DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

A question about Contax Digital

Do the previous posts imply that people have not been happy with the Contax cameras that Kyocera have produced in the past? More please ;)

Cheers, Bob.
 
Bob, I've always used the Kyocera cameras of late including AX and RX. Well made IMO. Some innovative stuff from them like the AX which was just to darn big and slow to focus...but still a neat way to use your Zeiss manual glass with AF. I liked the RX a lot for it's focus confirmation...again, a neat way to better use your Zeiss manual lenses.

I'm not sure I agree with Lynn. There have been many good poducts which must have been the outcome of a decent business plan.

As far as SLRs are concerned, the Contax/Kyocera offerings have been ahead of Leica, which is really the only other maker offering that kind of glass (although Canon is fast closing the gap and equaling Zeiss and Leica in some respects).

I still contend that Kyocera is failing badly at PR and marketing communications. Nikon still doesn't have a full frame pro digital and Kodak is somewhat struggling with the 14n.
Contax ND did it.

If Kyocera had first solved the power problem with a plug-in battery like Canon and Nikon use, and paid some developer to use their processing program(s), for RAW development ( The Phillps chip is a proven performer)...then
the ND story may have been a different one.

The biggest mistake was not controlling expectations compared to the competition. The ND is a different approach to digital capture, which I contend still has a better tonal range ability than even the Canon 1Ds (which I also use).
 
Two sentences and two cents when it comes to Contax (Kyocera) customer service (PR). I emailed there web site 2 weeks ago with a concern. Did they reply, no; they deleted it without reading it. Enough said.
 
When Contax launch the N1, there were full pages ads all over photo magazines. That's how I learned and got into the N system. When the ND actually released, there was almost no marketing ads except for some press releases and product news mentioned by various photo magazines. What's wrong with that picture? It does not take a MBA to figure out marketing (and the four Ps) is a big part of product success.

Marc, I admire your effort to help out the Contax. But don't set your hope too high. Look at the Contax web site. It is overly out-dated, especially for the N systems. A mom and pops wed-site is more well maintained than that. If anyone allow me to update their web-site. I would do it for free. I just could not stand it when a corporation pay no resource to maintain their web-site which is one of the most effective marketing venue.

When Dirk mentioned that Zeiss is more reactive than Kyocera, I could understand it. Lenses is Zeiss's primary business while Contax is just Kyocera's side business. Their resource and business focus's got to be in Ceramics. Having said that, it does not warrant such a bad management in the Contax department.

BTW, I recently sent my 24-85mm zoom for a repair (tighten the zoom ring). Great service from Contax in New Jersey! Reponse time was good and I was well informed.
 
Well, there's a thought Lynn. I wonder if Zeiss could enter into production of camera bodies. Presumably they would need to buy in a lot of new expertise first. I have been quite happy with my Kyocera bodies (with some reservations on the focusing of the G2) and Yashica before that but it is a nice thought that Zeiss might in effect take on Leica in a more complete way. Apart from the G2, I have not tried Contax autofocus.
John
 
"...I wonder if Zeiss could enter into production of camera bodies..."

I doubt that they will do that. Carl Zeiss (not Zeiss Ikon) never produced camera bodies. I think the investments would be to high at the beginning. I think it is more likely that Carl Zeiss will do even more cooperations with other brandnames.

With this strategy they can benefit from the know-how of others and do not have to duplicate efforts in this direction.

As long as the bodies are still on the requested Zeiss-quality-level to be a good match with their lenses I would find this the best compromise. I am sure we will here more in this direction over the time...
 
Thanks Dirk,that's interesting. Since Zeiss seems to have lost or forsaken new projects with Hasselblad, I suppose that it will be actively seeking new contacts to make up for that. I understand that Zeiss felt it already had too much on to undertake the lenses for the Xpan and the H1. They must be kicking themselves in view of the success of those two cameras and the high regard in which the Fuji lenses are held.
John.
 
... I am not sure that the H1 is a success and that Hassy is happy with the final outcome and price level of it
happy.gif


Fact is that the system is still a Fuji system but with the price tag of Zeiss. Sounds not very successful for me...
 
For those who don't know, Fuji makes some of the best optics on the planet. Especially at medium format (6x4.5, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9, and 6x17) not to mention large format and enlarging lenses.

Unfortunately, success is often measured only by popularity and snobbishness. I wonder if Hasselblad could produce electronics for their camera without partnering with a company that has a history of robust and quality equipment.

BTW: my '70's 6x9 Fuji rangefinder will smoke my 503 at everything except macro and long telephoto and I'm currently waiting for my 'blad to come back from the repair shop for $160 to replace a bad shutter spring.
 
Back
Top