|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
06/02/2008 09:27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Worst Contax
|
|
Nowadays you can pick up Contaxes quite cheaply, so I've added three more to the 167 MT I've used for some years. I have to say that the least favourite of the bunch is the 167, even though two of my other Contaxes are cheaper models.
So, of the Contax/Yashica/Kyocera years (RTS on), which do you reckon was the worst model tthey brought out?
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
The RTS, actually. I've got RTS, 137, 139, 167 and RX, and it's the RTS I like least - it's just too heavy for my taste. That said, I don't like using the 167 in manual, as it suffers severely from "1980s crazy control syndrome". The 137 and 139 I like very much indeed despite their bargain status, and the RX is so smooth and silky, if a little over-complicated at times.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
I've only one Contax, and it's a 167MT - bought so that I could get my hands on a "Zeiss" lens. Unfortunately, although it most often gets the correct exposure, it frequently over-exposes quite seriously - in a way which suggests malfunction rather than a metering fault. (Several times per film.) I haven't yet worked out whether it's a lens problem, sticky shutter or other cause - so I'm a bit biased against it.
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
06/02/2008 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
The RTS, actually ... it's just too heavy for my taste.
Never handled one myself, although it was an object of desire for me in the 70's/80's. I ended up with Yashicas - FR, FR1, FXD, and the FX103P - which showed you can have a programme mode with a Contax mount without sticking a lump on your lens and a microswitch on the body ...
Quote:
That said, I don't like using the 167 in manual, as it suffers severely from "1980s crazy control syndrome". The 137 and 139 I like very much indeed despite their bargain status, and the RX is so smooth and silky, if a little over-complicated at times.
Yes - it's the controls that put me off the 167 too. I'd like to get my hands on a 159 sometime - preferably before we run out of film ...
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
06/02/2008 22:20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
I've only one Contax, and it's a 167MT - bought so that I could get my hands on a "Zeiss" lens. Unfortunately, although it most often gets the correct exposure, it frequently over-exposes quite seriously - in a way which suggests malfunction rather than a metering fault.
I always prefer to use a hand-held meter and set the camera manually where possible. Are the shutter speeds consistant when you cycle through them on manual?
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Hi,
I've got the RTS, 137ma and 139. The 159 and 167 were/are on my want list. I've not handled either of them but the 159 strikes me as a really nice lump. Interesting about the 167, I think I better find one to have a play with before I eventually part with cash.
Of the 3 I have I find I'm currently using the 139 the most, the nicest to use though is the 137, my long standing camera that I can pick up and use and not even think about it.
Darran
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
06/02/2008 22:34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Interesting about the 167, I think I better find one to have a play with before I eventually part with cash
I think I read somewhere recently that 167's have a built-in lithium backup battery which would require replacement by .... Contax! If true, this would be a good camera to sell wjile you can, IMO! 
Quote:
Of the 3 I have I find I'm currently using the 139 the most, the nicest to use though is the 137, my long standing camera that I can pick up and use and not even think about it.
Darran
The Yashica FXD I used for years is very similar to the 139 - I stuck a 50mm Planar on it, and probably got results just as good as if I'd had the Contax body.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
He he I have two FXD's coming from Ebay . I'll keep the best and resell the the other. I couldn't resist them because they were in effect going for peanuts. The buying bug is almost as big as the using bug!!
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
If that's true about the 167 battery thats outrageous. Perhaps I'll give it a complete miss then.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
This review index covers users experiences with lots of cameras, including the 167MT.
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
07/02/2008 08:40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
If that's true about the 167 battery thats outrageous. Perhaps I'll give it a complete miss then.
After some digging, I think it's a capacitor - not a battery.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Ah, I knew the RTS was massively outside my league back then. I did like the FR and FR 1 - the latter being top of my list for quite some time. It's a bit of a shock I've nver owned one!
The 159 looks great, and is on my list - the only one I've handled was faulty, sadly. So's an Aria, actually, but they're still too dear. Ditto the S2...
I've always loved the feel of Contaxes, but more important to me are those lovely lenses.
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
07/02/2008 10:25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Thanks for that.
I found a site with Contax manuals the other day in PDF format, so downloaded all the ones I wanted, and then forgot the address. I'll find it again and post it later ...
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
07/02/2008 10:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Ah, I knew the RTS was massively outside my league back then. I did like the FR and FR 1 - the latter being top of my list for quite some time. It's a bit of a shock I've nver owned one!
My FR1 is out on loan. I bought it s/h and later found out it was corroded internally due to water damage. AFAIK it still works. Maybe I'll buy another sometime if I see one at the right price - a fiver or so!
