Contax 139 Quartz

[Roger2000]

Hello,

I'm the proud owner of this camera, and have had some great use out of it over the past couple of years.

I've gathered a few manual focus contax and yashica lenses and been well impressed.

However, the film advance lever snapped off last summer and I had to have it fixed at a cost of around £60-70. Fair enough, I thought, what with it approaching its 30th birthday.

This afternoon though, the film advance mechanism fouled up again.

The camera spools about four or five frames through quite happily, but then loses all purchase. This has proven to be the case with two seperate films.

I don't want to get into the habit of spending £70 per year on its upkeep, so I'm on the search for any advice on the following questions:

- Do you think this is likely to be an easy fix, or is the camera beginning its sad descent into uselessness?

and

- Should I look at a superior Contax / Yashica camera?

Many thanks for any assistance!

 

[Trask]

I have Yashicas and Contax-es (167MT and RTS II), and the Contax cameras are better made IMHO. I think with careful shopping you can get a Contax body that will serve you better than a dodgy Yashica that's in constant need of repair. Right now on UK eBay I see a Contax 137MD for 24 pounds, with only 14 hours left to go.

 

[Jeff L]

There was a guy in England that had a 139 repair site - seems to be gone now.
I had a 139 (great camera) for a short time but it was stolen. I replaced it with a 137MA back in the mid 80's. It's been my most reliable camera. Never any issues, just the standard foam light seals. The body covering is the only weak point, you just need to replace them with a set that's much more durable.

 

[frdrx]

Look here:
http://www.contax139.info/index.shtml
http://www.contax139.info/repairs.shtml

 

[pstake]

The 139Q is a great camera. I have one as well as an RTS, RTS II, a Yashica FX-2 and FX-3 Super 2000.

I agree with Trask that the Contax bodies are generally superior, but the Yashicas are not slouches and can be had for much less. The differences are usually in materials and not so much in engineering. The 139Q uses the same chassis as the FX-3. If you like the hair-trigger shutter release button on your 139Q, get another one ... or look at an RTS II for a bit more money. If you would rather get a reliable mechanical body for quite a bit less, I would recommend the FX-2 or FX-3 Super/Super 2000. I think the Yashica FX-D is essentially the same as the 139Q, as well, but I'm not positive. The FX-D also has a good reputation.

Alternatively, I can recommend Mark Hama here in the US to overhaul your 139Q completely. I'm sure he has the parts because I sent him a 139Q recently to use as a parts body (100 percent functional until I dropped it and the mirror came loose!). The price for the overhaul and minor repairs is usually $140 USD which comes with a 6 month warranty. I've had two cameras repaired by him including my RTS, which works like new even a year later.

You might also google Rockycameras in the UK. Contax Yashica bodies can be found there for good prices. He's got some bad reviews on the web for slow shipping, but I've always received what I've ordered albeit many weeks later (of course, i'm across the pond).

Glad to see another C/Y "shooter."

 

[frdrx]

Since you live in England, I think that your best option is to send the camera to Peter Robinson (http://www.contax139.info/contact.shtml). If it's not worth repairing, you could buy another, CLAed 139Q body off him and sell him the broken one for spares.

I second pstake's suggestions to get a Yashica or two. They are awfully underrated and irresistibly cheap. The FX-D, for example, is almost the same as the 139Q, except it has a plastic top cover, lacks DOF preview, has a darker viewfinder (pentamirror, not pentaprism like the Contax), and its shutter speed dial is on the right of the camera. Also, unlike the 139Q, the FX-D beeps when the self-timer is activated and when the upper limit of the metering is exceeded, and the AE lock doesn't disengage automatically when the winding crank is returned to its normal position, which can empty the batteries quickly. The Yashica FX-3 is in a similar relationship to the Contax S2, though the S2 also has a completely different shutter and shutter speed and metering indication in the viewfinder, among other differences. The FX-2 is prone to developing unreliable shutter speeds (too slow and inconsistent below 1/60 s), and its meter isn't accurate without a mercury battery. If you can get your hands on one that works perfectly, however, don't hesitate.

 

[ic-racer]

Another vote here for getting an fx3 or Super 2000. They are small, reliable, inexpensive, metal, fully manual cameras.

 

[pstake]

The FX-2 is prone to developing unreliable shutter speeds (too slow and inconsistent below 1/60 s), and its meter isn't accurate without a mercury battery. If you can get your hands on one that works perfectly, however, don't hesitate.

I have not had any noticeable problems with the shutter speed on my FX-2 but I haven't had it tested, either, and I rarely use speeds below 1/30. Also, I use an SR44/357 in the FX-2 (same as the FX-3s and FX-D), and the meter is spot on, even in very low light. I like my FX-3 super 2000 a lot but the FX-2 is more often my go-to camera when I just want to have one with me. Also, its shutter is a bit quieter than the FX-3.

The FX-D def. sounds like a cool little camera.

 

[Jeff L]

The FX-D def. sounds like a cool little camera.

It is. I bought one that in great condition with 50mm f2 that just needed foam light seals for $25 CDN off Kijiji. I got seals from Jon Goodman for a few bucks and the camera is as good as new. That's the 139 winder and Contax flashes as well, but the camera won't do the TTL flash metering.

 

[frdrx]

Consider yourself lucky, then. I have bought two FX-2 bodies (one last Friday), and neither of them works as it should. Both are in perfect cosmetic condition, but their shutters are woefully inaccurate. Obviously, their slow speed escapements are dirty and dry, plus the second curtain lags on one of them. There's some crud (disintegrated foam) on the shutter curtains of both of them (something you can also see on many RTS IIs, by the way). My hope is that I'll be able to fix at least one of the bodies through cleaning, lubrication and adjustment, possibly using parts from the other. I utterly adore the size, heft and feel of the FX-2. Its viewfinder isn't bad either. I'm looking forward to shooting with this gem.

 

[Roger2000]

Hello,

Many thanks for all the replies.

I've decided to plough on and have the repair done - luckily under warranty. Hopefully there's a bit more life left in its old bones yet.

 

[M. Lointain]

I had a 139 years ago that had this same problem. I sent it to Contax and they fixed it but it cropped up again only a short time later. I pulled it apart myself and it was just a spring that slipped/came out of position. I put it back and it worked perfectly after that for years. I can picture the spring in my mind, but I don't remember exactly where on the inside of the camera it was though......