Taken out of Contax

<p>Very nice set of images, Rick, I'm not a big fan of 35mm -( much prefer medium format there is just something in those large negatives) but I enjoyed reading your write- up and I gotta say that for 80 bucks you got yourself a nice camera. Congrats.<br>

Soeren, You don't post here often but when you do, I enjoy your images a lot. Your pictures always have this warm feel to it. Is it the film or processing? </p>

<p>The FXD doesn't have an aperture display in the viewfinder, just LEDs on a shutter speed scale (that can be a bit hard to see in bright light). I think the 139 does, though - perhaps this is the camera with a similar problem?</p>

Perhaps the best thing to do about the display 'problem' is remind ourselves that there are cameras that don't have anything displayed in the viewfinder - neither shutterspeeds, apertures or focus confirmation - and are perfectly usable still.<br>Is it "a problem"?

Honestly, I tend to look at the lens aperture ring anyway since I learned on cameras that lacked VF display. So not a

problem for me.

<p>Quite right,<strong> Mike</strong> and <strong>Q.G</strong>.; from an operational point of view the lack of the aperture scale matters not a jot. To "have things right" is just obsessive behaviour on the part of we collectors...Thanks for the information, <strong>Chuck</strong>, and while I'll have to say that I much prefer working in MF formats myself, <strong>Kris</strong>, I just find a fascination with the huge range of 35mm cameras.</p>

I understand, Rick. In a Classic Camera Context "to have things right" could mean (in a collecting context it <i>should</i> mean) "to have things the way they made them, good or bad".<br>If in the present "Contaxt" the viewfinder display is unusable (or thereabouts) because of some form of damage the camera sustained during the last 40 years, it would require a fix. If it is unusable because they made it that way, it is an endearing quirk that is part of what the camera is (and that if it at some time had been fixed would have to be unfixed again).<br>But it's a big part of the fun of old, uhm... classic cameras, isn't it? Getting to know their peculiarities, their strong points and their weak points. Not knowing about them gives something to talk about and produces threads like this one. So isn't it good that they made it bad? ;-)

<p>I've been the owner of a 139 with the Yashica 28ML and 135ML, as well as a Tokina 28-70 SZX (not bad BTW), and last year I stumbled upon this S2 with the Zeiss 50/1,4 ; 80-200/4 ; Mutar 2X converter ; 400/5,6 Sigma APO and Metz 40 flashgun. The whole lot in excellent condition for $120!. The Metz has let me down in the mean time (as some may have read in this forum) but I consider myself very lucky still, except that film is dying out completely in our country, Namibia . I haven't used anything except the 400 on Digital (a very pleasant lens), since I have to travel very far to have films developped, with usually bad results... Very frustrating. This is why you find very good stuff for cheap around here. You can't use them anymore! I guess there must be a few dozens film users left in the whole country.</p>