Another great video Matt! I love the Contax rangefinder system. The Contax you have is the Contaxiii the one with the meter. I have a Contax Kia with four lenses and really love it. You may know this but the plating on the Contax rangefinder is not chrome. The plating is Iridium. Keep 'em comming!
I’ve had the 50 1.7 and 35-70 for years now and use them adapted on my canon and Fuji. They’re beautiful and both sharp. Picked up a brand new contax 167mt around the start of the pandemic for very cheap thinking I’d hate how electronic it is. I love it. Meter is great, it’s easy to use, I only wish it had a proper bulb mode and shutter release for astro.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I compared it against the 1.4 some years back. I was surprised at the weight difference and for me the picture quality was and extra light was negligible.
I own the vario sonnar 35-70 lens along with some other zeiss lenses. The vario sonnar is hands down the best zoom lens i’ve ever used, it performs perfectly at all focal lengths!
Thanks Julius, the 35-70R might beat it but it’s good for sure. I have both. Still need to find time to compare them! (See Leica 35-70 video for samples)
Just happened across your flickr stream as another shooter doing weddings on film. Great work! Dig your stuff. I just sold my T2 last year for what I considered an absurd amount of money. Just never really liked the thing after trying to get on with it for 5 years (and it happened to be my grandfather). There are other similarly sized cameras I always get better results from and it always just felt so very drab and soulless to handle and shoot, IMO. Glad it's making someone else happy. Anyhow. New sub. Great stuff.
Hey thanks mate! I tend to use manual everything cameras but stopped down for sunny climates I do love the size and weight of the T2. Full video and thoughts still to come so you might be able to relate to it. At least you bought and sold at the right times! Cheers
This is right up my alley 🙂. I can highly recommend that 35mm/2.8 you have there: it is totally underrated. I used it a lot on my Contax Aria (another underrated gem, very lightweight but almost equal to the RX in other respects). The humble 135mm/2.8 is also a wonderful lens, but not my favorite focal length. The 50/1.4 is great as well, especially slightly stopped down. Looking forward to your test videos! - Ooh, just remembered: I used the 100/2 and 21/2.8 only once, but these two are really next level. See if you can get your hands on one!
I will never forget my first experience with Contax. It was the mid 70's, I had just, after much deliberation, invested in a Canon system EF 50/1.4, 100/4 macro, 24/2.8 and 200/2.8. I went in to my local camera shop and picked up a new Contax (don't remember the model, just that supposedly Porsche designers did the body) and I will say two things, no camera has felt better in my hands and I had never seen a brighter view finder. Had I not had so much into my Canon's and been a poor high school student, I would of switched systems right there and then.
In 1966 my dad had a contax camera given to him by my uncle who had bought it while stationed in Germany in the 1950’s. It was a rangefinder with a built in light meter, and a fix Zeiss lens. It eventually became mine and it’s how I leaned photography as a teen. I played basketball and could judge distance to the subjects spot on, usually just set the camera to F8 set distance on lens with my mark1 eye and shot. I learned and memorized all the rules of thumb and moved through the development of cameras ever since. If I were to recommend anything from my life experience it would be that the basic rules of thumb are key, are relevant today in digital photography. Knowing those you can function very successfully in any situation. Might be fun to list the rules of thumb people know.
I have the models on either side of the T2, the original Contax T, which is manual everything. Fold down front lens cover that pulls the lens forward into shooting position. Manually adjusted rangefinder focusing with manual film loading,advance and rewind. The lens is excellent. The T3 is smaller than the T2, but has auto focus, auto load and rewind with an automatically retracting lens activated by the power switch. Be careful if you’re looking for a T2, the electrics weren’t the most reliable and very difficult if not impossible to repair due to very few stair parts being available. If you get the chance to try out a Contax RTS 2, they were beautiful
Just picked up the CONTAX RX and the 35-70 3.4 & Planar 50mm 1.7. Looking forward to seeing your review on the camera and the 35-70 lens. You may also want to check out the CONTAX N1, their last 35mm SLR film camera before the brand was retired.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Thanks ! Unfortunately, It suffers from the dreaded “mirror slip” issue. Other than that it’s mint. I should be able to fix it easily. Also, if you can check out the 85mm/2.8 Sonnar. Not the fastest portrait lens but very sharp and compact.
My favourite of the Contax SLR's is the 137MA. The autowind smooth and quiet. The body has a nice feel, heft and balance and its analogue viewfinder display one of the best around. The only downsides are the peeling leatherette, the gummed up light seals and sometimes the electronics can be dodgy. Well I have two which work just fine, though I did replace the leatherette and light seals for just a few quid, which seeing as neither cost more than £60 I can happily live with. I like using them with either the 50mm f1.7 Planar for B&W or the Yashica 55mm f2.8 Macro for colour. The other Contax SLRs I like are the flawed S2 (silly metering system) which I prefer to use with the 45mm f2.8 Tessar and the RTS which is nice with the Planar or Yashica Macro or Zeiss 85mm f2.8. The best (IMO) compact of the Contax line is the original Contax T rangefinder. It is tiny, but very useable. Unfortunately they are very rare and expensive these days.
Help please. Where did you get your leatherette replaced? Mine has long since gone home, altho despite everything it is still my favourite camera .....bought new from an lady agent in Leeds. 167 was clever but not as automatic to my mind as the 137MA. My strap is dying as well......
The best (Contax) camera is the 167MT: I don’t know why, but with the pancake Zeiss 45/2.8 I always achieve very good results. Even when I don’t remember the camera, I often find out (on the pc..) that I had taken a photo I like with the 167MT. Similar mechanism as with the Leica M2 :-) And the AX is a killer: you can use manual focus lenses, like the Zeiss 50/1.4 and autofocus with it!! It’s not a feature I need, but again: those pictures are simply better. Why can’t I really say why?.. It’s not only because of the Zeiss glass (I use a Zeiss ZF 35/2 on my Nikon F3). Perhaps the light meter is better than in other cameras? And do not forget the G2 with the stellar Zeiss 45/2 !! Contax is just great!!!!
Two of the best film 35mm cameras ever made in my opinion the G1 and G2 with carl zeiss lenses image are gorgeous. I would also say a match for the Leica M cameras
I agree, I owned both over a period of years and the lenses were just amazing. I had the 28mm, 45mm and 90mm and wish I still had them... They quality of the build was outstanding, they felt sensational. The autofocus could be a little hit and miss but overall one of my favourite cameras.
