Contax bodies (RX in particular)

[flatulent1]

I recently received a Contax RX from KEH. I have no prior experience with Contax, this is the first one I've ever held. While the build quality is everything I expected, and I love the interface (KNOBS!), I'm more than a little disappointed in the height of the camera, or perhaps the size of the grip. I can only grasp it with thumb and three fingers, and I don't have large hands. It doesn't look like there's a battery pack or vertical grip available for the RX, so I'll be sending this one back. I'm also a bit dismayed by their unfortunate locating of the strap lug on the right side, forcing me into an even more awkward grasp. The Nikon F4 springs to mind, but that one has such a large grip that the lug rarely gets in my way.

Is there a Contax body (apart from the RTS III) that is a)taller or 2)has an accessory grip that can make the camera taller? I'll not be giving up my EOS or my FD, but it's nice to have a new toy to play with and accessorize when my bank will allow it. The RTS III seems out of my budget.

 

[naaldvoerder]

The ST is even less tall but with it,s batterypack attached is has more hight then the RX, with an extra release button to boot. Before you send the RX back however, it has the most vibration free mirrorslap of all the contax bodies i have owned (RTSIII, ST, RX, Aria)

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

If you need something that does a better job of filling your hand, I'd look at the AX - it's quite beefy and will fill ANY hand. That said, I have fairly large hands, and while I noticed the dangling pinky phenomenon on the RX as well, I got over it pretty quick. I think the RX is one of the best designed SLRs ever made.

Another option would be a 167 MT with the PB-5(??) battery grip. While the battery grip on the 167 does not have a vertical shutter button, it does give you a good grip for vertical compositions, and balances the camera better. It also moves the tripod socket to the center, not the end, making it, in my mind, a required accessory. I used to shoot a pair of 167s before switching to an RX.

 

[naaldvoerder]

I think the RX is one of the best designed SLRs ever made. .

I'll second that....

Jaap Jan

 

[FilmOnly]

It sounds like you have discovered why I never purchase a camera that does not take a grip, winder, or motor. While I rarely have use for the speed of a motor, the grip always helps with handling and balance.

Further, since motors tend to be the rather large, they will let your camera "stand up." I like being able to set my camera down on a flat surface. Most motors will balance a camera with a standard lens attached (and usually some longer lenses, too). I love older cameras, but do not like the nose dive that most grip-less types take on a flat surface.

 

[flatulent1]

If you need something that does a better job of filling your hand, I'd look at the AX - it's quite beefy and will fill ANY hand. That said, I have fairly large hands, and while I noticed the dangling pinky phenomenon on the RX as well, I got over it pretty quick. I think the RX is one of the best designed SLRs ever made.

Point taken. I will spend a little more time with it before I cast it back to the underworld.

Another option would be a 167 MT with the PB-5(??) battery grip. While the battery grip on the 167 does not have a vertical shutter button, it does give you a good grip for vertical compositions, and balances the camera better. It also moves the tripod socket to the center, not the end, making it, in my mind, a required accessory. I used to shoot a pair of 167s before switching to an RX.

The 167 has a battery grip? I'll have to look into that.

I'm not really into accessory grips as they tend to make cameras too big for my tastes, though considering my OP, that sounds contradictory. I use my 5D 'small', currently have battery packs on the 1V, 3 and 1N instead of the power booster, and while I have the Motor Drive FN for my F-1N, I have never used it. One of the first things I bought for my F4 was the short grip; I have never gone back to the F4s configuration.

On the other hand (no pun intended), I had to add the grip extender to my EOS 630 and 850 so my hand wouldn't swallow the things, especially with large lenses. And as I said, my hands are NOT large.

(I have given up trying to make my cameras stand up straight; several of them have RRS QR plates and WON'T stand up straight. And I will not not NOT buy a bunch of extra RRS ballheads just for display purposes. Um, it does sound kind of cool, though... :rolleyes

 

[Trask]

I've had my Contax 167MT for over 20 years now, and it's a fine camera. But a recent experience with an RTS II taught me to be careful AGAIN about buying used cameras. This was a subtle thing that I overlooked in the heat of a camera fair: inside the lens mount, above the mirror in the RTS II, is a horizontal tab that moves back and forth; it is engaged by a tab on the rear of the lens when it is mounted. The purpose is to tell the camera electronics what the max aperture of the lens is. I believe this is similar to the resistor track that goes bad in Nikon FTN prisms. The one in my RTS II has apparently deteriorated, which means the metering is now useless as f/stops set on the lens ring do not get translated properly into the electronics. I'll set to f/8, the in-eyepiece readout says the camera thinks the lens is a f/16, or f/4 -- it can vary. So now I've got a lovely Contax SLR that does not have through-the-lens metering. I've been buying used cameras a long time, but I missed this one small point. I've tried to get it fixed, but alas, no Contax parts available and damned few repairmen who know how to work on them.