Tell me your Contax SLR glass experiences, feed my GAS

[PaulDalex]

I should add the I have had 2 more bodies.
One is the RTSII. I have a good but vague memory of that camera because I returned it after a short while, having decided to buy a RTS III.
I have seen it has a led system like the S2.
And yes the S2 is somewhat loud, especially compared to the RTSIII: the mirror slap of the RTSII is inaudible, you only hear the "zee zee" of the motor.
Now if anyone has a RTSII could he tell me if it is noisy?
The other one was a Yashica. I don't remember the model It might have been a black FX2000.
My problem with the Yashica was the viewfinder, I would say murky, especially compared with the RTSIII, which has one of the best viewfinder ever seen in a srl. So I returned the Yashica too.

 

[PaulDalex]

UPS,
I forgot I have had for quite a While also a Contax RX. The first model
Such a nice camera!
I do regret I got rid of it.
It was my perfectionism, the RTSIII had the vacuum system with ceramic film plate and mirror lock up and the flash meter (one feature that should have been standard in any serious camera!) and more.
I could not resist!
At the time I could not afford to keep both cameras.
By the RX was a real joy to use and had no cons that I remember!

 

[philosli]

Here is the best review of Contax C/Y lenses I've ever encountered, and surely will feed your GAS (so you are warned):
http://www.nadir.it/ob-fot/contax_eyes.htm

 

[philipaloft]

I agree with the earlier comment recommending the 28mm 2.8. I have and use the 28/2.8, 45/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 100/2, 135/2.8, 180/2.8
They're primarily used adapted to digital these days, for photographing live music.
Can't vouch for the quality of the work itself, but my modest website shows 20 yrs of using these lenses, and you should get an idea of what to expect. Almost all images are with these lenses except for a few obviously very wide ( at night) and those are with CV 21/4. www.backbeatphotos.com

 

[philosli]

I have a few Zeiss C/Y lenses. They are all outstanding.

After using the Zeiss C/Y SRL system primarily for a few years, I started using Leica M system and now I am mostly using M. I still occasionally take out my Contax SLR.

I made the change due to two reasons: 1. size & weight, and 2. the Contax C/Y system started to show their ages. For reason #2, I've given up having them fixed after a few failed CLA services.

I have two Contax bodies: the very first RTS and the ST. Both are bought used and are still working, but both have some defects not worth fixing.
- The RTS's shutter speed started to deviate. I know this because with the flash at the max. flash sync speed the shutter still doesn't fully open.
- The ST's exposure compensation dial became loose (no clicks) after a few rolls.

The lenses:

- 85/1.4 (MMG), this legendary portrait lens does live up to its reputation. One of the best 135 portrait lenses. At the distance of full-body shots or closer, its sharp with all the Zeiss 3D pop, with dreamy bokeh at full aperture.

I once lugged it around in a family trip. I learned a few things: It's not designed for travel. It's heavy and bulky, and it takes a lot of time to focus. Also maybe it's my copy, or maybe it's just the case: the resolution seems to suffer at infinity.

The aperture blades started to have oil. I have inquired the possibility of CLA, but was told there are no parts.

- 28/2.8 (MMJ). Sharp, full of micro contrast, small and easy to carry. As many reviews have observed, the center resolution is still top notch by today's standard.

The aging of this lens and the weight of the 85/1.4, however, are the reasons that really pushed me to find a different system. The 28/2.8's aperture blades also suffer the oil problem but are in a much worse condition. I have sent it for repair twice to two different shops. The oil keeps coming back, so much so that its aperture blades do not stop down properly when the shutter is released. I can only use this lens with my RTS body, by pushing down the DoF button and the shutter button at the same time to make sure the lens does not stay fully open while a shot is taken. The ST body will not accept the DoF preview being engaged while the shutter is pressed.

- 35/2.8. Not as famous as its other siblings. Not the sharpest on the MTF charts nor in the field. But, you know what, I really like its rendering, more than Zeiss 35mm F/2 Biogon M.

- 50/1.4. It's good. It's sharp. Micro contrast is high. A very capable 50mm.

But it has a pronounced barrel distortion. Once I started to noice it, I cannot unsee it. Zeiss's own technical (MTF) publication confirms this.