You'll be sorry you got me started on this subject! I owned both of these, along with most of the lenses, and used them extensively; in fact for a while I operated the "Contax G User Pages," at that time the world's most-visited Contax G website. (This was back when you could host an internationally popular website on an old computer under your TV cabinet, which is exactly what I did!) Eventually, though, I got disenchanted and got out of them. Reason: You can never be actually SURE that the part of the subject on which you want to focus the camera IS what the AF system focuses on! The position of the AF brackets in the viewfinder is only approximately accurate, and (a lot of people don't realize this until after they've bought one) there is NO way to confirm correct focus visually. Using manual focus is no help because it still uses the AF sensor, and the distance scale gives only an approximate reading so that's no help either for critical work. For street photography, landscapes, etc., the G1 and G2 were okay, but I was doing mostly documentary photography and portraits/people, and after too many out-of-focus eyes in portraits and wrong-subject focus in documentary scenes, I said enough and bailed. It's academic how sharp a lens is if you can't focus it! If I still sound a bit peeved, it's because I am... I had a lot of money invested in that system (I even had the little leather system bag that brings ridiculous prices today for no reason that makes sense) and I felt Kyocera should have done better. (Y'all realize that all the modern-era Contax cameras and lenses were made by Kyocera of Kyoto, Japan, with Carl Zeiss having no involvement other than being paid license fees for the name and offering a claimed but never quite exactly specified level of production supervision... right?)
Looking forward to these reviews! The Contax SLR lenses are very much like 75% size Hasselbad lenses and produce very nice images. The G lenses (i.e., for the G1 or G2) while not superfast, are very well made, lightweight, and can be used on mirrorless cameras with both a manual focus adapter, my preference, and an autofocus adapter, although I find the one I've tried a bit awkward. The very wide G2 lenses will tend to have the smearing issue on Sony mirrorless cameras, although there is something of a fix with a lens filter hack that can be found by googling.
Loved the RTS and RTS 2 (which I used often back in the day) - almost purchased a Contax normally a 139 or 137 several times, still have a Yashica slr or two, a Yashica T4 and of course a Yashicamat. Shame that the brands died....
I really like my Contax Zeiss gear. The RX is supposed to be a very quiet camera, so it might be time for a CLA. They’re also prone to the dreaded mirror glue issue, so might be good to include getting the mirror re glued while in service.
The rangefinder camera you're showing is the Contax *IIIa* (not IIa). The difference being the built-in exposure meter of the IIIa which the IIa is lacking (but could be retrofitted by Zeiss Ikon, at a price).
I had an RX back in the 90's and regrettably sold it to go digital. But what I miss the most was the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 lens. An amazing portrait lens. And the lens itself is a thing of beauty.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I am shooting film again and definitely thinking about buying back into Contax. I've read the RX has had issues with the mirror slipping loose. Have you had any trouble with that? Also, that shutter sound is the best!
Thanks yes love the sound! Yes I hear the G2 is nice for those liking more automated. I like the T2 (so far) as it's so portable and seems nicely made/ good features.
Only Contax camera I still own is G1 (green label) with a Zeiss 35mm f/2 Planar. I used to have a Contax Aria but stupidly sold it when going digital. But I do have my Yashica T4 Super w/Zeiss 35/3.5 Tessar T* lens and a pair of Contax/Yashica Zeiss mount T* lenses, 135/2.8 Sonnar and 200/3.5 Tele-Tessar, the later two I use on my Sony digital cameras. BTW, I did guess correctly on the three Contax camera pricing. I knew the TII is a cult camera the same as the Yashica T4 Super is. Couple years ago I bought a T4 Super at a thrift store for US$ 3.75 and sold it to a guy in New York that just had to have one for US$150. They go for even more now.
You missed the excellent "G" series rangefinder cameras introduced in the early 2000. I was the last independant sales representative Kyocera America. I covered Northern California, Oregon and Washington for them after they fired my friend who was their employee. Anyway, I used most of the kit for demo but kept the RTS III, the 85mm 1.4, the 35mm1.4. 70-200 Vario-Sonnar zeiss 16mm 2. 8 fisheye and the 60mm 2.8 macro lenses and returned the rest as that was all I could afford. All in all I think they are superior optically to my Sony Zeiss lenses, but I'm an admitted snob. OK, I kept my Hasselblad system because it just great gear.
Thanks Phil! Yes sorry I just included the 3 Contax I have. I know the G series are nice. Cool kit with RTS III and the Hassy! I need to dust off my Hassys soon.
As the proud owner of a black Contax G2 and a full set of black lenses, I can say these lenses on the G2 outperform similar Leica lenses with ease in terms of sharpness and color contrast.
I always wanted an RTS but they (and their lenses) were SO expensive back in the early 80's - I bought a Canon T90 instead. In 2001 we had just got married and went travelling - and I bought my wife a Contax G1 outfit (that she still has) and some of the slides she shot back then we had printed large on Cibachrome, framed and still hang on our walls today.
I think we still have a T2 somewhere. I don't remember selling it. I bought it (very cheaply - £70 or something) when ebay was still young and few people wanted film cameras! I see they make big money now. I ought to hunt it out.
£70!!! That's about the same cost as 4 rolls of premium film now! Amazing. Yes I suggest looking for it! :) If it's non-silver they are worth even more.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I think it was beige/goldish? I'll ask the wife (when she wakes up!) she might know where it is. Stuff was REALLY cheap 15 years ago. I should have bought more than I did before people woke up to the ease of selling things all over the world! There was a lot of hesitation in sending 'lots of money' to 'strangers' when it started.
@@FFVoyager yes the gold and black ones fetch a bit more I think. Nice! Yes I was lucky with my timing getting into film and Ms but like you say I wish I’d both a lot of others back then too!
It's actually the other way round. The Contax is a re-engineered version on the pre-war Contax. The West German company did not have access to the drawings, so the Kiev (Soviet era spelling) is the more authentic successor to the pre-war design. They are not quite the same internally but I have both and like both, though like you I don't use them enough.
