the viewfinder is very dim. I also dug out an old distagon that I snatched on ebay for peanuts that was broken as well. Fixed the little thingy and it works good as well.

I took the 167MT and the distagon outside for two test rolls and this is where I started getting some doubts. Having that ability to go manual, or do Aperture priority, or change the metering mode actually feels great. Which lead me to think that maybe Aria was the best choice for me.

I would get an S2 on a whim, but am scared of the spot meter. S2b sounds great but is sort of expensive, so I want to make sure I don't mindlessly spend that amount of money, especially if Aria will give me same features, plus a bunch of automation on top of that if I decide I want it.

Can anyone share their experience with either of the cameras? I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
 
I can't share any experience of Contax cameras at all, but I would not be afraid of spot metering, which is now what I have to use on my Leicaflex SL2 and choose to use on my Leica R8. Once you understand the zone system of metering and apply it the scope for bad exposures declines considerably in my experience.
 
I have Arias and had an S2b and an S2. The S2 and S2b were the most disappointing cameras I have ever purchased. They seem on paper to be close to the ultimate user camera but really don't perform or handle well, despite looking beautiful, and the build quality isn't up to the other Contax cameras. They are slow, the meters aren't very responsive, the shutter has lag and a soft, "I'm not sure when I will actually take a photo" feeling to the release. Mine had a lot more wobble and flex in the parts than I expected. The viewfinders were not as bright and did not snap into focus as well as the other Contax SLRs. The mirror is poorly damped and they were noisy. On the upside, apart from the meter the S2 and S2b are mechanical and fixable from a donor body. I do not know if the S2 suffers from the notorious Contax mirror slip problem.

The Aria is light but feels rigid and well built. The viewfinder is very bright and manually focuses very well. I like the good coverage and high magnification - any viewfinder with better coverage will have lower magnification. The controls are simple and intuitive and don't get in the way. The shutter release is positive and short and quick. The meter works well (except the flash metering, which is ordinary, but flash is what Nikons are for). The wind motor is quiet, the camera feels good in my hand. I have seen the mirror housing taken apart and the mirror is held in a frame that prevents the mirror slip problem. It is well damped and the wind motor, although quiet, seems louder to me than the mirror or shutter sound. I really like the Aria and sentimentally retain mine despite a 22 year old electronic film camera being a liability, at least theoretically.

BUT!

To improve your photography, having a camera that you like, that you can get out and use a lot is the most important thing. Ultimately it won't matter if you get an S2 or an Aria. What will matter is the 1,000 rolls of film you put through it, that you look at the photos from, that you analyse, understand, assess if you like them or think they are good, and home in on whatever it is that is good about your own photography, to get better at it.

One thing is for absolute certain: any camera you do not use will never make you a better photographer.

And you can take good photos with cameras you don't like. I think I took this with a Leica R5 or RE, two cameras that I like about as much as the S2/S2b.

File0846.jpg


Marty
 
You will get a horde of conflicting opinions, that’s the only thing that’s consistent in Contax camera threads. There has been a lot written about each of these three bodies and it is available via a google search, so I would go through all of that to establish some sort of a baseline of opinions. I am not being dismissive, just trying to not be repetitive with regard to information that is already out there. I have owned and enjoyed most of the Contax model range, including the S2 and Aria. I’d personally vote for the Aria, out of those three. It’s just a more capable camera. The S2 and S2b are nice and solid, as everyone notes, but they are overpriced for what they are. Also, in my experience, being “forced” into learning is something that works on paper more than it ever does in reality. The Aria gives you the option of shooting manual or with a decent metering system, so for people who really want to learn how to use a meter, or no meter, it provides that.
I am sure someone will say, if they haven’t already, that Contax cameras can’t be repaired because Kyocera went out of business and stopped repairing them, and the S2 and S2b are thus more “reliable” and trouble free. It’s true that something without electronics isn’t susceptible to electronics failure. But. Nippon Photo Clinic in NYC repairs them, the internet idea that Contaxes can’t be repaired is not really true, and I’d personally still get the Aria. Hands down. Every camera with electronics, and many without, will eventually become unrepairable due to lack of parts, no matter who made it, Nikon, Canon, Leica DMR, whatever. That’s just my opinion based on ownership. Nothing wrong with the S2 or S2b, as an all around camera for a one camera owner, I’d just go with the Aria. YMMV. Details about the cameras and other’s opinions are available online.