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
I use 167MTs in the air, alongside a Pentax 67II and am very happy to claim that it is the best 35mm air photographic camera ever built. It's light, the exposure system is good, the glass is second to none, the internal motor drive is fast and there is less shutter/mirror shock than virtually any other SLR I have ever used. However, I never use it on the ground because of the almighty din it makes and would also agree that the control set-up makes manual exposure a bit of a pain. So yes, this is the best and worst Contax for me depending on where it is.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
An excellent summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the camera. I often wonder if the reason why it's the first camera to have autobracketing was because they knew it was a pig to control manually...
|
|
nimbus
|
|
(enthusiast)
|
|
07/02/2008 13:25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
The 159mm is apparently the least reliable of the Contax line, although a nice working example would be tempting. The 167 is certainly an oddity in handling and setting compared with the rest of the range, but is not really difficult to learn, it is certainly a lot simpler than even the simplest digital slr. The Aria is a lightweight camera, but the body and a couple of lenses makes a nice easy on the shoulder combination, when gear has to be carried any distance.
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
07/02/2008 15:32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Some Contax Manuals here.
Shame about the 159, maybe a couple of broken ones can be cobbled into one good one!
Quote:
The 167 is certainly an oddity in handling and setting compared with the rest of the range, but is not really difficult to learn,
Not really bad if you use it all the time, not so good if you use it with an ST, 137MA or 139 to do a wedding or other function though - you can forget whether to turn or flick ...
Not that I've done a wedding on film for a couple of years though ... 
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
I've always loved the feel of Contaxes, but more important to me are those lovely lenses.
That sums it up for me as well, there is no other make that feels so nice in the hand. They are tactile, quality cameras. Though sadly I've never been able to afford the T* lenses other than the 50mm 1.7. Though I am watching the prices tumble, if it wasn't for those pesky digital Canon owners......... 
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I've always loved the feel of Contaxes, but more important to me are those lovely lenses.
That sums it up for me as well, there is no other make that feels so nice in the hand. They are tactile, quality cameras. Though sadly I've never been able to afford the T* lenses other than the 50mm 1.7. Though I am watching the prices tumble, if it wasn't for those pesky digital Canon owners.........
I'm also on the lookout for some prime Minolta AF lenses to work on my Dynax 7. So far, I have the 50 f1.7 and 28 f2.8 and that's it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
I often wonder if the reason why it's the first camera to have autobracketing was because they knew it was a pig to control manually...
Could be. The autobracketing system is very effective once you work out how it works, and the motor drive is fast enough that I can still use it at 100 mph in the air. Oddly, though, the manual sells it very short. The best description can actually be found in the original AP review, which is still available from OTC.
|
|
zx9
|
|
(old hand)
|
|
08/02/2008 21:20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I've always loved the feel of Contaxes, but more important to me are those lovely lenses.
That sums it up for me as well, there is no other make that feels so nice in the hand. They are tactile, quality cameras. Though sadly I've never been able to afford the T* lenses other than the 50mm 1.7. Though I am watching the prices tumble, if it wasn't for those pesky digital Canon owners.........
Works the other way too, the reason I went EOS film and then 5D (in the last year) was 4 zeiss lenses and no working Contax  so the worst Contax for me are the two I own.
|
|
melek
|
|
()
|
|
11/02/2008 17:38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
I think I read somewhere recently that 167's have a built-in lithium backup battery which would require replacement by .... Contax! If true, this would be a good camera to sell while you can, IMO!
Remember, Contax is simply a brand name and not a company. That would be Kyocera. And I wonder how long Kyocera will commit to repairs of the cameras. Not long, I think. Have they already shed themselves of that responsibility?
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
I've still got a 139 and an AX. I also used to have an RTS which I sold, as for me it didn't do much more than the 139.
I too have been looking to the future, particularly as my AX developed a bizarre fault on a recent trip. I've got 4 Zeiss lenses, and 4 Tokina C/Y fit lenses, so have also been considering the 5D. If I eventually get get one, I'll probably regard that as the worst Contax.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
... so have also been considering the 5D. If I eventually get one, I'll probably regard that as the worst Contax.
But only if you try using it with an un-chipped adapter. My attempts with my 5D and an un-chipped Nikon adapter got sharp focus in lots of wrong places. (Eric Morecambe said it better...)
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
26/02/2008 01:51
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think I read somewhere recently that 167's have a built-in lithium backup battery which would require replacement by .... Contax! If true, this would be a good camera to sell while you can, IMO!