Matt, off topic but I wanted to ask you a question. Have you tried any of the new Meyer Optik Görlitz M lenses? I'm thinking the 58mm f/1.9 Primoplan and the 30mm f/3.5 Lydith. I refer to the newly made lenses, not the East German vintage stuff. Just curious. Thanks, Don
I'm two-out-of-three, sort of, on having owned any of these cameras. I never owned one of the Kyocera Contax SLRs, although I did get burned on their G1 and G2 interchangeable-lens autofocus cameras (see fulmination farther down in the comments.) As to the others: (1) Today's insane prices for the Contax T2 are ludicrous and constitute proof that the Gen Z celebrity film photographers on RUclips will fall for anything. It's just a frickin' point-and-shoot with no especially distinguishing features! I bought mine used back when they were still current, paid a reasonable price, had it for a couple of years, but hardly ever used it because it was so limited, and eventually traded it to another photographer. Yes, it has aperture-priority auto exposure, but that's mostly meaningless given that depth of field is huge even at maximum aperture; yes, the lens is pretty good, but you can't tell me it's any better than the one on the Olympus Stylus Epic (which also is currently overpriced because of hipster idiocy, but at least has the useful feature of being weather-resistant.) Yes, it theoretically has manual focus, but in practice (like the aperture-priority auto) it's meaningless: the "electronic rangefinder" feature relies on the infrared autofocusing system, which means it's no more accurate or controllable than just letting the camera autofocus, and the gradations on the manual scale are so widely spaced that you can't really focus precisely on a specific distance. (Plus, using the electronic rangefinder eats expensive batteries like crazy.) The AF wheel also feels gritty and plasticky in operation. Have I mentioned yet that the T2 is noisy and has lots of shutter lag? Today this should be a $100 camera at most, and once the hipster RUclipsrs all move on to trading NFTs or something, it will be again. (2) I had a Contax IIa (and let me be the 9,734th person to point out that what you've got is a IIIa, distinguishable by the probably dead selenium meter in the awkward lump on top.) These are beautifully finished cameras with very few changes from the 1936 Contax II (and your Kiev clone of same) which means they're handicapped by dim, squinty viewfinders (and no framelines or parallax compensation) and incredibly slow operation; if you want a classic 35mm film rangefinder camera to USE at about the same price point, you should be scaring up a Canon 7, which is 30 years ahead in terms of technology, performance, and usability. On the other hand, the 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar is a magical optic, and if you can find a way to adapt it to your Leica SL I predict you'll be thrilled with the results.
Thanks JL. Lots of food for thought. I'm new to the T2 so i'll sit on the fence for now except yes they are very overpriced. Thanks re. iiia, yes I messed up sorry. I think I wanted the iia as didn't want a meter but this listed cheap (ish) so I got it to try. Yes re. 50/1.5 - see my Amedeo adapter video which lets me shoot it on the SL/CL/M/iii bodies (calibrated for RF). Before I do the video I plan to use on my iif and M3 (plus digital).
Hi Matt, give Contax T (not 2, not 3 but the first Contax - Yashica compact) a few films - you‘ll be surprised by the quality of the lens. It looks like the 24x36 Minox from that era, with the built&feel and the lens far superiour. You don’t need AF, do you? Lens-shade needed in the rarest of cases? Just hold the camera upside down (=with “the lens trap door” over not under the lens. Writing this, because you are an avid jogger. Cheers
Some of my friends had Contax cameras, the 50mm 1.7 Planar are just as good optically as the 1.4 but much cheaper, some of the good Contax Lenses are 15mm 3.5 Distagon (the same as Leica´s R 15mm !), 18mm 4.0, 28mm 2.0, 60mm 2.8 Macro-Planar, 85mm 1.4 Planar, 135mm 2,8 Sonnar. If you get used to the Contax T2, then I can very highly recommend the Leica Minilux which have the best Lens of all compact analog film Cameras.
See if you get get your hands on a Leica Minilux and compare it to the Contax T2. Personally I like the first Contax T most which reminds me of my Minox 35 ML, if you use these Cameras upside down you have a shade for the sun 😃
Very interesting comparison. Ironic how the point and shoot is valued much higher in this day and age. I sold my point and shoot Olympus Mju cameras which I got for a pittance and made enough to import a Nikon F4 from Japan in great condition after watching your review on said Nikon. I will be interested to see how the RX does when you test it.
Thanks John, yes crazy times for sure but yes at least some of the older cameras become great value (RX seems like a LOT of camera for that little money). F4 also great but feels a lot less luxuary compared now I own both. It's all in the glass though as we know.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Thanks Matt. I am curious about Contax and there are mixed views. I think reliability may be less of a given than Nikon. I have FM2N, F90x, F100, F4 and F5. The F5 is like a Challenger 2 tank ! As for point and shoot , the F100 with my Af 35-70 f3.3-4.5 N is very fast to use. It and the F5 have the benefit of back button focus which is the only thing I miss on the F4.
Less than £200 for Contax IIa?! I'm surprised to hear that. I would have said nearer double that if including the f1.5 lens, or at least that's what I paid (so hoping I haven't been diddled). Scanning eBay, if ever listed in the UK at all they seem to be well over £300. Lovely camera though - as good as a Leica IIIf. I don't get the Contax RX - if the electronics fail you have one expensive paper-weight. The T2 sounds interesting so my vote for a review on that.
Thanks, yes without lens, maybe the cheap ones sold that I saw on eBay. They are worth more for sure! The T2 can fail as easy as the RX sadly but I look forward to testing both. I still prefer iiif :)
Well, personally, I only have experience with a Contax IIIa rangefinder - with the same type of lens as you have on your IIa. It's very nice, but I prefer my Leica IIIb even though the viewfinder/rangefinder is so much smaller than on the Contax. As far as point and shoot cameras go, I'd point out, that they come in many different sizes and with different properties. The T2 is compact, and it has a version of aperture priority. My new favorite point and shoot isn't compact at all and there is very little control of the aperture. It's a Canon EOS 750. An SLR camera with interchangeable lenses, shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 2 secs, X-sync 1/125, capable of using DX-coded film with speeds from ISO 25 to 3200 and evaluative metering, but without manual settings. Kind of point and shoot camera on steroids... Oh, and an impressive sounding shutter and film advance for a cheap automatic SLR from the 80's.
The Coxtax body without the selenium meter on top was the IIa; with the meter it was the IIIa. He misspoke describing his Contax as a IIa. Same distinction applies to the pre-War Contax II/III.
I have an RTS, don't really like it, heavy and with a dark viewfinder, I prefer my Yashica FX3 2000 super for my planar 50mm f1.4 Wich is very nice. I also have a distagon 35 f2.8 and a sonnar 135mm f2.8. they are all nice lenses but the planar seems to be sharper I also have a Contax IIIa with the sonnar 50mm f1.5. Maybe the best lens of all I have, the Contax IIIa has the most precise focus rangefinder, with a very large distance from the viewfinder. Just impressive if you accept the slow charging wheel and the dark viewfinder. But it's a vintage camera.. I took the last foto of my father just passed away with the IIIa 😢
Thanks Oscar, yes I much prefer the older Contax (and Kiev) RF cameras. That Sonnar lens at f2 is fantastic and can compete with my Leica lenses from the same period. I use it on my Kiev 4a mostly (longer RF base length vs my Contax iia so even better accuracy).
