Why so little said about the Contax 645

[hjoseph7]

<p>Not sure what it is about Contax but they seem to make great cameras with great features that are well built and are topped off with Carl Zeiss lenses, but they never seem to be as popular as other cameras. Right now, I'm talking about the 645AF in particular, but other Contax cameras including 35mm's, rangefinders and 16mm's have not fared any better. <br>

They start off strong, then they putter out and wind up on the used market discontinued. You might say that maybe it's the price, but Hassy's which are not exactly bargain-basement either and they seem to do fine. So what could it be, bad luck ? </p>

[DWScott]

<p>Interesting -- it seemed over the last few years that the Contax 645 became one of the most talked-about, and dare I say "hyped" cameras.</p>

<p>When new, it was perhaps overlooked. But the Contax 645AF became the go-to camera of the digital backlash. Led by Jonathan Canlas, a (small) but vocal group of wedding and portrait photographers have embraced shooting film, and the collective wisdom of this group seems to favour the Contax 645.</p>

<p>As a result these cameras have been thin on the ground at used retailers like KEH, and command premium prices compared to competing systems.</p>

<p>That said, I'm happy to shoot with my Bronica ETR (and to enjoy the lower prices for lenses etc.)</p>

[c_watson1]

<p>Pricey, thin dealer support, perceived value issues, scarce repair/service options probably all influenced slow sales relative to the H series--just a guess.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I've always wanted one, but the issues C Watson points to are a powerful counterargument.</p>

[georg_s1]

<p>I've handled the Contax 645 once and was in love ;-) It's owner did all kind of commercial stuff with it, from weddings to low-light concert photography. He sold it later because careful scanning took too much time. I really wonder if modern 120-cameras would get more love if the range of available very good film-scanners was broader.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

More than thin dealer support I suspect. Kyocera hardly admits my RTSIII still exists though they did fix it by special

dispensation many years ago. Parts are almost impossible for the RTSs so probably worse for the 645. Nothing wrong

with the quality though.

[ellis_vener_photography]

They never managed to get a decent distributor, or sales network going in the USA. They were far more popular in

Europe.

[donbright]

<p>All the way, in my view including the G2.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>The RTSs (35mm) were great cameras to use by the way, really a pleasure, just a bit heavier than the competition (used to be). These days the RTSIII with a lens isn't that much heavier than a modern Nikon or Canon DSLR.</p>

<p>It's tempting to use these cameras these days if you shoot film, but that ancient electronics is definitely delicate and often irreplaceable. You're better off using an old Leica M2. THOSE can still be fixed, even by the manufacturer.</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>The Contax 645AF was an excellent and elegant design, and with its Zeiss lenses, it seems to have had particular appeal in places like Japan.</p>

<p>It was one of the first bodies to communicate internally with digital backs, albeit that communication was one-way (camera to body), while its rivals and contemporaries the Mamiya 645AFD and Hasselblad H1 had two-way communication which enabled remote computer control and tighter integration of metadata. Nevertheless, the Contax interface is still supported by vendors like Phase One in their latest digital backs, and there are still many people shooting it digitally including leading professionals in advertising, etc.</p>

<p>I think that where the Contax struggled a bit versus its rivals was that 1) the Hasselblad H series had leaf shutters, which many photographers insist on for their work; 2) the Mamiya 645AFD and its lenses were less expensive, and Mamiya had a vast and affordable ecosystem already in situ with manual focus M645 lenses and accessories, while the Contax came on the scene from scratch with a limited and expensive lens range.</p>

<p> </p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

What obviously did not help the Contax also was Kyocera's decision, not based on the success or lack thereof of the Contax 645, to stop building cameras. Maybe that decision was helped along a bit by Zeiss working with other makers besides Kyocera to make Zeiss labeled cameras.<br><br>The Contax 645 had a bit of a bad start too, with the rumour doing the rounds that it consumed batteries at a more than alarming rate. The thing behind the rumour probably was that before starting to use it seriously, one reviewer played with it a lot, and not aware of that he emptied the batteries himself gave it a bad review. Other reviewers copied that, and the Contax started out getting bad reviews.<br><br>The Hasselblad H series did not come about until 4 years after the Contax appeared. In reaction to the success of the Contax and the Mamiya 645 AF (not the ZD or DF - the 'digital' Mamiya only arrived much later, after the Contax had already gone.) By the time the H Series came of age, Kyocrea had already stopped making cameras.<br><br>I don't know much about the Contax 645, but what i do know is that it is a first class camera with a series of really excellent lenses. Better than many lenses made by other manufacturers and even better than many lenses Zeiss made for Rollei and Hasselblad.

