bj_rn_petter_hernes Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Purchased on fleabay ... I had worked my expectations very high for this camera, read lots on photo.net, Rangefinderforum and anywhere else on the net I could find stuff. I was however, a little disappointed in the shutter sound, I found it very hard compared to my Contax III, also the back plate seems a little "loose" or not as sturdy as the older version. The overall impression is that the pre-war contax were of a more solid build. Anyhow, I look much forward to trying it out. It was serviced and repaired only a month ago, so it should have a few clicks in it still. Regards Bj�rn Petter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 You could only be disappointed in the build quality of the IIa by comparing it to a Leica or another Contax. Trust me, it's very well built (I own a IIIa). Go out and use it - I suspect it will grow on you. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_oleson Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 ZI worked very hard to reduce the size and weight of the camera (relative to the II), and to eliminate the ribbon-attrition factor in the shutter, and the difference in 'feel' you observe was the result. There were a couple of details that might have been different - the rangefinder's vertical alignment might have been more positive, and the high shutter speeds are a bit prone to fade, neither of which was a problem with the prewar model - but the IIa is a very nice camera, I think smoother in operation than the II. In overall long term reliability, the II probably wins by a narrow margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kymtman Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 It may have been the repairman's lack of care that is showing in the IIa. I have a IIIa that is smoother than a Singer Sewing Machine or a babies bottom. I would not take a grand for mine. I have not taken but one roll of color with the IIIa. I have been quite busy this summer with tinkering with the other classics that I have. One should settle down to only one great camera, and that would be my IIIa if I had to choose. A link to my Contax folder: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=518233 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santiago_montenegro Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Ditto. Hard words to say "If I could have only one camera...", but mine would be my Contax IIIa. But really, really, couldn't I keep aslo a Rolleiflex as a companion? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiblanke Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I am with Santiago on the Rolleiflex: As nice as 35mm is, there is no replacement for 'the real machine' ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kymtman Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 The real machine" ...well now The Bronica ETR ain't bad! Nor is the Hartblei either.It is rather difficult to get anyone to process 120 around here, 35 not to bad. I live in a rural area, so I bought a jobo procesor and I do 120 myself. Walmart will process my 35 film for 1.79 a roll (neg only). Soup will cost almost that much. Now I find that I shoot more 35 because I love my Leica IIIf and my Contax IIIa. I will use my Contax more because I hate to load the film into the Leica(Bottom feeder)! My remarks may offend some of you, but remember it is my personal preferance only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summitar Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Very interesting observations. I think I would have to say that my Contax IIa is probably the best built camera I own, a collection that includes Leica LTMs, many different Voigtlanders and Retinas, Canon FD systems, and Nikon F2 and FTNs. The Canon F-1 and Nikon F2 come the closest, but the Contax IIa, externally at least, is like a Tiger tank. I can't speak to the internal stuff like shutters, film winding mechanisms, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bj_rn_petter_hernes Posted September 3, 2005 Author Share Posted September 3, 2005 It has improved ... meaning that the shutter sound is better now, it was probably a little raw after the repair, I do not know. One other thing though I was suprised about is the lack of frame counter ... the Contax III has it also the II, but not the IIa (unless I have not noticed it). If not, it is kind of odd if you ask me. I love the camera though, loaded it with my first film today and brought it into the woods to accompany me and the family on a berry picking trip. Bj�rn Petter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_scheitrowsky1 Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 Hello Bjorn, I have a new Contax IIa too. The frame counter it concentric to the shutter release button. I have to agree with you about the shutter sound. My Kiev 4a has a nicer, softer sound! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now