I happened to know the T2 is expensive. I see a lot of RUclipsrs shooting them (as you say, the younger generation). Absolute nuts money to pay for a point and shoot..... and if the electrics go in it you're shafted because no spares are made anymore. Only thing you can do is have a second donor body (which will also cost you a fortune). Surprised at the cost of the RX. Hmm
The comparisons made here are a bit peculiar, in that there is really no connection or "family" between the Contax cameras made by Zeiss in Germany and Contax camera made in Japan by Kyocera, except the royalties paid to Zeiss for a licence to use the Contax name. In terms of design and build, they have little in common apart from using 35mm film. The Zeiss cameras were all metal, all mechanical, poor ergonomics, with overly complex designs which limited their usage and doomed them as an ongoing line of models. (There isn't much different between the Contax II of 1936 and the last IIa of the mid 1960s.) The Japanese cameras were distinguished by use (overuse?) of cutting edge electronics of their day. Well thought out designs, highly ergonomic for use, wide use of metal and synthetics to make durable but limit weight. A variety of basic technologies such that no two models were much alike, apart from revisions over time. (My first 35mm was a Contax II in 1959; I've owned a T2 since the later 1990s.)
Thanks, yes sorry I shared them all together as I’d not yet done individual videos. I’ve since done a T2 video and blog post with full res files on MeLeica.com
It starts itching when I hear certain words like: Point and shoot - Professional - Grain - Bokeh - Frames per second - ND 10 - Art - etc I can point and shoot with a Hassellblad, Linhof an a can of soup. Professional borrow your tele lens, your flash and two rolls Tri-X 135-36. No grain, no image. Bokeh by Rodenstock Imagon 300 mm, Frame/sec needed to shoot my mother in law speaking like a Gatling of a Thunderbolt. ND - 10 for welding a submarine ? Art person is just a fart
A fool's confession: I was crazy for less than fifteen minutes. I like german "glass". So I bought myself a Zeiss Contax IIa with a Zeiss Sonnar 1 : 2 - 50 mm no lightmeter for a € 1000,00 It happened june 2022 Still in the photoshop I retourned the Contax. I do not trust old Jaguars V12, teachers and no old Contax. The rangefinder of it is a piece of crap.
▶️ WATCH NEXT: All Film Camera Reviews - bit.ly/3eBvxq7
✅ CHECK eBay: (US) ebay.to/2F0HoxY (UK) ebay.to/3ijzle2 (DE) ebay.to/3iqDNYs (FR) ebay.to/2ZJ3E75 (HK) ebay.to/32A8xBu
📞 ZOOM: Not sure what camera or lens to buy? Arrange a call today - bit.ly/3lBkdgq
🛎 SUBSCRIBED?: Monthly Giveaways - worth £30/$40 upwards - bit.ly/3qET0ZO
📷 MY KIT: mrleica.com/kitlist/
▶️ VIDEO PLAYLISTS : mrleica.com/youtube/
👤 Where to find me: mrleica.com/socials/
💫 LEICA PRESETS - mrleica.com/leica-lightroom-presets/
🚀 LEICA PHOTOGRAPHY WORKSHOPS - mrleica.com/leica-workshops-uk/
📝 BLOG: mrleica.com/free-newsletter/
🎞 NEED FILM - mrleica.com/do-you-need-film/
☕️ COFFEE: Thank Matt with a coffee - www.paypal.com/paypalme/MrLeica
⭐️ PATREON: More Content? 100+ Videos & Zoom - www.patreon.com/mrleicacom
Another great video Matt!
I love the Contax rangefinder system. The Contax you have is the Contaxiii the one with the meter.
I have a Contax Kia with four lenses and really love it.
You may know this but the plating on the Contax rangefinder is not chrome. The plating is Iridium.
Keep 'em comming!
Many thanks Michael!
I’ve had the 50 1.7 and 35-70 for years now and use them adapted on my canon and Fuji. They’re beautiful and both sharp. Picked up a brand new contax 167mt around the start of the pandemic for very cheap thinking I’d hate how electronic it is. I love it. Meter is great, it’s easy to use, I only wish it had a proper bulb mode and shutter release for astro.
Thanks Kerem! Someone else mentioned the 1.7 is also good so thanks!
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I compared it against the 1.4 some years back. I was surprised at the weight difference and for me the picture quality was and extra light was negligible.
I own the vario sonnar 35-70 lens along with some other zeiss lenses. The vario sonnar is hands down the best zoom lens i’ve ever used, it performs perfectly at all focal lengths!
Thanks Julius, the 35-70R might beat it but it’s good for sure. I have both. Still need to find time to compare them! (See Leica 35-70 video for samples)
Just happened across your flickr stream as another shooter doing weddings on film. Great work! Dig your stuff.
I just sold my T2 last year for what I considered an absurd amount of money. Just never really liked the thing after trying to get on with it for 5 years (and it happened to be my grandfather). There are other similarly sized cameras I always get better results from and it always just felt so very drab and soulless to handle and shoot, IMO. Glad it's making someone else happy.
Anyhow. New sub. Great stuff.
Hey thanks mate! I tend to use manual everything cameras but stopped down for sunny climates I do love the size and weight of the T2. Full video and thoughts still to come so you might be able to relate to it. At least you bought and sold at the right times! Cheers
This is right up my alley 🙂. I can highly recommend that 35mm/2.8 you have there: it is totally underrated. I used it a lot on my Contax Aria (another underrated gem, very lightweight but almost equal to the RX in other respects). The humble 135mm/2.8 is also a wonderful lens, but not my favorite focal length. The 50/1.4 is great as well, especially slightly stopped down. Looking forward to your test videos! - Ooh, just remembered: I used the 100/2 and 21/2.8 only once, but these two are really next level. See if you can get your hands on one!
Thanks Filibert! Yes I look forward to testing! :) Thanks for the lens info!
I will never forget my first experience with Contax. It was the mid 70's, I had just, after much deliberation, invested in a Canon system EF 50/1.4, 100/4 macro, 24/2.8 and 200/2.8. I went in to my local camera shop and picked up a new Contax (don't remember the model, just that supposedly Porsche designers did the body) and I will say two things, no camera has felt better in my hands and I had never seen a brighter view finder. Had I not had so much into my Canon's and been a poor high school student, I would of switched systems right there and then.
