Contax 645 First Impressions

[randall_pukalo]

<p>Well, I've had a Contax 645 for about a week now, and my first impressions are that it is a great camera. The autofocus is actually very fast, almost as fast as my Dynax 7 in good light. After reading all the posts complaining about AF speed, I was very suprised when I hit the focus button in my study at night (only incandescent bulb in ceiling on) and it snapped into focus. Well, maybe in very dim light it has issues, but under normal room lighting it seems fine. Also, the viewfinder is great, the image is very large (I am used to 35mm and dslr mirror sizes), making manual focusing easy. So far, the only drawback (other than the expensive glass and accessories;-) seems to be the auto off function. I lost a shot of my daughter becuase of this, but then again, medium format is not the best for impromptu shots of kids playing.<br>

Overall, I am very impressed, the ergonomics are fantastic, and the camera is a joy to use. I'd like to hear other owners experiences also.<br>

Thanks.</p>

[mikeseb]

<p>The ergonomics are stellar, the glass superb. AF speed is fine as long as you never use a DSLR and learn what *truly* fast AF speed is like.<br>

I have loved my Contax.</p>

[charles_hohenstein]

<p>The auto-off does sound like a pain in the neck. It can't be turned off or adjusted?</p>

[kelly_hughes]

<p>I don't own a Contax myself, but I compared it to the Pentax 645 series when I was shopping. The complaint I've frequently seen is that it chews through the batteries VERY fast. In the 5th post <a href="00EqZK">here</a> the guy claims 5 to 10 rolls on LITHIUM batteries. If you forego the $14 for a set of Lithiums, I think you could count on 1 or 2 rolls with Duracells, since Lithium AAs are said to have 3X the capacity of standard alkalines. Pentax claims the 645N gets 130 rolls of 120, or 100 rolls of 220 using only NORMAL batteries (and that was at the time of printing of the manual, not current improved alkalines). Further down the same page, a Pentax user claims to routinely get over 250 rolls of 120 using Lithium batteries with his 645NII.</p>

<p>That alone would turn me off from the Contax 645. But that's tiny compared to the 15X cost factor of everything Contax. Hmm... $300 to $500 for a complete Pentax setup including a lens or two, or $10,000 for a Contax with mostly the same features and no lenses? No-brainer for me, but YMMV.</p>

<p>BTW, I have a friend at work who is a 35mm Contax fan. His last lens hood (just the lens hood, not the lens itself) cost him $125, and from a quick glance at eBay, that was relatively cheap. Most are $180+. In contrast, I have 3 of Pentax's 645 lenses in my bag, one is autofocus, and not a one of them cost me over $125. Contax prices are so ridiculous that we've adopted a running joke where we use "hood" as a denomination of money (= $125). At only $63, my last autofocus lens for my Minolta mount DSLR was only 0.5 hood.</p>

<p>I guess if money is no option, then Contax might make sense. To me it just plain doesn't.</p>

[kelly_hughes]

<p>Afterthought: Not to disparage your purchase, of course. I'm sure it's a great camera. My takeaway point was just that it wasn't right for me, and you should buy lots of batteries to carry along. </p>

<p>In fact, I wonder how modern day NiMH compare to Lithium AA's? Perhaps rechargeables make more sense now. Capacities there are upwards of 2700maH now.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Completely depends on your intended application. If you feel the Contax 645 provides fast enough AF then your application may not be as demanding of AF as it is for others. Three current MF cameras significantly outperform the Contax in that area ... The Hasselblad H3/H2F, the Mamiya AFD-II, and the Hy6. I loved everything about my Contax except the AF. When Kyocera stopped production, it became clear the dreams of a Contax 645 that used the newer AF technologies had evaporated. </p>

<p>Doesn't take awaay from the fact that it was and is a fabulous camera system ... just not fabulous to everyone based on specific needs from their tools.</p>

[john tonai]

<p>Images from the camera were beautiful. But if you use flash, test it out at the sync speed long before you need to shoot an important job. When the cameras were new, a bunch of them did not expose the entire film at the sync setting. This was not an occasional thing either. Yashica/Contax had a fix at the time, but if the user didn't use the flash, they may not have know about the problem.</p>

<p>You can shoot at one shutter speed slower and it works fine, but it is nice to have the luxury of using the fastest speed possible-especially since the sync speed is already pretty slow to begin with.</p>

[bill_dewberry]

<p>Contax lens hood issue solved, I buy rubber lens hoods in the needed MM size, and they are cheap and plentiful, and work great. Next complaint from the peanut gallery ?</p>

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>I am using my Contax 645 AF with original Zeiss glasses, and with an adaptor with lenses from Fisheye up to 2,000mm tele photo lens. I am very pleased with this camera, and I would buy it again. I guess, that's the best compliment I can do!<br>

Cheers</p>

 

[bradleygibson]

<p>Would love to hear more about your tele lenses--including the 2000mm! Wow! What are you using?</p>