Camera for Zeiss Contax CY mount lenses

[JWMster]

I originally collected Zeiss lenses on discovering them a few years back to run in lieu of Fuji lenses on a Fuji digital camera. The lenses were so good and I loved the handling that I junked the Fuji moved to Sony (for IBIS) to do the lenses justice. Wow! As time passed, I began collecting some Zeiss ZM and began shooting film... ah.... film! and all manual! with handheld meters! Ah... back in my element!

So I'm now trying to figure how to keep showing the Zeiss Contax CY mount lenses a little love. The natural would be a Contax RTS II or similar "native" mount camera. I've looked at Leitax mounts to run the lenses on a Pentax K1000 or Nikon F2 or similar, but there are issues there, and the native mount looks better and better - if there are quality repair folks still extant. And and all thoughts, recommendations and insights appreciated! My thanks in advance!

 

[emacs]

The Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 is a good camera for not a lot of money compared to Contaxes if you want an experience similar to a K1000 or (kinda) F2.
My favorite Contax C/Y camera is the AX which allows you to autofocus with manual focus lenses and has a macro feature which is acts like a sort of built-in extension tube, though it's quite big and heavy and maybe not what you're looking for.

 

[Paul Howell]

FR or FRII if you want a body that takes a motor winder. Not as expensive at Contaxe, many were made, get a couple of bodies so you have a backup if fails.

 

[msarkki]

This really depends what you are looking for.
-Pro-body, solid build, good viewfinder with all relevant information, relying on batteries, aperture-priority and manual metering: RTS II
-Very compact, almost all important features except mirror lock-up and shutter speeds over 1/1000, manual wind, aperture-priority and manual metering, batteries needed: 139 Quartz (159mm is as well nice, but they are hard to find and on Contax bodies I've used it is the only one that has failed, couple of times actually...). If you can live with viewfinder showing shutter speed only, aperture not visible and double exposure is not a big thing, Yashica FX-D is very very similar than 139q. You will as well miss TTL with flash with Yashica, but FX-Ds are typically dirt cheap. Control lay-out is different between Yashica and Contax.
-All manual, FX-3/Super/Super 2000. No info on viewfinder, except 3 light lightmeter, light and compact. FX-3 Super is the camera I take when it is raining These are pretty cheap as well.
-In-built winder,matrix metering, spot metering, center-weighted metering, all exposure modes and all the info you need in viewfinder. Compact and light: Aria.

139q and FXs will need their leathers most probably to be replaced. Aria and 159mm do not suffer from that. RTSII seems to as well have better quality leather. On the cameras mentioned above RTSII and 139q get the most usage. They do everything I need and nothing gets in the way while shooting as I am on aperture priority 90% of the time. While buying check that mirror has not slipped. Google for "Contax mirror slip" and you get what it is all about. Best bang for the buck I'd recommend the 139Quartz, unless a bargain RTSII shows up.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

These days, at current pricing, get an RTS III - all the bells and whistles, pro-grade construction, and you can beat muggers into submission if need be. I don't know how effective it actually is, but it has the vacuum plane film pressure plate which to me seems to improve sharpness across the image. It also has a very cool feature if you're into studio photography - it can do TTL metering with non-dedicated flash units. If you don't want the weight, and can live without some of the fanciest features, an RX is a great option. It's one of the most ergonomic SLRs I've ever handled.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You don't say what your budget is....

Like Scott says, an RTS III is hard to beat. If you want a great camera for less, then get an RX or an ST. If you want a manual camera, get an S2. I would skip the older cameras myself. It doesn't sound like you are hurting for cash, so that would be my recommendation.

 

[msarkki]

One more consideration: You did not say whether your lenses are MM or AE versions. In order to use program and shutter priority modes you need MM versions. With AE, manual and aperture priority are supported. MM lenses can be recognised having smallest aperture marked in green numbers. Program/shutter priority mode is on 159mm, 167mt, rx, st, rts iii and Aria. Afaik all the other bells and whistles like metering modes should work with both versions.

 

[JWMster]

Thanks folks! To answer a question: most lenses are MM but there's the 100mm Macro which is a sole AE. Fancy features aren't what I'm about here so much as a rugged SLR platform that will run the lenses without an adapter.

Like 35mm film box size! With Contax CY lenses in great shape, and adapters that seem to mostly have "issues"... again, the native seem a good option. Grapevine as I remember it had the RTS cameras pegged as having mechanical issues, but here, you guys seem to give them higher regard. S2 is a bit pricey, but all mechanical has some ruggedness (true?) appealing for it.