Thanks for your memories! They do feel very nicely made :)
Could have been a 139q or similar (157)
@@jd5787 I did some looking, it was an RTS.
In 1966 my dad had a contax camera given to him by my uncle who had bought it while stationed in Germany in the 1950’s. It was a rangefinder with a built in light meter, and a fix Zeiss lens. It eventually became mine and it’s how I leaned photography as a teen. I played basketball and could judge distance to the subjects spot on, usually just set the camera to F8 set distance on lens with my mark1 eye and shot. I learned and memorized all the rules of thumb and moved through the development of cameras ever since. If I were to recommend anything from my life experience it would be that the basic rules of thumb are key, are relevant today in digital photography. Knowing those you can function very successfully in any situation. Might be fun to list the rules of thumb people know.
Thanks William!
35mm-70mm Vario-Sonnar whops everything!
Ah you're the person I hoped would see this video! :) Yes I hear very good things so look forward to trying that lens out.
I have the models on either side of the T2, the original Contax T, which is manual everything. Fold down front lens cover that pulls the lens forward into shooting position. Manually adjusted rangefinder focusing with manual film loading,advance and rewind. The lens is excellent. The T3 is smaller than the T2, but has auto focus, auto load and rewind with an automatically retracting lens activated by the power switch. Be careful if you’re looking for a T2, the electrics weren’t the most reliable and very difficult if not impossible to repair due to very few stair parts being available. If you get the chance to try out a Contax RTS 2, they were beautiful
Thanks Lee, I appreciate your info!
Just picked up the CONTAX RX and the 35-70 3.4 & Planar 50mm 1.7. Looking forward to seeing your review on the camera and the 35-70 lens. You may also want to check out the CONTAX N1, their last 35mm SLR film camera before the brand was retired.
Thanks Eric! Congrats on yours. I need to develop my film once I finish the roll.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Thanks ! Unfortunately, It suffers from the dreaded “mirror slip” issue. Other than that it’s mint. I should be able to fix it easily.
Also, if you can check out the 85mm/2.8 Sonnar. Not the fastest portrait lens but very sharp and compact.
Matt, it's a Contax IIIA :-) And I OF COURSE use them :-)
Agreed! Contax IIIa ( with light meter ) vs Contax IIa ( no light meter )
Thanks Eric! Yes sorry I messed up! ..and good to hear it! :)
Thanks, yes sorry I said it wrong.
My favourite of the Contax SLR's is the 137MA. The autowind smooth and quiet. The body has a nice feel, heft and balance and its analogue viewfinder display one of the best around. The only downsides are the peeling leatherette, the gummed up light seals and sometimes the electronics can be dodgy. Well I have two which work just fine, though I did replace the leatherette and light seals for just a few quid, which seeing as neither cost more than £60 I can happily live with. I like using them with either the 50mm f1.7 Planar for B&W or the Yashica 55mm f2.8 Macro for colour.
The other Contax SLRs I like are the flawed S2 (silly metering system) which I prefer to use with the 45mm f2.8 Tessar and the RTS which is nice with the Planar or Yashica Macro or Zeiss 85mm f2.8.
The best (IMO) compact of the Contax line is the original Contax T rangefinder. It is tiny, but very useable. Unfortunately they are very rare and expensive these days.
Thanks Richard, good info regarding the bodies and lenses, thanks!
Help please. Where did you get your leatherette replaced? Mine has long since gone home, altho despite everything it is still my favourite camera .....bought new from an lady agent in Leeds. 167 was clever but not as automatic to my mind as the 137MA. My strap is dying as well......
The best (Contax) camera is the 167MT: I don’t know why, but with the pancake Zeiss 45/2.8 I always achieve very good results. Even when I don’t remember the camera, I often find out (on the pc..) that I had taken a photo I like with the 167MT. Similar mechanism as with the Leica M2 :-)
And the AX is a killer: you can use manual focus lenses, like the Zeiss 50/1.4 and autofocus with it!! It’s not a feature I need, but again: those pictures are simply better. Why can’t I really say why?.. It’s not only because of the Zeiss glass (I use a Zeiss ZF 35/2 on my Nikon F3). Perhaps the light meter is better than in other cameras?
And do not forget the G2 with the stellar Zeiss 45/2 !!
Contax is just great!!!!
Thanks! I will check out 167MT. I see the 45/2.8 is a great size. I might need to get at some point :) Yes MF is fine for me too.
The 167MT is also my favourite Contax.
Two of the best film 35mm cameras ever made in my opinion the G1 and G2 with carl zeiss lenses image are gorgeous.
I would also say a match for the Leica M cameras
I agree, I owned both over a period of years and the lenses were just amazing. I had the 28mm, 45mm and 90mm and wish I still had them... They quality of the build was outstanding, they felt sensational. The autofocus could be a little hit and miss but overall one of my favourite cameras.
You'll be sorry you got me started on this subject! I owned both of these, along with most of the lenses, and used them extensively; in fact for a while I operated the "Contax G User Pages," at that time the world's most-visited Contax G website. (This was back when you could host an internationally popular website on an old computer under your TV cabinet, which is exactly what I did!) Eventually, though, I got disenchanted and got out of them. Reason: You can never be actually SURE that the part of the subject on which you want to focus the camera IS what the AF system focuses on! The position of the AF brackets in the viewfinder is only approximately accurate, and (a lot of people don't realize this until after they've bought one) there is NO way to confirm correct focus visually. Using manual focus is no help because it still uses the AF sensor, and the distance scale gives only an approximate reading so that's no help either for critical work. For street photography, landscapes, etc., the G1 and G2 were okay, but I was doing mostly documentary photography and portraits/people, and after too many out-of-focus eyes in portraits and wrong-subject focus in documentary scenes, I said enough and bailed. It's academic how sharp a lens is if you can't focus it!
If I still sound a bit peeved, it's because I am... I had a lot of money invested in that system (I even had the little leather system bag that brings ridiculous prices today for no reason that makes sense) and I felt Kyocera should have done better. (Y'all realize that all the modern-era Contax cameras and lenses were made by Kyocera of Kyoto, Japan, with Carl Zeiss having no involvement other than being paid license fees for the name and offering a claimed but never quite exactly specified level of production supervision... right?)
My wife still has the G1 kit I bought her 20 years ago.
Thanks Alan, yes I know people are usually Contax G or Leica M but rarely both :)
Thanks, yes I couldn't live with iffy AF on a "proper" camera, that's why I use MF bodies.
Looking forward to these reviews! The Contax SLR lenses are very much like 75% size Hasselbad lenses and produce very nice images. The G lenses (i.e., for the G1 or G2) while not superfast, are very well made, lightweight, and can be used on mirrorless cameras with both a manual focus adapter, my preference, and an autofocus adapter, although I find the one I've tried a bit awkward. The very wide G2 lenses will tend to have the smearing issue on Sony mirrorless cameras, although there is something of a fix with a lens filter hack that can be found by googling.
Thanks D, yes the Planar does remind me of my Hassy lenses. I know the G lenses are said to be nice too.
Loved the RTS and RTS 2 (which I used often back in the day) - almost purchased a Contax normally a 139 or 137 several times, still have a Yashica slr or two, a Yashica T4 and of course a Yashicamat. Shame that the brands died....
Thanks Michael! A T4 too! Niiiice!
I really like my Contax Zeiss gear. The RX is supposed to be a very quiet camera, so it might be time for a CLA. They’re also prone to the dreaded mirror glue issue, so might be good to include getting the mirror re glued while in service.
Thanks for the info. Noted thanks!
The rangefinder camera you're showing is the Contax *IIIa* (not IIa). The difference being the built-in exposure meter of the IIIa which the IIa is lacking (but could be retrofitted by Zeiss Ikon, at a price).
Thanks Lorenzo, yes sorry I messed up. I prefer the smaller iia without meter.
I had an RX back in the 90's and regrettably sold it to go digital. But what I miss the most was the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 lens. An amazing portrait lens. And the lens itself is a thing of beauty.
Thanks Alex! If you still shoot any film they are cheap nowadays (the camera).. nice lens i'm sure!
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I am shooting film again and definitely thinking about buying back into Contax. I've read the RX has had issues with the mirror slipping loose. Have you had any trouble with that? Also, that shutter sound is the best!
wow that Contax camera is a beautiful piece of sculpture
Which one!? The RX? Yes they are very nice and price ok too (RX / iiia)
i must buy a Contax RX Slr one day it looks a fantastic camera , great shutter sound, it reminds me of the sound the Nikon 301 makes....
Thanks Michael, yes they seem to offer great value for sure. Video to come with images when I get the opportunity
Contax IIIA not iia the iia has not built in lightmeter at the top,similar to the kiev 4 you paired it with ,however great video.
Thanks Jude, sorry yes I messed up. Thanks for confirming. The iia is better, without meter as smaller.
Definitely the best shutter sound around !
What about the Contax G2, also famous and quite expensive !!
Interesting video, thanks for sharing !
Thanks yes love the sound! Yes I hear the G2 is nice for those liking more automated. I like the T2 (so far) as it's so portable and seems nicely made/ good features.
I highly recommend the cz 33mm distagon lens…I currently own this lens in the cy mount and I think it is a joy to use 😁
Thanks Sonya! Sounds interesting I will check it thanks!
Only Contax camera I still own is G1 (green label) with a Zeiss 35mm f/2 Planar. I used to have a Contax Aria but stupidly sold it when going digital. But I do have my Yashica T4 Super w/Zeiss 35/3.5 Tessar T* lens and a pair of Contax/Yashica Zeiss mount T* lenses, 135/2.8 Sonnar and 200/3.5 Tele-Tessar, the later two I use on my Sony digital cameras. BTW, I did guess correctly on the three Contax camera pricing. I knew the TII is a cult camera the same as the Yashica T4 Super is. Couple years ago I bought a T4 Super at a thrift store for US$ 3.75 and sold it to a guy in New York that just had to have one for US$150. They go for even more now.
T4 for
You missed the excellent "G" series rangefinder cameras introduced in the early 2000. I was the last independant sales representative Kyocera America. I covered Northern California, Oregon and Washington for them after they fired my friend who was their employee. Anyway, I used most of the kit for demo but kept the RTS III, the 85mm 1.4, the 35mm1.4. 70-200 Vario-Sonnar zeiss 16mm 2. 8 fisheye and the 60mm 2.8 macro lenses and returned the rest as that was all I could afford. All in all I think they are superior optically to my Sony Zeiss lenses, but I'm an admitted snob. OK, I kept my Hasselblad system because it just great gear.
Thanks Phil! Yes sorry I just included the 3 Contax I have. I know the G series are nice. Cool kit with RTS III and the Hassy! I need to dust off my Hassys soon.
As the proud owner of a black Contax G2 and a full set of black lenses, I can say these lenses on the G2 outperform similar Leica lenses with ease in terms of sharpness and color contrast.
Thanks TW, I guess that is why people get Contax lenses adapted to Leica M
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom the Zeiss 45mm f2 is by far the best standard lens I have ever used.
@@weisserth ok great, thanks (that’s my best lens on the Minolta SLR too)
Would be very curious to see how the Zeiss 50 1.4 compares with your Leica R Summicron 50 f2.
Great work mate !
Thanks! Yes me too! Hopefully not too well or my Leica Rs will be at risk haha :) Hopefully in the coming months, stay tuned!
I always wanted an RTS but they (and their lenses) were SO expensive back in the early 80's - I bought a Canon T90 instead. In 2001 we had just got married and went travelling - and I bought my wife a Contax G1 outfit (that she still has) and some of the slides she shot back then we had printed large on Cibachrome, framed and still hang on our walls today.
I think we still have a T2 somewhere. I don't remember selling it. I bought it (very cheaply - £70 or something) when ebay was still young and few people wanted film cameras! I see they make big money now. I ought to hunt it out.
Thanks yes these Contax looked like they were expensive when they were released. Nice regarding the G1!
£70!!! That's about the same cost as 4 rolls of premium film now! Amazing. Yes I suggest looking for it! :) If it's non-silver they are worth even more.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom I think it was beige/goldish? I'll ask the wife (when she wakes up!) she might know where it is.
Stuff was REALLY cheap 15 years ago. I should have bought more than I did before people woke up to the ease of selling things all over the world! There was a lot of hesitation in sending 'lots of money' to 'strangers' when it started.
@@FFVoyager yes the gold and black ones fetch a bit more I think. Nice! Yes I was lucky with my timing getting into film and Ms but like you say I wish I’d both a lot of others back then too!