My main reason for posting is with regard to your listed lens choice. If you are aiming to use a Contax to improve your photography, for goodness sake don’t walk past the 1.4 and 1.7 Planars and choose the 45/2.8 Tessar as a normal. Yes, it’s small and light. And sharp. And cheap. It’s also probably the least interesting lens in the entire C/Y lineup in terms of results. I’ve still got one, but it won’t get used again. By myself, at any rate. Get the 28/2.8 (perhaps that’s the distagon you mentioned) and the 85/2.8 Sonnar (instead of the 1.4 Planar). That’s my recommendation, though those are somewhat stylistic choices.
 
I have been in love and hate relationship with all my Contaxes (S2b, Aria, 139, 167, RTSII, T2, AX) and can put together a list of pros an cons, but... I noticed that I started to like my photography (I don't claim I have improved, but I hope I have) more when I stopped worrying about what gear I use.
 
I do have an Aria and it is an excellent camera for the reasons mentioned already earlier in this chain. However I like simplicity, cheaper batteries and manual winding. Thus Aria stays in the drawer and out goes 139q, 159mm or even a FX-3 (yashica). I do like simple to learn and consistent center weighted metering and that especially the Contaxes include everything essential and nothing I do not need.

There was a point of lenses though. If I were you I would use as little money on the body as possible (139q is great!) and use the money on Zeiss. 28 Distagon, either of 50 Sonnars (I would even prefer the ’lesser’ 1.7) and 85 Sonnar into the bag and you do not need to worry and cannot blame the gear if pics do not look good. Optionally throw in even a 135 Sonnar and that’s it.

However if you do have a possibility to get an Aria for cheap, go for it. A few years back I paid 70 Euros and for that money I felt it was a bit of a bargain...
 
I‘d get the ST: small, solid, cheap batteries, fast and great looking.
Instead of the S2 I‘d get the Yashica FX3 or FX7. It‘s not titanium nor features 1/4000 shutter speed but is 100% mechanical.
 
You might want to look at the 139Q. A lot less expensive than an S2. Also, the plain Yashica FR is a totally manual camera with no auto features. (there is also the FR I, which has manual and aperture priority, and the FR II which is totally auto so skip it). The 139/FR are the two I'd recommend if you want simple and less expensive but still want quality.

Otherwise, the ST I think is the best value. Incredible finder and great features. Basically designed as the little brother to the RTS III. They aren't very expensive either.
 
I appreciate all the suggestions, but the choice is between s2, s2b and aria only.

A lot of people are saying that spot is very suitable metering type for an all-manual camera. While s2b looks very enticing and pretty, I was wondering if the center-weighted meter will justify the price difference between the s2 and s2b.

Freakscene said:
The S2 and S2b were the most disappointing cameras I have ever purchased. They seem on paper to be close to the ultimate user camera but really don't perform or handle well, despite looking beautiful, and the build quality isn't up to the other Contax cameras. They are slow, the meters aren't very responsive, the shutter has lag and a soft, "I'm not sure when I will actually take a photo" feeling to the release. Mine had a lot more wobble and flex in the parts than I expected. The viewfinders were not as bright and did not snap into focus as well as the other Contax SLRs. The mirror is poorly damped and they were noisy. On the upside, apart from the meter the S2 and S2b are mechanical and fixable from a donor body. I do not know if the S2 suffers from the notorious Contax mirror slip problem.

Marty
Click to expand...

Which cameras do you like if I may ask? A couple other questions as well, if you have time – 'don't perform well' – can you please explain this? Or why are they slow?

It's shocking to me to read this, especially about the build quality or not-as-bright viewfinders.

Can anyone else confirm this?
 
