Bodies for contax/yashica mount

So my contax rts ii broke and i got a refund. But now im left with a carl zeiss 50mm planar lens (contax/yashica mount). I thought maybe another body that will fit? Or sell it? But its so nice. I bought a nikon d3400 dslr and now im regretting it (probably most likely im going to take it back for a refund tomorrow) the photos look to clean, its sharp like the carl zeiss but for some reason carl zeiss and film just looks better to me. Moving to digital feels like how i imagine an unwanted divorce would feel. Attached two pics below, 1st is carl Zeiss with ilford pan 50, 2nd is d3400. Carl zeiss looks almost 3D.

Just don't know what to do

Well, at the prices they're going for these days, why not get an RTS III or an RX? If that's not in your budget, there were a number of Yashica bodies that were well regarded (model names escape me at the moment).

TheFlyingCamera said:

Well, at the prices they're going for these days, why not get an RTS III or an RX? If that's not in your budget, there were a number of Yashica bodies that were well regarded (model names escape me at the moment).

Click to expand...

+1

If you like the RTSII get an other one (I like mine, after the loved 139q got a broken film transport); RTSIII if you want the top, 167 is fine, too. The only model I don't like is the 159 (ugly surface and electronic problems). And yes, the 1.4/50 Planar is great, as is the Planar 1.4/85mm, too.

Best
Jens

RTS III is a larger camera, but it is a great camera. One of the best ever made. The better smaller ones include the RX and ST. If you want a fully manual camera and don't want to spend any money a Yashica FRI is excellent. Personally I've never been fond of the first two RTS models. Not worth the money in my opinion compared to others for the same price. The 139 is also a decent choice for not much money, especially with the winder. Still, if you can afford one, an ST or RX are the ones to look for. They should set you back less than $200.

I've got a couple of RTS but they both have the same problem where the lens "key" that tells the camera the lens' maximum aperture is mis-read by the camera. But my 167MT is still fine and produces great photos, as does the Aria -- I've seen 167MT for under $125. Can't go wrong with that.

Jonnysound said:

So my contax rts ii broke and i got a refund. But now im left with a carl zeiss 50mm planar lens (contax/yashica mount). I thought maybe another body that will fit? Or sell it? But its so nice. I bought a nikon d3400 dslr and now im regretting it (probably most likely im going to take it back for a refund tomorrow) the photos look to clean, its sharp like the carl zeiss but for some reason carl zeiss and film just looks better to me. Moving to digital feels like how i imagine an unwanted divorce would feel. Attached two pics below, 1st is carl Zeiss with ilford pan 50, 2nd is d3400. Carl zeiss looks almost 3D.

Just don't know what to do

Click to expand...

Did you try the Planar on your DSLR or compare it with a kit lens? Kyocera made Contax SLRs as technically sophisticated cameras, there wasn't a Nikon F2 or Canon F-1 equivalent in the mount. The nearest is a Yashica FR. All the RTS range are getting old and may need attention, as will many film cameras.

It's hard to tell from your post what your priorities are. I wouldn't build my photographic aspirations around a single lens, no matter how good. Nor would I let its rendering dictate whether I used film or digital cameras.

I started using the RTS 1 and love the simple very accurate metering and 2000s speed . They are cheap on ebay and its a top quality camera for not much money .I have 2 RTS 1 s and keep one loaded with black and white the other with color

I've been wanting to get into Contax for some time now, my first choice being an RTS III, but I just haven't had the funds for it. So I compromised. I didn't want a Yashica body. I know that there are several very good ones, but I just wanted a Contax. I finally ended up buying a 139 Quartz for dirt cheap -- like about $40. Sometimes you can find them for cheaper than what its asking price is typically seen on eBay. Look for auctions and not BIN listings.

The 139 Quartz has a couple of quirks, but once you get used to them, it's a solid little body with two different exposure modes: Aperture Priority AE and fully coupled Metered Manual. Plus it has exposure compensation, the dial for which is located where the shutter speed dial is located on just about all other cameras. The shutter speed dial is coaxial with the film rewind crank. Vertically traveling shutter, speeds from 11 seconds to 1/1000 in Aperture Priority, 1 second to 1/1000 in Manual. Shutter speed readout in the VF using LEDs to indicate exposure, with a window showing the aperture selected. 1/100 flash sync, TTL flash with dedicated units. In short, a cool little camera that can often be found for very good prices -- if you're patient. A dedicated winder was also made for it and can be found for relatively cheap, even on eBay, if you're patient.

I was very happy with the Contax 159 MM when I had it. Nice Av and P autoexposure but more importantly, shutter and aperture info in the viewfinder for easy manual exposure.

cooltouch said:

So I compromised. I didn't want a Yashica body.

Click to expand...

Bear in mind both Yashica and Contax were branding exercises for the Kyocera company. The Contax was a technologically advanced Japanese camera, not a German one.

+1 with Blockend, the Yashica FR and FR2 were fine cameras, nice auto winder, the FX models were standard budget bodies, but coupled with a Zeiss lens as good a picture taker as a Contax, only reason to buy a Contax or a FR or FR2 for that matter is if you need advanced features or plan on heavy shooting.

This subject has come up before. My only Zeiss lens in Y/C mount is a 352.8 AEJ. The rest are Yashica ML, MC and YUS or third party lenses. I have four Yashica bodies which have been overhauled: three FX-3 and an FX-7. I also have working FX-3 Super 2000 FX-103 bodies. The FX-3 is off by one stop but if I double the ISO, the exposures are perfect. I don't have any working FR bodies and wouldn't bother with them. The FX-3 is simple to use, has a bright finder and is easy to get serviced.

Some of the FR models are notorious for frame counter issues (I have one) and some folks can't figure out how to meter. I sold one to a student and then had to buy it back because she lost a battle of wits with her camera.