sr.may Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 I know that this is the Leica fourm, but I also know that many of you are like me and are addicted to buying and trading bodies and lenses and the like. I have found a Contax RX body with 1,4/50 and 2.8/28 new for a very decent price. I have always been intrigued by Contax/Zeiss, but have never owned or tried them out. The apparent age of the lenses, developed for the most part 10 years ago or more and the dated styling and features of the bodies has kept me away. Can anyone help me decide? I love my M and R gear, my Nikon AF too, but is it time to jump into Contax/Zeiss as well? Or am I spending money just to gain bag weight? It's the three pieces above or a new Summilux-M 1,4/35! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sait_akkirman Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 The answers to all your questions are in the : "M7 Predictions (Dennis Couvillion, 2002-02-25) " thread a few lines down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_henry Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 What will the Contax RX allow you to do that you cannot do presently with the equipment you now own? You have a M and R system, and a Nikon AF camera as well? Am I missing something here? A 28/2.8 and 50/1.4 are available in every 35mm system; why would you buy into Contax for these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_brown4 Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 This is so ironinc. I am just finishing selling virtually all my Contax gear because I am totally pleased with my M6/35/50/90 combo. Oh, I do have a digitial for ebay transactions and e-mail junk. <p> So if it we me, I get the 28mm Summicron M without hesitation, but, that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leonid Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 check out alfie wang's contax question below . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j._g. Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 i know this might sound trite, but do whatever you like. if buying and selling camera gear makes you happy, do it! ~J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_brown1 Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 Sr.May,You Have Affluenza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlegaspi Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 Alfie has met his match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_doyle2 Posted February 26, 2002 Share Posted February 26, 2002 Affluenza!!! That's a great one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_piper2 Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 If it were ME I'd get the 35 ASPH...but the RX is (IMHO) the cream of the Contax 35 crop - 95% of the functionality of the RTSIII with 65% of the weight. The focus confirmation is pointless and useless, but can be turned OFF very easily. <p> I sure wouldn't bother with more than 1 SLR system, though. Make an informed choice, but CHOOSE! Cameras are for picture-taking, not body- building! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_b.2 Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 In the event you are looking for "German glass" by buying into the current Contax system and Carl Zeiss lenses, I am quite certain that it is actually manufactured in Japan by the "Carl Zeiss Society of Japan", or something to that effect. I travel to Tokyo a lot on business, and often visit the major camera dealerships to learn about current developments. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leonid1 Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 Well I am one of the few people ( on earth ? ) who uses an old zeiss contarex . I have a 35mm distagon (60's w.german ) for it , and shoot about 4 to 5 rolls of film a week . It's really a nice lens , but I have come to the conclusion that it is no better than one from nikon or canon (certainly less versatile ). To paraphrase the NRA's ( idiotic ) mantra , lenses don't shoot people , people shoot people . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 Leonid <p> Good for you with the beautiful Contarex. Why is the Distagon a "less versatile" 35mm lens? I don't get it - is it because it is slow? I am great admirer of the Contarex optics. They don't make them like that any more... Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leonid Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 No auto-focus , no autoexposure , slow ( at night, the f/2 version is at least $700 ) . Unless I am shooting something that is motionless , having to meter by hand , transfer it to the camera , and then focus isn't always convenient ( and I would like a high eyepoint finder ). I am finding that as I stick my nose into more and more dangerous/dark spots , an autofocus, autoexposure camera may be the thing for me . As much as I love the camera , I 'll probably sell it and get a f100 and 35/2 . But that's just me , so please don't take offense at anything that I've said . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xavier_dalfort Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 If you have the money and the envy, go for it. <p> I recently bought a Rollei 35SE just for fun. It's nice and lovely. <p> Who cares if it's anachronic. <p> However, the Zeiss Quality is a real thing. You should be pleased. <p> X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray_moth Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 Xavier, <p> The Zeiss "anachronic" lenses used in the Rollei 35 were very good, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_piper2 Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 "In the event you are looking for "German glass" by buying into the current Contax system and Carl Zeiss lenses, I am quite certain that it is actually manufactured in Japan by the "Carl Zeiss Society of Japan" <p> True (except for some specialty lenses like the 16 fisheye and 300 2.8(?)) <p> Bu of course all the parts and much of the pre-assembly of Leica bodies takes place in Portugal - and many of the 'classic' Leica lenses from 1960-1990 were made completely in Canada. For that matter the CURRENT Leica 80-200-R is made by Kyocera (read Contax!) - and not even the "Zeiss Foundation". <p> If Zeiss or Leica is prescribing the glass formulas and shapes and specifications, do you think the materials and machinery in the factory 'know' whether the people outside are eating sushi or bratwurst or paella or (hmmm...what's a traditional Canadian dish?) 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