I have had a Yashica FX Super 2000 for more than thirty years. It is still one of the most reliable all mechanical cameras I have used. Battery for the meter only. Hard to beat.
 
I have both the S2 and the Aria (+RX, AX, N1, G2, TVS and the 645), and I just now put these two next to each other. I cannot see any difference between these two when it comes to viewfinder brightness, to me they are very good both of them. Regarding build quality the S2 is the clear winner, the Aria feels slightly tacky in comparison. The S2 was aimed at the zone system crowd and that also means that the metering spot is smaller than on the other Contax SLRs. I cannot agree that the meter is slow in any way if you know how this camera works. They are both fine cameras, but aimed at two very different type of usage.
When it comes to lenses, don't forget to check out the Yashica ML series, they are very close in performance to the Zeiss glass and still surprisingly cheap to buy.
 
redimp said:
Which cameras do you like if I may ask? A couple other questions as well, if you have time – 'don't perform well' – can you please explain this? Or why are they slow?

It's shocking to me to read this, especially about the build quality or not-as-bright viewfinders.

Can anyone else confirm this?
Click to expand...

In manual focus SLRs I like and use the Aria, RX and RXII among Contaxes. Leica R6.2 and 8. Nikon FM3a and F3.

My explanation for my description is right there. If the meter takes half a second to respond to a half shutter press, then the shutter has substantial lag and the release feel is poor, I lose a lot of shots. If the focus screen isn’t bright and I can’t focus off axis I am slowed and again miss shots.

The end of Contax was one of the most displeasing things that happened in my interest in photography, and how it was done (parts and tools recalled from service agents followed by disposal) added salt to the wounds. But most of the cameras were great, really great, just not the S2 and S2b. The lenses speak for themselves. I still have a bunch of C/Y lenses, and they are still fantastic (though not all of them were, particularly the long non-APO lenses).

Marty
 
redimp said:
I appreciate all the suggestions, but the choice is between s2, s2b and aria only.

A lot of people are saying that spot is very suitable metering type for an all-manual camera. While s2b looks very enticing and pretty, I was wondering if the center-weighted meter will justify the price difference between the s2 and s2b.

Which cameras do you like if I may ask? A couple other questions as well, if you have time – 'don't perform well' – can you please explain this? Or why are they slow?

It's shocking to me to read this, especially about the build quality or not-as-bright viewfinders.

Can anyone else confirm this?
Click to expand...

Center weighted metering is different, it’s not “better”, so, no it doesn’t justify a price difference. There’s a reason why some people pay big money for Pentax digital Spot meters, when they have averaging meters built into their cameras already. It’s just two different techniques, and one has to learn how to use them, either one. For those who don’t understand the things that one has to understand to utilize in camera metering, of any kind, in order to get good results, the center weighted is more of a point and shoot than the spot meter, so might be better in that way, but only in that way, but having said that, the matrix metering in the Aria is much better still for someone who is just going to point and shoot, or for good photographers who know how to spot meter, but just need to squeeze off a shot in a hurry, as we all do occasionally.

I’ve already said that I preferred my Aria to my S2, and thought the Aria to be a better all around camera for most people so needn't repeat that. Though, if only able to own one camera, and it had to be an S2, I’d be fine with an S2.
As to build quality, I for one do not think that the S2 is better built than the Aria. At all. It’s heavier, so it gives that impression, but I don’t really think that means it is better built. I think the Aria is “better built” if splitting hairs, but yes it does seem “plasticky” in comparison, because polycarbonates. But it’s the same thing with the move to polycarbonate construction on modern lenses, some of which are much better built and weather sealed than brass lenses of the past. But, yeah, plastic isn’t going to have “road hugging weight” like a ‘49 Cadillac. But it’s significantly lighter, which some people like. A Nikon F2 is heavier, and in that case heavier does translate to build quality, but my S2 was not in that same league by any means.

You didn’t ask, but the 139Q is a wonderful camera as others have noted, which is why I find myself with five of them. And the ST has 1/6000 shutter speed.

But, for the comparison you laid out, I’d still go with the Aria, but that’s personal. As Marty said, none of these will improve your photography more than the others, they’re just different in day to day use and feel. You’d get used to any of them.
 