I'd initially thought of the K1000 (Pentax) and FM2N (Nikon) for the same all-manual bit, but Leitax ain't cheap and "Dave" (Leitax guy) seemed to push Canon... a whole 'nuther brand. Cheapest option is to avoid adapters all together and find a CY mount camera that works well. Your help is much appreciated and pushing in the right direction. Thanks!

 

[dynachrome]

There was a similar thread not too long ago. My Y/C mount lenses are all used on Yashica cameras. I have had three FX-3 bodies overhauled and recovered. This week I sent my repairman an FX-7. From what I can tell, the FX-7 is the same as the FX-3 except for the name. Maybe it was sold under the FX-7 name in certain regions. The FX-3 Super is similar to the FX-3 but its meter is activated by pressing the shutter button gently and not by pushing in a button on the back of the top plate. My Super hasn't been worked on yet. The FX-3 Super 2000 is a pleasant enough camera but not made nearly as well as the other FX-3 models. I have a nice collection of Yashica ML lenses and one Zeiss lens, the 35/2.8 AEJ. I have been tempted more than once to get a Contax body but my concern is that they aren't easily repaired and I could wind up with an expensive brick. The FX-3s have decently bright finders and have worked well for me. Somewhere I have an FX-103 which seems to work but which needs new seals. Maybe I'll send that one out next. The Contax cameras have some interesting and useful features but your Y/C mount lenses can also do well on the Yashicas. I do not like the FR series models. They seem much less well made than the FX-3s. They are heavier than the FX-3s but that doesn't make them more reliable.

 

[blockend]

The closest camera to the K1000 in the Contax/Yashica range is the FR.

 

[JWMster]

Guess I'm starting to get confused. The Contax RTS II seems a good camera and runs about $200 on eBay. Look for the Contax SR and prices (from a good dealer whose "stuff" I know) seem to run about $400. These are significant enough that repair could double the cost - if you went there. And there's this mirror issue I've read about with these guys that is disconcerting - unless SR's aren't prone to that? Yaschicas seem to run pretty far south of these which puts you into "if it don't work, chuck it out" category. Here between Dynachrome and Blockend we have a difference of experience with Yaschicas. One thing I should ask is how the "mirror slap" issue is in these? With a RF, shake ain't a problem. These cameras? Love to hear what you find. Also... the RTS II is supposed to have an VF size something close to 90+ %, is that true for all of these?

 

[Patrick Robert James]

If you want a manual wind camera, then I would recommend the RTS, RTS II, S2 and the Yashica FRI. The FRI is supposed to share a lot of the internals with the RTS. It even fits the same winder. Personally, I like the FRI (I have one) and the S2, but the difference in price with those is quite a lot. The S2 is kind of a collectible. Skip all the other Yashicas. The other manual camera is the Contax 139Q. Nice camera, but they don't seem to be very well built. I've owned a few.

For what it is worth, the FRI is the most reliable camera I have ever owned. I have had one for twenty some years now. I have shot hundreds of rolls with it, and when I got it, it was already beat to heck. It was obviously professionally used. Never had a single issue with it. Never had it cleaned, nothing. The only weak spot of the whole camera seems to be the counter which can strip or break. Mine is still fine.

Hope that helps you!

 

[Neal]

Dear JWMster,

The original RTS models are a great value. Now to show a little love for the Yashica FX-2. They are cheap and dependable. The meter works fine with 357 batteries.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[JWMster]

Patrick Robert James: Thanks! That's pretty helpful. Yeah... the S2 is nice, but given I've fought off the collectible types to get a Leica (M4-2... the "cheap" Canadian cousin)... I'm not looking to wade through the collectors a 2nd time. A clean RTS II probably would fill the bill, and I just put a line out to a trusted dealer to see if he has one. Did see a Yaschica FRI being sold on eBay "as new" in an open box... but my eyebrow rises and the seller has no track record. Solid advice. Thank you! and thanks to all who've helped here.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You are welcome.

Let us know what you end up with.

 

[msarkki]

...... One thing I should ask is how the "mirror slap" issue is in these? With a RF, shake ain't a problem. These cameras? Love to hear what you find. Also... the RTS II is supposed to have an VF size something close to 90+ %, is that true for all of these?

RTSII has 97% VF coverage according to the manual. Mirror is pretty well damped in RTSII, definitely better than in Yashicas or cheaper Contaxes, like 139q. Having said that I've never experienced issues with Yashicas either caused by mirror slap. 1/30 is OK, but I would not dream of using 1/10th of a sec which is pretty doable with RF (like Contax II or Contax IIa)

If you are preferring manual exposure mode, Contax lay-out might be a handicap. It's a matter of taste, but shutter dial is on the left hand side and does not have real overhang. In addition in RTSII it locks in X and in A positions to be freed by pressing a button on backside of the camera. Exposure compensation dial is where shutter speed dial is on Nikon FM and Pentax K1000. I think the layout is brilliant for aperture priority shooter, in manual modes I feel Yashica's traditional control lay-out better.
I've never used the original RTS, but I would assume it is a great camera as well. AFAIK it does not have a locking shutter dial which could be better if manual exposure is the preferred way. If I remember correctly the other main differences on RTS compared to RTSII are lack of TTL and smaller VF coverage (92%?).