It's actually the other way round. The Contax is a re-engineered version on the pre-war Contax. The West German company did not have access to the drawings, so the Kiev (Soviet era spelling) is the more authentic successor to the pre-war design. They are not quite the same internally but I have both and like both, though like you I don't use them enough.
Thanks JM!
Matt, off topic but I wanted to ask you a question. Have you tried any of the new Meyer Optik Görlitz M lenses? I'm thinking the 58mm f/1.9 Primoplan and the 30mm f/3.5 Lydith. I refer to the newly made lenses, not the East German vintage stuff. Just curious. Thanks, Don
Hi Don, not yet. If I get chance in the future I will be sure to share my results.
I LOVE my Contax S2 and my Zeiss lenses
Thanks Marlon! Nice!
Great vídeo, as always! Thanks for sharing, Matt!
Thank you! :)
I'm two-out-of-three, sort of, on having owned any of these cameras. I never owned one of the Kyocera Contax SLRs, although I did get burned on their G1 and G2 interchangeable-lens autofocus cameras (see fulmination farther down in the comments.) As to the others:
(1) Today's insane prices for the Contax T2 are ludicrous and constitute proof that the Gen Z celebrity film photographers on RUclips will fall for anything. It's just a frickin' point-and-shoot with no especially distinguishing features! I bought mine used back when they were still current, paid a reasonable price, had it for a couple of years, but hardly ever used it because it was so limited, and eventually traded it to another photographer. Yes, it has aperture-priority auto exposure, but that's mostly meaningless given that depth of field is huge even at maximum aperture; yes, the lens is pretty good, but you can't tell me it's any better than the one on the Olympus Stylus Epic (which also is currently overpriced because of hipster idiocy, but at least has the useful feature of being weather-resistant.) Yes, it theoretically has manual focus, but in practice (like the aperture-priority auto) it's meaningless: the "electronic rangefinder" feature relies on the infrared autofocusing system, which means it's no more accurate or controllable than just letting the camera autofocus, and the gradations on the manual scale are so widely spaced that you can't really focus precisely on a specific distance. (Plus, using the electronic rangefinder eats expensive batteries like crazy.) The AF wheel also feels gritty and plasticky in operation. Have I mentioned yet that the T2 is noisy and has lots of shutter lag? Today this should be a $100 camera at most, and once the hipster RUclipsrs all move on to trading NFTs or something, it will be again.
(2) I had a Contax IIa (and let me be the 9,734th person to point out that what you've got is a IIIa, distinguishable by the probably dead selenium meter in the awkward lump on top.) These are beautifully finished cameras with very few changes from the 1936 Contax II (and your Kiev clone of same) which means they're handicapped by dim, squinty viewfinders (and no framelines or parallax compensation) and incredibly slow operation; if you want a classic 35mm film rangefinder camera to USE at about the same price point, you should be scaring up a Canon 7, which is 30 years ahead in terms of technology, performance, and usability. On the other hand, the 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar is a magical optic, and if you can find a way to adapt it to your Leica SL I predict you'll be thrilled with the results.
Thanks JL. Lots of food for thought. I'm new to the T2 so i'll sit on the fence for now except yes they are very overpriced.
Thanks re. iiia, yes I messed up sorry. I think I wanted the iia as didn't want a meter but this listed cheap (ish) so I got it to try.
Yes re. 50/1.5 - see my Amedeo adapter video which lets me shoot it on the SL/CL/M/iii bodies (calibrated for RF). Before I do the video I plan to use on my iif and M3 (plus digital).
Hi Matt, give Contax T (not 2, not 3 but the first Contax - Yashica compact) a few films - you‘ll be surprised by the quality of the lens. It looks like the 24x36 Minox from that era, with the built&feel and the lens far superiour. You don’t need AF, do you? Lens-shade needed in the rarest of cases? Just hold the camera upside down (=with “the lens trap door” over not under the lens. Writing this, because you are an avid jogger. Cheers
Thanks Simon, great tip!
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom In case you want a good one (or two), let me know HERE. I‘ll answer for sure somewhere else
@@simonvoigt7560 thanks
Some of my friends had Contax cameras, the 50mm 1.7 Planar are just as good optically as the 1.4 but much cheaper, some of the good Contax Lenses are 15mm 3.5 Distagon (the same as Leica´s R 15mm !), 18mm 4.0, 28mm 2.0, 60mm 2.8 Macro-Planar, 85mm 1.4 Planar, 135mm 2,8 Sonnar. If you get used to the Contax T2, then I can very highly recommend the Leica Minilux which have the best Lens of all compact analog film Cameras.
Thanks regarding the Zeiss lenses. I hope I don't like them, I don't need another system haha. Noted re. Minilux thanks!
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom 😄Yes, it can be a problem with us that have G.A.S. syndrom 🙃
As far as I remember the best Contax SLR Camera was the RTS II
Thanks OK noted.
I like my RTS II. It’s really nice. But I always reach for my Contax S2 instead. It’s really really nice. 😆
@@JP1050x thanks I will check it 👍🏻
I got two contax and you can't stop me!
Haha nice :) I will share full videos once I get chance to test them so stay tuned!
See if you get get your hands on a Leica Minilux and compare it to the Contax T2. Personally I like the first Contax T most which reminds me of my Minox 35 ML, if you use these Cameras upside down you have a shade for the sun 😃
Thanks re. Minilux, OK
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Predominately use Contax, but the lens on that Miniliux is quite something!
PS Try the Contax N mount lenses (and if you can find a working one, the world’s first FF Digital camera!)
@@spluff9110 ok thanks!
@@spluff9110 hmm I might need to try to get one to test! Thanks!
Very interesting comparison. Ironic how the point and shoot is valued much higher in this day and age. I sold my point and shoot Olympus Mju cameras which I got for a pittance and made enough to import a Nikon F4 from Japan in great condition after watching your review on said Nikon. I will be interested to see how the RX does when you test it.
Thanks John, yes crazy times for sure but yes at least some of the older cameras become great value (RX seems like a LOT of camera for that little money). F4 also great but feels a lot less luxuary compared now I own both. It's all in the glass though as we know.
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom Thanks Matt. I am curious about Contax and there are mixed views. I think reliability may be less of a given than Nikon. I have FM2N, F90x, F100, F4 and F5. The F5 is like a Challenger 2 tank ! As for point and shoot , the F100 with my Af 35-70 f3.3-4.5 N is very fast to use. It and the F5 have the benefit of back button focus which is the only thing I miss on the F4.