The price difference between the S2 and S2b comes down to rarity, and both of them are kind of overpriced collectors cameras. The persistent rumor is that they were both made by Cosina, which IMO isn't all that bad, but it's a bit of an idiosyncrasy that such a luxurious camera is kind of "budget" on the inside. I wanted an S2 for quite a while, but after actually using a friend's I lost a lot of interest, it looks good but doesn't "feel" like a Contax SLR. I find the Nikon FE/2 a smoother user body mechanically at a fraction of the price, and if I'm willing to haul a little more weight the RX is my favorite SLR ever.

Whether or not any of these cameras will improve your photography kind of depends on what you need, but it seems the Aria does the most in the smallest package.

Unless you really like the Zeiss coatings from the 80's/90's (and I totally understand if you do, I'm a movie nerd and love the fact I can shoot on the same glass with the same coatings as some of Kubrick's favorite lenses - you may already know that the C/Y lenses were converted for cinema use) I would consider the equivalent ZF lenses and shoot on a Nikon.
 
Another +1 to those saying you shouldn’t discount the 139Q in your choice of bodies.

It’s probably the most compact Contax body, has a wind lever (a rarity in Contax cameras), and I love the way it handles metering and ae lock.
 
I had a Contax 159mm with a 50mm yashica lens for a while, loved that setup a lot. I think both can be found for not a lot of money.
 
I can't comment re: the S2/S2b vs Aria, as I haven't had either S2 model.

I have had lots of other Contaxes, though; RX, ST, RTS, 139, 159, etc., even the 645.

I prefer the 159 to the Aria, as I don't need a motor and it seems better built. They are both small and light. But it's not like I didn't enjoy shooting the Aria, as I did all the Contax models. The Aria has a more modern UI, similar to other later Contaxes like the G1/G2, N1, Contax 645.

1/4000 and a nice LED readout of aperture, very easy to see, on the 159.

RX/ST and RTS derivatives are too big/heavy, along with the AX.

Also had the N1 and NX, even....

28/2 or 28/2.8, any of the 50s, the 45, 85/2.8, 100/2. Unbeatable optics.
 
redimp said:
I appreciate all the suggestions, but the choice is between s2, s2b and aria only.

...
Click to expand...

I have never owned or used any of those three. The way I do photography (when I get the opportunity), I seldom need or wish for spot metering, finding center weighted metering fine enough and if not, I have enough experience to adjust to what shutter/aperture I need.

So I can't give you a clue about the cameras you mentioned. I have used the 139Q and the 167mt. I liked the 139Q but it quit working after a house fire. I don't know if there was a flaw in manufacturing or acids in the smoke and water did something.

I later acquired the 167mt. I do like it except I am not in favor of a lack of a manual film advance. I have been thankful the winder isn't as loud as I expected it to be.

I have the 50mm f/1.4 lens (2 actually). I have a lot of different lenses when I find one that works well. I actually have an 18-28mm Phoenix zoom that anyone would be happy using.

When the 139Q quit working, I got a Yashica FX-103. Then found I liked it so much I got another. Since purchasing the 139Q, I purchased a Yashica FX-3 for backup.

None of those cameras or lenses have disappointed me.

As you pointed out, none of us are you, with your likes or dislikes or camera preferences. But if for any reason you think you might like to try something besides what you have mentioned, I and some of the others may have some useful experience.

Oh, one other thing important to me, but maybe not you, is the auto sensing flash on the 139Q, the 167mt, and the FX103, when using compatible Contax or Yashica flashes. It is spot on. I once took several photos inside a torched wooden building. I kept getting a green indicator on some very black wood, and had trouble believing it. I had the film developed right away and all photos were perfect.

I don't know how to evaluate your experience with the Fuji cameras and Fujinon lenses. I have had a Fuji ST901 and several Fujinon lenses for over 40 years. The camera still works and the lenses are still good except for some hard use. But oh, those Contax lenses ...

I hope you get a Contax camera you like when you make your decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom