Question about how rangefinder focusing actually works

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

The simple truth is that the best are amazing pieces of precision engineering, brilliantly designed and superbly executed. The worst are often surprisingly good too. Much like leaf shutters and mechanical watches. And, like leaf shutters and mechanical watches, they can and do go out of alignment. A lot of it seems to be down to luck, and how many beers Hans (or Igor or Katsuji or whoever) had with his lunch before assembling a particular camera.

With their insanely complex rangefinder linkages, Contaxes need to be even better built than Leicas. Shame about the shutters, the lens mount and the ergonomics.

Cheers,

R.

It's a good thing they were, then, isn't it Roger? I don't mind complexity that's reliable. After frequently remaining in perfect adjustment for eight decades, I think the Contax installation has passed the test. And you can make a decent example of the Contax II/III shutter run well again with nothing more than a few cents worth of ribbon and thread, some watch oil, and a bit of patience. Was the Contax the first to use a bayonet lens mount? If not, it must have been close to it. I think it's a mechanical work of art, personally, and it's a joy to examine its helical assembly whenever I clean and lubricate one. Ergonomics are such a personal thing in so many cases. I wouldn't mind a focusing lever on the lens but otherwise get along OK with them. But I also like shooting with Exaktas, and my other dream rangefinder is a Prominent, which feels OK to use to me. Perhaps I just have lower expectations than most people?
Cheers,
Brett

 

[rajmohan-fotograf]

It's a good thing they were, then, isn't it Roger? I don't mind complexity that's reliable. After frequently remaining in perfect adjustment for eight decades, I think the Contax installation has passed the test. And you can make a decent example of the Contax II/III shutter run well again with nothing more than a few cents worth of ribbon and thread, some watch oil, and a bit of patience. Was the Contax the first to use a bayonet lens mount? If not, it must have been close to it. I think it's a mechanical work of art, personally, and it's a joy to examine its helical assembly whenever I clean and lubricate one. Ergonomics are such a personal thing in so many cases. I wouldn't mind a focusing lever on the lens but otherwise get along OK with them.

I developed much respect for the Contax designers and engineers after seeing the results of the first roll I put through a pre-war Contax II that had never been serviced, and had been sitting on a shelf for a few years before landing in my lap. Apart from a somewhat hazy viewfinder, everything worked smoothly and the RF was perfectly aligned. While the fragility of the silk ribbons is a known point of weakness, I don't find their ergonomic challenges to be too onerous; indeed, they are no worse than those of other pre-eminent cameras of that era. And I think the mount and body-wheel focusing mechanism (also employed by Voigtlaender and Mamiya on some of their cameras) are engineering marvels, with the latter being quite user-friendly especially for fine focusing in select situations.

But I also like shooting with Exaktas, and my other dream rangefinder is a Prominent, which feels OK to use to me. Perhaps I just have lower expectations than most people?
Cheers,
Brett

I also like the Exaktas and Prominents, so I suspect that my bar must also be low!