[evan_dong1]

<p>Q.B.,</p>

<p>I can your question partially, only because I do not have the Hasselblad H system. I bought into the Contax 645 system, while it was near its end. It was still being sold and many photographers was dumping it at that time was buying into the Canon MK5 II.<br>

I use my Contax 645 with the 35mm, 45mm, 80mm, 120mm, 140mm, & the 45-90mm zoom. If you use it as your main studio camera or for weddings, then it is sufficient for those needs. The battery issue is not as bad as one would think. I use rechargeable CR123 batteries and I also use a Quantum Battery + as my main power source for the camera system and flash. Never had any problems with it.</p>

<p>With various lens adapter I have an open range of lenses to choose from: P-6 mount lenses, Hasselblad V lenses, and Mamiya 645 lenses. The meter is accurate enough, but nevertheless I back it up with my Minolta Auto Meter IV Flash. The Contax 645 are superb and for the ranges that I do not have for it, I use my Hasselblad V with the MAM-1 adapter.</p>

[john_photos]

<p>Q.B gave the best explanation. Currently, the Contax 645AF is the hot "film" wedding camera and one of the only medium format SLR's to have retained some of its original value from the late 90's. The standard lens is very fast and so "sought after" by hip wedding guys that charge in the tens of thousands. Lots said about this camera if you look in the right place. Google is your friend (a tip for ya since you need help evidently). Comparing this camera directly to Hasselblad is apples to oranges in my opinion given the AF. </p>

[donbright]

<p>A word about rechargeable batteries. Too often its a mistake to just do the quick charge for the hour until the light goes out, or on, then expect peak performance from the charge. Maybe redundant to some, but I found that leaving an overnight trickle charge really sets up the battery. Also letting a battery purge itself to its lowest will accept the most efficient charge, so you never know how rumors, or perceptions are over things, but all you need is a writer that doesn't know whats up, and there you go.</p>

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>The Hasselblad H series did not come about until 4 years after the Contax appeared. In reaction to the success of the Contax and the Mamiya 645 AF (not the ZD or DF - the 'digital' Mamiya only arrived much later, after the Contax had already gone.)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think the chronology needs correcting, as there were 'digital' Mamiyas around long before the Contax went:</p>

<p> 1997 - Pentax 645N: 1st AF medium format SLR, film only<br>

1998 - Contax 645: 2nd AF medium format SLR, film and digital backs<br>

1999 - Mamiya 645AF: 3rd AF medium format SLR, film and digital backs [with similar digital limitations as the Contax 645]<br>

2001 - Mamiya 645AFD: updated 645AF, mainly for better digital back compatibility [introduced the Mamiya Serial Communication (MSC) protocol]<br>

2001 - Pentax 645NII: updated 645N, still film only<br>

2002 - Hasselblad H1 and Rollei 6008AF: 4th and 5th AF medium format SLRs, film and digital backs<br>

2004 - Hasselblad H1D: bundled with Imacon digital back, after the two companies merged <br>

2005 - Kyocera discontinues production of the Contax 645; Hasselblad H2 & H2D launched; Mamiya 645AFDII launched.</p>

<p>So, while the Contax had a head start; it, the Mamiya 645AF/645AFD, the Hasselblad H1/H1D, and the Rollei 6008AF, were all in production and vying for digital medium format photographers' wallets at the same time in the early to mid 2000s.</p>

[c_watson1]

<p><em>"What obviously did not help the Contax also was Kyocera's decision, not based on the success or lack thereof of the Contax 645, to stop building cameras."</em></p>

<p>Hardly a mystery. Film camera sales overall were tanking in 2004-5. How could Kyocera keep the Contax 35mm line and poor selling 645AF afloat and still make money?</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Kyocera was making heaps of money. As to this day, they don't quite know where to put it all, so they keep buying other companies. They could afford to prolong the Yashica/Contax line, if they had wanted to. I believe it's that they just lost interest in it.<br>The Contax cameras were no big sellers. But they sold. And the 645 was not a market failure but instead revived the Contax line, bringing in new buyers from a market segment they hadn't tapped before.<br>They still make cameras, by the way, disguised as telephones.