Remember, Contax is simply a brand name and not a company. That would be Kyocera. And I wonder how long Kyocera will commit to repairs of the cameras. Not long, I think. Have they already shed themselves of that responsibility?
Quote:
Kyocera will continue to provide after-sales services to its customers for their CONTAX-branded cameras, and the exclusive lenses and accessories over the maximum period of ten years within the specified time of each model.
Source: http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/
|
|
Dave_Cox
|
|
(old'n'grumpy)
|
|
27/02/2008 21:16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
I used a Yashica FR for several years when it was new. Wish I still had it but mortgage, kids etc forced it's sale. I was looking at a 137 and 167 on ebay (mint and recently serviced according to the seller). Unfortunately SWMBO and my daughter were looking for clothes and saw my 'watched list'.........needless to say I won't be getting any more cameras for a while..... 
|
|
zx9
|
|
(old hand)
|
|
27/02/2008 22:23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
I used a Yashica FR for several years when it was new. Wish I still had it but mortgage, kids etc forced it's sale. I was looking at a 137 and 167 on ebay (mint and recently serviced according to the seller). Unfortunately SWMBO and my daughter were looking for clothes and saw my 'watched list'.........needless to say I won't be getting any more cameras for a while.....
I trust you pointed out the weather is getting warmer and they don't need so many cloths in the summer  The FR was a great camera, my first Yashica / Contax. It travelled many miles in my motorbike tank bag, got very abused and always worked, until a GF left it in her hotel room from where it was nicked.
|
|
Dave_Cox
|
|
(old'n'grumpy)
|
|
27/02/2008 22:35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I used a Yashica FR for several years when it was new. Wish I still had it but mortgage, kids etc forced it's sale. I was looking at a 137 and 167 on ebay (mint and recently serviced according to the seller). Unfortunately SWMBO and my daughter were looking for clothes and saw my 'watched list'.........needless to say I won't be getting any more cameras for a while.....
I trust you pointed out the weather is getting warmer and they don't need so many cloths in the summer The FR was a great camera, my first Yashica / Contax. It travelled many miles in my motorbike tank bag, got very abused and always worked, until a GF left it in her hotel room from where it was nicked.
Yeh, tried that argument plenty of times. After all who needs more than a couple of t-shirts and a pair of jeans........The return argument is "you can only use one camera at a time, so why have you got so many"
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
The worst Contax has to be the AX. Whoever thought of a motorised telescoping body to deliver slow and hesitant autofocus should have been shot.
The second worst Contax (to me) is probably the 167MT. It worked well enough but I found the handling bizarre. Contax got it so right with the Aria, which I think shows that Kyocera/Yashica did learn from their mistakes.
I was a big fan of the N1. It performed and handled superbly. If only the N Digital had not been such a disaster, I think Contax would still be with us.
I didn't make the N Digital my choice for worst Contax ever because I admired the sheer bravery of Kyocera/Yashica in developing that camera when they did. The problem was entirely with the sensor, which was so bad that Pentax did not even release the DSLR they had developed around it.
|
|
Ian_A
|
|
(Avocadopearaphobe)
|
|
25/04/2008 09:23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
The 167 is the worst I've had my hands on.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Quote:
The 167 is the worst I've had my hands on.
And thanks to that, it's allowed me to get my hands on a 167MT body, some Carl Zeiss lenses at a very affordable cost, and I've now bought the AF chipped adapter for my EOS 5D from ebay. OK, it's not as convenient as using EF lenses, but I now have a usable 50 f1.4 with decent contrast at full aperture.
With regard to the 167MT I find it somewhat different, but it's certainly as usable as many of the other SLRs in my collection.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
Keep it in Aperture Priority and it's a dream. In manual, it's a bit of a nightmare. Mine never budges from aperture priority as a result - which is really a bit of a waste of the camera's functionality, but there you go - it suits my way of working anyway.
|
|
|
|
Re: Worst Contax
|
|
hello all. worst was 159MM-although i liked it very much. exactly 20 years ago when i had my last assignment there was an accident at an important event. due to opto-electronical defect 50% of the flash-shots(ttl) were underexposed and the costomers very unhappy. since then i concentrated on rotapanorama-cameras. but also there: technical problems due to unprecise fabrication.
rts had problems with moisture in cold weather. i have now fx-3(variants) and fx-2(shutter not precise) 139, 137ma(again), fxd(identical to 139). if i will find a second ir-s-remote controller i could synchro the two for 3dstereo.
only receiver would be needed. will buy rts III again later.
|
