eleskin
Well-known
I own 2 M8's and a large assortment of M mount lenses and sometimes I would like to have an autofocus option without buying into a DSLR system with new lenses. Contax had a unique system with the AX that would work great with an M mount design. I could see having this for situations where I want to use high speed lenses to limit depth of field on moving subjects. Getting spot on focus is hard enough with lenses like the Noctilux, so having this option would have tremendous value for many situations. I would not care what the camera looked like, as long as it is well made and thought out. Brass like the M9 would not be necessary to me. Use of less expensive modern but durable materials would be welcome as this would be a tool only. With adapters, SLR lenses of any make or design could be used as well, making this type of camera a truly universal body for any lens ever made. I would still use my M8's but something like this would be welcome I my tool kit. He'll, if it had the M8 crop factor I still would buy it!
So who here would buy such a camera if made and why?
So who here would buy such a camera if made and why?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Not really, the Contax system was not renowned for accuracy and killed off the brand.....
In general the M rangefinder system -when set up properly and used expertly- is far more accurate and faster for the lenses offered for the Leica M system. So - no thank you - I see AF as a crutch - and a wonky one at that.
In general the M rangefinder system -when set up properly and used expertly- is far more accurate and faster for the lenses offered for the Leica M system. So - no thank you - I see AF as a crutch - and a wonky one at that.
eleskin
Well-known
I think this would be a good camera with new technology
I think this would be a good camera with new technology
Indeed, the Contax may have had problems, but this is 2011 and the technology is vastly improved. I believe this type of autofocus system could work well with what we have today.
Although for most situations, the rangefinder is fine with manual focus, there are some times when I wish I had autofocus. Children are notorious for moving around alot, and it seems one of my favorite lenses for children is the Noctilux (my clients love the unique "look" and I see nothing else that comes close) so if I had an autofocus option, I would use it. Trying to keep a Noct in perfect focus with a moving child around is not easy!
Also, if you use a flash like the Sunpack 622 Super, autofocus helps keep your hands free. I know this well, especially when I use a Pentax 645N with the giant "potato masher" flash. Yes, I know M's are for non flash, but I do not want a million different camera systems!
I think this would be a good camera with new technology
Indeed, the Contax may have had problems, but this is 2011 and the technology is vastly improved. I believe this type of autofocus system could work well with what we have today.
Although for most situations, the rangefinder is fine with manual focus, there are some times when I wish I had autofocus. Children are notorious for moving around alot, and it seems one of my favorite lenses for children is the Noctilux (my clients love the unique "look" and I see nothing else that comes close) so if I had an autofocus option, I would use it. Trying to keep a Noct in perfect focus with a moving child around is not easy!
Also, if you use a flash like the Sunpack 622 Super, autofocus helps keep your hands free. I know this well, especially when I use a Pentax 645N with the giant "potato masher" flash. Yes, I know M's are for non flash, but I do not want a million different camera systems!
Paul Luscher
Well-known
Agree. Manual focusing on an M is fast enough. MF is one of the charms of an M--the DIY aspect.
This gets back to one of my pet peeves--people wanting this, that, or the other on an M, apparently without realizing that if they all got their wishes, you'd have something not much different than your run-of-the-mill DSLRs.
This gets back to one of my pet peeves--people wanting this, that, or the other on an M, apparently without realizing that if they all got their wishes, you'd have something not much different than your run-of-the-mill DSLRs.
Alex Shishin
Member
The AX system would be easier to install into a mirorless camera. It is not at all unreasonable to consider a portmaneau RF and mirrorless system like the Leica M incorporating this AF system.
TheGodParticle
Well-known
I love my AX and would gladly buy such a M-mount camera
rbelyell
Well-known
who said the contax ax 'killed off the brand'? really, that incredibly engineered camera, unique in the history of cameras, killed contax? where does this stuff come from? i too loved my ax, found it accurate in most situations, and was/am in constant amazment at the engineering and commitment it took to make this camera and bring it to market.
i read recently that indeed sony was working on a similar system for inclusion in a mirrorless offering.
i read recently that indeed sony was working on a similar system for inclusion in a mirrorless offering.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
It didn't sell....
BTMarcais
Well-known
It seems like it was the N1/NX AF cameras that were the end of the line, not the AX.
The new mount, and limited lens lineup, and lack of compatibility with the older lenses didn't help the brand much. The AX wasn't as big a seller as the RX, but I don't think it really had much of an impact on Kyocera dropping out of the camera business.
Of course, I actually LIKE the AX, so....
-Brian.
The new mount, and limited lens lineup, and lack of compatibility with the older lenses didn't help the brand much. The AX wasn't as big a seller as the RX, but I don't think it really had much of an impact on Kyocera dropping out of the camera business.
Of course, I actually LIKE the AX, so....
-Brian.
ZeissFan
Veteran
Kyocera introduced the NX, as I recall, just as the major makers began to shift their focus to digital SLRs. Kyocera did introduce a dSLR (full frame, which was awesome conisdering it arrived in 2000) but then pulled the plug on cameras before it had a chane to really develop it into something. Sort of a shame.
thegman
Veteran
Sure, but compared to Nikon or Canon, Leica can barely give their cameras away if we're talking actual numbers sold.
rbelyell
Well-known
dude 'didnt sell' doesnt equal 'killed off the brand' does it? sorry, it just bugs me when people toss out extreme statements that have no factual basis. equally inaccurate was your claim that 'the contax system was not reknown for accuracy'. in fact, the contax system was much more 'accurate' than your post.