 

[oftheherd]

I used to really want more of the Contax lenses. The only one I ever had was the 50mm f/1.4. I used an adapter for other screw mount lenses. Especially the Fujinons. No problems with quality for me.

 

[Ste_S]

I'm not going to feed your GAS. Yashica were as good as any other Japanese lens manufacturer, and the T* coating thing is marketing. Your Minolta lenses are going to be just as good, and cheaper.

 

[oftheherd]

I'm not going to feed your GAS. Yashica were as good as any other Japanese lens manufacturer, and the T* coating thing is marketing. Your Minolta lenses are going to be just as good, and cheaper.

I think you are the first person besides myself to say anything good about Yashica lenses, at least the Yashinons. The Yashikors weren't so good. I have both the screw mount and C/Y mounts. All are good except Yashikors.

 

[Archiver]

I think you are the first person besides myself to say anything good about Yashica lenses, at least the Yashinons. The Yashikors weren't so good. I have both the screw mount and C/Y mounts. All are good except Yashikors.

This is very interesting, as there is an opportunity to get a Yashica ML 28mm f2.8 in almost perfect condition from the local shop. It is in C/Y mount, and is especially intriguing because of this post:

I had an S2 for a while, and found it to be a very well-made but astonishingly loud camera. Loved the spot meter, and the 45mm. And, strangely, I also had a Yashica-branded 28mm (same mount, of course) that was the best-rendering 28 I've ever used, including my Zeiss 28 in M-mount..

It shouldn't be too much money at all, so fingers crossed. And speaking of Minolta, I just might pick up a MC W Rokkor 28m f2.8 in the very near future. Fingers crossed again!

 

[splitimageview]

Bargain for UK buyers:

https://www.contax-yashica-repairs.co.uk/1031

I recently picked up an 'as-is' Contax 137MD from keh. They charged $5.45, and other than missing leatherette, which is normal for this era of Contax (although it's usually partially disintegrated), it's absolutely perfect, not a mark on it, not even a single bit of dust in the viewfinder, the AA battery compartment is pristine. I wonder how few rolls it's had in its 40ish year life!

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Mike Eckman wrote a nice review of the Contax RTSIII and it got me terribly interested on one. Then, his warnings were very real. And for some reason I veered towards the N1. To make a long story short, I ended up buying one, with a 24-85 zoom. Very well balance between body and lens! I can take photos at unusually slow shutter speeds without shake. I also nabbed a 70-200 zoom (not too great but useful) and a Planar 50mm f1.4. The camera has a nice, robust feel and makes it very pleasant to use. It's an old AF body and I'm sure it's on par with the Nikon bodies from the time, the F100 and the F5.

 

[Archiver]

Mike Eckman wrote a nice review of the Contax RTSIII and it got me terribly interested on one. Then, his warnings were very real. And for some reason I veered towards the N1. To make a long story short, I ended up buying one, with a 24-85 zoom. Very well balance between body and lens! I can take photos at unusually slow shutter speeds without shake. I also nabbed a 70-200 zoom (not too great but useful) and a Planar 50mm f1.4. The camera has a nice, robust feel and makes it very pleasant to use. It's an old AF body and I'm sure it's on par with the Nikon bodies from the time, the F100 and the F5.

There's a nice N1 kit at my local pusher, with a 17-35, 24-80 and 100mm. It's tempting, but then I ask myself honestly, how much film do I even shoot these days?

 

[das]

The pro Contax glass was definitely a step above most 1970s and 80s lenses made by Nikon, Canon, Minolta, etc. It would be expected because its lenses were expensive. There is some real magic with lenses such as the 50 1.4. Even cheaper lenses like the 35mm f/2.8 and the 28mm f/2.8 were fairly good. It's the only film SLR system i use anymore, besides messing around with the Praktica PB system.

 

[splitimageview]

The N1 is excellent, the 35mm version of the Contax 645. The 100/2.8 is phenomenal.

I too prefer the Contax lenses of the 70-80s era over any others, including Leica R.

 

[phofseth]

I agree ad lens quality, but disagre that the mount is a problem: With easily available adapters one can use them on any camera with a shorter mount distance. I use them on a NikonZ7 which would show any weaknesses. No problems and if I should recommend one lens, It would be the 35-135 even though it is fat and heavy, with the 85/2,8 as the lightweight and compact alternative. The metal sunshades are large and unwieldy, but useful.

p.