 

[JWMster]

Will do. Might not happen soon... but eventually. Shooting a Zeiss Contax CY on film... that give me a kick. Take the digital thing down one more notch to a point where it becomes much more of a choice rather than a necessity.

 

[blockend]

Here between Dynachrome and Blockend we have a difference of experience with Yaschicas. One thing I should ask is how the "mirror slap" issue is in these? With a RF, shake ain't a problem. These cameras? Love to hear what you find. Also... the RTS II is supposed to have an VF size something close to 90+ %, is that true for all of these?

I can only speak from personal experience and on-line consensus - the FR is a solid manual camera with only one known vice, which is early frame counter demise. The FR was Yashica's attempt at a professional camera, which means a solid metal body and LED aperture and shutter readout in the viewfinder. It takes readily available batteries, unlike some 1970s manual cameras which use mercury cells. Bear in mind Yashica's parent company Kyocera also made Contax SLRs, the name was a branding exercise for a Japanese camera, not a German manufactured camera.

I own various Nikon, Canon and other cameras, but the FR is used at least as often as any other SLR because it's simple and straightforward and the user is always in control. I've used mine regularly for almost six years and it has never let me down. The only caveat I'd offer is there aren't many original FR's around in the UK (lots more FRI and FRII cameras) and prices are rising. Most European models seem to come via German sellers, maybe the US has a larger sample and better prices.

 

[mynewcolour]

The Contax 139q is nice and I found mine totally reliable and practical. Leathette and mirror foam goes, so replace those if they've not had it done already.

The RTS II is nice also. It equals the 139q in terms of technology and is heavier built. These two are the sweet spot for the SLRs IMHO as most contax bodies are sadly big, heavy and not very reliable.

 

[RattyMouse]

Patrick Robert James: Thanks! That's pretty helpful. Yeah... the S2 is nice, but given I've fought off the collectible types to get a Leica (M4-2... the "cheap" Canadian cousin)... I'm not looking to wade through the collectors a 2nd time. A clean RTS II probably would fill the bill, and I just put a line out to a trusted dealer to see if he has one. Did see a Yaschica FRI being sold on eBay "as new" in an open box... but my eyebrow rises and the seller has no track record. Solid advice. Thank you! and thanks to all who've helped here.

One thing to consider about the S2, it's all manual aside from the meter. Less electronics to break so this camera will have a longer life. The electronic Contax cameras are getting on in years, in some cases over 20 years old. They have a limited life and I'm sure the last Contax working in the future will be either an S2 or S2B.

 

[JWMster]

Ratty: Is this the way of the S2 and NOT the RTS II/III? So an S2 would be more or less like an M6? If so, sounds good. FWIW, I also look at MF from time to time, and while you can find Pentax 645N's listed for a reasonable price... but all the electronics - especially motor wind - carry a potential "dead camera" problem that a more manual camera like my M6 doesn't threaten. Beyond that, S2 price is a bit steeper than an RTS II, but maybe for similar reasons?

 

[Jeff L]

As said above. If you're looking for longevity then a mechanical/manual camera like S2 is what you're after.
Having said that, my RTS II from the late 80's that I bought as a factory demo still works great.

 

[RattyMouse]

Ratty: Is this the way of the S2 and NOT the RTS II/III? So an S2 would be more or less like an M6? If so, sounds good. FWIW, I also look at MF from time to time, and while you can find Pentax 645N's listed for a reasonable price... but all the electronics - especially motor wind - carry a potential "dead camera" problem that a more manual camera like my M6 doesn't threaten. Beyond that, S2 price is a bit steeper than an RTS II, but maybe for similar reasons?

The Contax S2 cameras are very similar to the Nikon FM2n. I would try to compare to another 35mm camera.

 

[JWMster]

And the FM2N was the original idea I had and bought a lens adapter, but then thought this was nuts... just go for a camera that runs the glass natively. The MF idea is unrelated and not meant as a comparison. Thanks!

 

[JWMster]

Just to close the loop, after all of this... and after pondering some other options, I've ordered a Contax S2 from my friendly Japanese dealer with whom I've had a number of suitable dealings. Thanks for the help and advice here. I look forward to happy times shooting.