[c_watson1]

<p>"<em>They could afford to prolong the Yashica/Contax line, if they had wanted to. I believe it's that they just lost interest in it</em>."</p>

<p>Seems rather that consumers lost interest in Contax products. Fanciful ideas of corporate governance aside, you don't seem aware that Kyocera's stakeholders wouldn't have accepted continuing commitment to an unprofitable product line like film cameras in 2004-05. But feel free to believe that Kyocera management's "boredom" with cameras alone killed off Contax.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Yes, consumers were switching to 35 mm format based digital SLRs. The Contax 645 could have helped the Contax brand move on into the digital age. But instead the entire Contax line was discontinued.<br>What Kyocera also discontinued then were the digital consumer cameras they also made. What do you make of that, C?

[celasun]

<p>Just a note for future visitors considering getting a Contax 645: The shutter mechanism has a life (no wonder!) and the mechanism made by Copal is "practically" unreplaceable. In other words, parts are "almost" unavailable... Go decide for a purchase!</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

... Yet still available, Bulent. There are no restrictions on Contax 645 service and repair today.<br/>Future visitors: check with Kyocera (website) if you want to know.

[c_watson1]

<p><em>"There are no restrictions on Contax 645 service and repair today."</em></p>

<p>Seems likely that Contax 645 parts and service are coming to an end in N. America as 2015 approaches, ending ToCAD USA's responsibility for Kyocera product support. It's plainly a dead-end product whose service and support wasn't stellar even pre-2005 in the US and Canada.</p>

<p>Bulent was having trouble getting his Contax 645 looked after 2 years ago:</p>

<p><a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/00aVCe?start=10">http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00aVCe?start=10</a></p>

<p>Free pdf manuals are about all the Kyocera site provides.</p>

<p> </p>

[evan_dong1]

<p>I'm coming in a bit late on this, but I was the individual that corresponded with Bulent when he posted about his issue with the shutter. Were corresponded outside of the Photo.net forum and I gave him the necessary contact information on his continent, Europe. In addition, I also gave him Kyocera JAPAN, as the more difficult repairs were sourced to Japan. The 35mm Contax-Yashica system was parceled out to many different shops.<br>

That information can be found here: http://kyoceraimaging.com/bulletins/csb2.htm<br>

Regarding the Professional line - 645 System, here is the link for their worldwide locations:<br>

http://global.kyocera.com/prdct/optical/global/index.html</p>

<p>I had been dealing with Tocad America for all of my needs and never had they turn me away for the simple reason that parts are no longer available. I contact Tocad America directly for Bulent and was told the shutter inventory is running low, but they still have units. Eventually it will dry up, but at this preset time. Keh do not stock these parts and like everyone else, would have to go directly through Tocad America or to Kyocera Imaging. Eventually I understand that Bulent manage to get it repairable. Am I correct about this?<br>

For a dead system, like most other comparable system, I personally had been very lucky with all of my servicing through Tocad America. For minor issues, most can be repaired stateside. For the more difficult issues, they got to Japan to be repaired.<br>

<br /> I am happy with the level of service I received from KyoceraImaging / Tocad America for my 645 system and the newer 35mm system. Eventually all good things must pass on, and I'm prepare to move along with it. But their optics continue to be used with 3rd party adapters and fabricators, so in respect are they truly dead? The Contax 645 optics can be used on the Leica S2 digital camera with their reverse engineered adapter. The Contax N system can be converted to be use on the Canon EOS Digital system. The older Yashica/Contax 35mm optics has found a place on most 35mm digital system with adapters. The G optics can be converted to Leica M Mount or 3/4 format digital system.</p>

<p> </p>

[nathan_wu1]

<p>Hi Guys, </p>

<p>I just had my second contax 645 shutter break down on me 2 days ago during a shoot. So I have two bodies now with broken shutters. <br>

As I am based in Singapore, what would be the best course of action for me to take to get these two guys repaired? Should I send the bodies to Japan directly? <br>

Would it also be possible to buy extra spare shutters from them to stock up in case I need to repair them again? </p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[martin_wouterlood1]

<p>Yeah, one wonders what Kyocera was thinking in those days...they could have held a steady market share to take their loyal followers into the digital age (after all, who was it that made the first full frame 24x36mm dslr, about 6mp, iioc??)...perhaps they were overwhelmed with the giant strides that Canon, Nikon, perhaps others too, were making in sensor development without having a competitive source of these themselves...or perhaps the behind-the-scene Japanese industry ethics compelled the decision...who knows, really? IF1 really loved the RTS series and still the 645.<br /> Contax Japan (or Kyocera) MAY still fix your Contax gear until 2015, by some reports.<br /> My thoughts only...</p>