35mm Equipped with Standard Zoom

[KidA]

I'm looking for a standard zoom lens +/- 35-70mm range and potentially a new body to go along with it. I currently use the OM system and would be carrying around with me a lovely OM-4ti. This is a near perfect camera for me. If I were to stick with this body, It would look like a 35-70 f3.6 would be the lens to carry around with it. The 2.8 is way too expensive (and a bit big).

After always being intrigued by the Contax SLRs, I've always thought that the Aria with the 35-70 f3.4 would be really nice to have. *Retail therapy alarms going off?*

First off, any experiences with either of these lenses? Both perhaps? Is one significantly better than the other? They both claim to be comparable to their primes. Keep in mind, my only experience with any Zeiss lens is an 80mm Planar on a Hassy… And yeah, it's impeccable. I must say, I'm very impressed with my Olympus lenses. Comparing apple and oranges here, right…? But Zeiss, I guess, is known for their great lenses on any format.

What would you do? Save a few bucks (cost of Contax body about $200-300). Or should I be a little adventurous and give a new system a shot? My overall concern is image quality and portability. I have never seen an Aria and the lenses seem to be about the same size. I can't seem to find a size comparison of these two bodies and/or lenses

Any other suggestions? The only thing need that I haven't already mentioned is a built-in spot meter.

To wrap things up, I'm looking for:

-Image quality on a standard zoom
-Built in Spot meter
-Relatively lightweight and portable
-Not crazy expensive

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Is there anything wrong with the OM-4Ti?
The lens, including zooms available for it are some of the best for 35mm.
Is the grass greener...?

 

[Xmas]

Is there anything wrong with the OM-4Ti?
The lens, including zooms available for it are some of the best for 35mm.
Is the grass greener...?

Mathew 7:3 refers?

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

You got me there!
But, who keeps telling me I don't need more OMs?
I'm trying to learn my lesson.
I need 30 Hail Marys.

 

[Xmas]

Touché

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use a 28mm to 200mm zoom, a 28mm to 300mm zoom and a 20mm to 35mm zoom.

 

[Xmas]

Most of the time I use a 35mm /2.8 on my OMs.

 

[loman]

If you want a really cheap kit, that produces excellent results go find a minolta x-570 and a md rokkor 35-70 f3.5 (the macro version as it focuses closer), and you have a superb kit. The md rokkor 35-70 is one of the best zoom lenses ever made period

 

[Bill Burk]

I usually gasp at the thought of zooms.

No connection to seller but how about the 28-48mm f/4 zoom?

I just found out about it and have been curious about how it might fare.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/252039477290?_trksid=p2045573.m570.l5999&_trkparms=gh1g%3DI252039477290.N36.S1.R2.TR3

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

It fares very well.

 

[Les Sarile]

You got me there!
But, who keeps telling me I don't need more OMs?
I'm trying to learn my lesson.
I need 30 Hail Marys.

---

Olympus OM-1N, OM-2N, OM-4, OM10

Seems you have a vacancy for the OM3 . . .

I took a chance on an "as-is, parts only" camera that turned out to be perfectly good.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I usually gasp at the thought of zooms.

No connection to seller but how about the 28-48mm f/4 zoom?

I just found out about it and have been curious about how it might fare.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/25203947729...99&_trkparms=gh1g=I252039477290.N36.S1.R2.TR3

Modern zoom lenses are almost as good as fixed focal length lens. All lens designs have compromises. With computer optical design software and aspherical design techniques and manufacture all lenses have been improving resulting in fixed focal length and zoom lenses becoming closer in quality than in the past.

 

[Russ - SVP]

Vivitar Series 1, 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 zoom ROCKS!

 

[Les Sarile]

Vivitar Series 1, 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 zoom ROCKS!

The results I am getting with this lens agrees with you!

It is on the heavy side at 680g.

 

[RobC]

I have an Aria and the zeiss vario-sonnar 35-70 3.4. Its a great little camera with very good matrix metering if you are wanting to just use it like a point and shoot without hand held meter. The lens is very good and has useful close up capability. I would thoroughly recommend that combo. Small and compact.
Lens barrel is all metal but compared to a Contax 167MT the Aria body is much smaller and lighter.
In its day the Zeiss Lens was very highly rated. You can get its datasheet at

http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Ph.../contax_yashica/vario-sonnar3-4_35-70mm_e.pdf

the full spec of the Aria is available at

http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/slr/aria/ariaoverview.html

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'm looking for a standard zoom lens +/- 35-70mm range and potentially a new body to go along with it. I currently use the OM system and would be carrying around with me a lovely OM-4ti. This is a near perfect camera for me. If I were to stick with this body, It would look like a 35-70 f3.6 would be the lens to carry around with it. The 2.8 is way too expensive (and a bit big).

After always being intrigued by the Contax SLRs, I've always thought that the Aria with the 35-70 f3.4 would be really nice to have. *Retail therapy alarms going off?*

First off, any experiences with either of these lenses? Both perhaps? Is one significantly better than the other? They both claim to be comparable to their primes. Keep in mind, my only experience with any Zeiss lens is an 80mm Planar on a Hassy… And yeah, it's impeccable. I must say, I'm very impressed with my Olympus lenses. Comparing apple and oranges here, right…? But Zeiss, I guess, is known for their great lenses on any format.

What would you do? Save a few bucks (cost of Contax body about $200-300). Or should I be a little adventurous and give a new system a shot? My overall concern is image quality and portability. I have never seen an Aria and the lenses seem to be about the same size. I can't seem to find a size comparison of these two bodies and/or lenses

Any other suggestions? The only thing need that I haven't already mentioned is a built-in spot meter.

To wrap things up, I'm looking for:

-Image quality on a standard zoom
-Built in Spot meter
-Relatively lightweight and portable
-Not crazy expensive

my zoom experience is limited to the Nikkor 35-70f/3.5-4.5?.and compared to the 80mm Zeiss Planar it just can't measure up(no surprise to anyoneI hope) but it is decent at f5.6-11 through out the image circle and better than the old 43-86mm zoom, which was terrble.according to Rockwell, newer Nikkor zooms are better and have come closer to prime performance.I use a prime wherever I can.I take weight over mediocre perfprmance anytime.One benefit of DSLRs is that you get an idea about lens erformance quickly

 

[Russ - SVP]

I've been using the Vivitar Series 1, 28-90, for personal and professional work since I purchased it in the mid 80's.

 

[Russ - SVP]

I don't find the older bodies and lenses to be heavy at all. But maybe after 30+ years, I'm used to their heft.

 

[John Koehrer]

I usually gasp at the thought of zooms.

No connection to seller but how about the 28-48mm f/4 zoom?

I just found out about it and have been curious about how it might fare.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/252039477290?_trksid=p2045573.m570.l5999&_trkparms=gh1g%3DI252039477290.N36.S1.R2.TR3

The stuck ring looks like the ring for a rubber lenshood.

 

[filmamigo]

Do you have any reason to eschew auto focus? If not, I suggest a Nikon 35-70 2.8 AF. This is a sparkling lens, great workhorse that can often be found cheap because the focal length has fallen out of fashion and there are newer versions with more frills ("D" compatibility, faster focusing etc.) Pair that lens with a Nikon F4 or a Nikon F100 for a totally different (but great) experience.

For manual focus, I love the SMC Pentax-A 35-105mm f/3.5. It's a fixed 3.5, with a deserved reputation for sharpness and lovely rendering. But, your need of spot metering would limit you to newer bodies like the Pentax Z1p or MZ-S. If you can live without spot metering, go for a Pentax LX or Super Program.