@@johnbragg thanks John, yes agree all my Nikon’s have been good (x10 of them)
Less than £200 for Contax IIa?! I'm surprised to hear that. I would have said nearer double that if including the f1.5 lens, or at least that's what I paid (so hoping I haven't been diddled). Scanning eBay, if ever listed in the UK at all they seem to be well over £300. Lovely camera though - as good as a Leica IIIf.
I don't get the Contax RX - if the electronics fail you have one expensive paper-weight. The T2 sounds interesting so my vote for a review on that.
Thanks, yes without lens, maybe the cheap ones sold that I saw on eBay. They are worth more for sure! The T2 can fail as easy as the RX sadly but I look forward to testing both. I still prefer iiif :)
My favorite is the. T3.
Nice! I've not tried that. I like the simplicity of the earlier T
The Contax TVS is also pretty sexy. In the same vein of sleek point and shooters . . I offer the Nikon 28ti...
Thanks! I was looking at the 28Ti on eBay just the other day (I prefer 28mm for walkabout shooting).
Contax G 🤫❤️❤️
Thanks! Nice lenses!
Well, personally, I only have experience with a Contax IIIa rangefinder - with the same type of lens as you have on your IIa. It's very nice, but I prefer my Leica IIIb even though the viewfinder/rangefinder is so much smaller than on the Contax.
As far as point and shoot cameras go, I'd point out, that they come in many different sizes and with different properties. The T2 is compact, and it has a version of aperture priority.
My new favorite point and shoot isn't compact at all and there is very little control of the aperture. It's a Canon EOS 750. An SLR camera with interchangeable lenses, shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 2 secs, X-sync 1/125, capable of using DX-coded film with speeds from ISO 25 to 3200 and evaluative metering, but without manual settings. Kind of point and shoot camera on steroids... Oh, and an impressive sounding shutter and film advance for a cheap automatic SLR from the 80's.
The Coxtax body without the selenium meter on top was the IIa; with the meter it was the IIIa. He misspoke describing his Contax as a IIa. Same distinction applies to the pre-War Contax II/III.
Thanks agreed I prefer Leica iii cameras over the Contax to use. That's why i've not used it yet. Nice on the Canon, thanks!
Thanks, yes sorry everyone to mis-inform, it is the iiia*
I have an RTS, don't really like it, heavy and with a dark viewfinder, I prefer my Yashica FX3 2000 super for my planar 50mm f1.4 Wich is very nice. I also have a distagon 35 f2.8 and a sonnar 135mm f2.8. they are all nice lenses but the planar seems to be sharper
I also have a Contax IIIa with the sonnar 50mm f1.5. Maybe the best lens of all I have, the Contax IIIa has the most precise focus rangefinder, with a very large distance from the viewfinder. Just impressive if you accept the slow charging wheel and the dark viewfinder. But it's a vintage camera..
I took the last foto of my father just passed away with the IIIa 😢
Thanks Oscar, yes I much prefer the older Contax (and Kiev) RF cameras. That Sonnar lens at f2 is fantastic and can compete with my Leica lenses from the same period. I use it on my Kiev 4a mostly (longer RF base length vs my Contax iia so even better accuracy).
I love my IIA
Thanks Lee, they are beautiful cameras no question!
I happened to know the T2 is expensive. I see a lot of RUclipsrs shooting them (as you say, the younger generation). Absolute nuts money to pay for a point and shoot..... and if the electrics go in it you're shafted because no spares are made anymore. Only thing you can do is have a second donor body (which will also cost you a fortune). Surprised at the cost of the RX. Hmm
The electronics are not the worst, the autofocus system are the most expensive to repair.
Thanks David, you knew more than me and agreed.
Thanks good info!
@@MattOsborne-MrLeicaCom only through watching RUclips 🤣
Doesn't look like a Contax IIa. It looks more like a Contax IIIa with the selenium meter?
Thanks Erich, sorry I think my eBay seller called it the wrong name and I never thought to check. Yes it is a iiia thanks!
プラナー85mmf1.4は素晴らしい描写をします。
Thanks!
I'm a little too excited for this lol
Haha thanks Sean, I hope it didn't disappoint!
Brilliant
Thanks Zoltan! :)
With regret both my Contax G2 bodies have developed the same fault. Everything works but the shutter. Very very disappointed .
Sorry to hear this :(
That is a Contax IIIA (3A), not a 2A.
Thanks sorry yes I messed up!
The comparisons made here are a bit peculiar, in that there is really no connection or "family" between the Contax cameras made by Zeiss in Germany and Contax camera made in Japan by Kyocera, except the royalties paid to Zeiss for a licence to use the Contax name. In terms of design and build, they have little in common apart from using 35mm film. The Zeiss cameras were all metal, all mechanical, poor ergonomics, with overly complex designs which limited their usage and doomed them as an ongoing line of models. (There isn't much different between the Contax II of 1936 and the last IIa of the mid 1960s.) The Japanese cameras were distinguished by use (overuse?) of cutting edge electronics of their day. Well thought out designs, highly ergonomic for use, wide use of metal and synthetics to make durable but limit weight. A variety of basic technologies such that no two models were much alike, apart from revisions over time. (My first 35mm was a Contax II in 1959; I've owned a T2 since the later 1990s.)
Thanks, yes sorry I shared them all together as I’d not yet done individual videos. I’ve since done a T2 video and blog post with full res files on MeLeica.com
It starts itching when I hear certain words like:
Point and shoot - Professional - Grain - Bokeh -
Frames per second - ND 10 - Art - etc
I can point and shoot with a Hassellblad, Linhof
an a can of soup.
Professional borrow your tele lens, your flash
and two rolls Tri-X 135-36.
No grain, no image.
Bokeh by Rodenstock Imagon 300 mm,
Frame/sec needed to shoot my mother in law speaking
like a Gatling of a Thunderbolt.
ND - 10 for welding a submarine ?
Art person is just a fart
Haha thanks Jaco!
A fool's confession:
I was crazy for less than fifteen minutes.
I like german "glass".
So I bought myself a Zeiss Contax IIa
with a Zeiss Sonnar 1 : 2 - 50 mm
no lightmeter for a € 1000,00
It happened june 2022
Still in the photoshop I retourned the Contax.
I do not trust old Jaguars V12, teachers and
no old Contax.
The rangefinder of it is a piece of crap.
Thanks Jaco!
Si vis pacem, para bellum !
You wake me up .......
Haha sorry Jaco! Yes it was late going out, apologies. Editing took too long.
Matt, no hard feelings
I like the way you do your vlogs
Your photos are top-notch
Never seen here.