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!

Contax ND

Interesting discussion on the ND. I hope I can offer some comparison material and reflection. Just a personal opinion.

I bought a Nikon Coolpix some 6 months ago (April 2002). The sharpest price for it in the Netherlands was then about 1500 Euro.
I was not prepared to pay this much, so I took my chances when I was in Singapore and bought it for 1400 Singapore dollar, or 900 Euro; good deal and it is actually a nice camera, works fine, but guess what . . . . . . It eats batteries, just like any other digicam or SLR. Paying import duties (some 170 Euro) reduced the benefit, but still . . .

The Coolpix 5000 has gone steadily down in price, faster since the successor the Coolpix 5700 has been introduced and just today, on the largest computer show in Holland I saw it on offer for 950 Euro (not one but hundreds in stock). So now the 1000 Euro barrier is also broken. Last week the price in Singapore was only about 1200 Singapore Dollar (so also down but not that much). Note that this price reduction in Holland is equal to a net discount of 550 Euro or just over 35% and the bottom is not in sight. I think before year-end the thing will be available at 800 Euro, or half of what it cost in April this year.

Nikon is a respectable brand, just as Contax, but for a different audience and for different reasons maybe. But their products seem to behave the same.

For a major part this is the result of the crazy product innovation cycle, both in cycle times and in functional performance that we consumers have pushed onto the manufacturers, each one desperately fighting for markets share, the prime requirement for survival. The latest, the greatest and in fact the newer model has features and performances that we may not require that much, but the magazines lead us to believe this and we buy. Every now and then, a product gets into the market and is introduced too early, with all the sad consequences for the parties concerned: the consumer suffering from a Monday morning product, the manufacturer suffering from high maintenance and possibly recall cost and the market from a general lack of trust that is resulting. And the early adapter customers are always the most vulnerable: larger chance of a poorly engineered product and certainly experiencing the steeper part of the price drop curve. Such a miss or near miss is usually not the result of a devious plan (as I believe was expressed in one of the earlier mails in this thread), but exposes bad management (marketing and new product development).

The innovation and market share fight is not very much different in the business to business high tech world as I experience on a daily basis in my professional life. Marketing makes the customers "crazy"; the customers in turn lure the manufacturers into innovation cycles that cannot be sustained without major sacrifice.

So back to basics maybe the solution. If you are happy with the camera you have, keep it and use it. This goes for the ND as much as any other camera.

By the way: for the Contax G2 users among you.
A nice set of a titanium G2 with 90 and 45 mm lenses and TLA 200 flash is now also 50-60% of the price of about 1 to 1 1/2 year ago. You can check this on the Internet sites of some German resellers. So even with the renowned high end products this is happening.

I was in Tokyo last week and saw G2 and G1 in second hand stores for about 350 Euro and 150 Euro respectively. Lenses (35 mm and 45 mm) varied from 150-175 Euro (one Euro is equal to one dollar). The best of the best for 500 Euro (G2) and 300 Euro (G1).

Many "exited" customers after some meditation will be more than happy with such a set and have to train themselves to forget to buy the newest and greatest.

Having said all this, I am in the market for a TVS digital. I will (have to) control my eager to get it until I know it is a good product and the first price peaks have been eroded. So not before summer next year, I guess.

Peter
 
Marc, I was not entirely clear on that ISO400 issue, I am afraid. Files would withstand much larger print size tha 8.5x11", I just did not do it because that was no need. We can try it, though.

What I am really annoyed with is that RAW filez have a distinct moire pattern, which interferes with sharpening, while TIFF files do not have it at all. I am positive that this is a software issue.
 
On the topic of noise at higher ISO settings: ColorPhoto (a German magazine) of this month publishes a test of the ND. With enlarged pictures of 50, 100, 400 ISO settings. I see a clear difference in the noise as reproduced in the test. The ND got a mixed critic in this magazine, the lenses (of course being very positive).
If anyone is interested in the test I can put a PDF scan on this site (assuming Dirk helps me to do this).

Peter
 
Peter, you have presented a well thought out train of thought. Yet it does not mitigate the fact that Contax had posponed the launch of this camera for well over a year under the notion that it was being perfected. Much like the refusal of Contax and Zeiss to release many N lenses due to not meeting their quality standards. It is this Brand stance that lures consumers into a sense of trust. I find it ironic that the comparisons being made here of similar past corporate transgressions are of things like a P&S digital and a Vega. Both are low end products from a mass manufacturer meant for a billion people. Not a high end camera from a company known for its appeal to only a few who know the difference. It seems no one here does know the difference. I suggest that some folks go try a Canon 1D or Nikon D1-X with a L lens or pro-level Nikkor and see for themselves. Digital really need not be this hard. Fix the software Contax and do it soon please.
 
I assume that in 5-10 years the rapid development of digital technology will be past, so that price purges slow down with computers, digicams, mobiles etc.

In this sense, today's digital products are *all* embryonic, Contax or any other. I would buy such a thing only if today's technology at today's price stands against an appropriate today's use. A professional user could evaluate that by money, an amateur just by heart.

For me, that did not happen with any digital camera yet, but with (several) computers. I have lost thousands of bucks on them, but also had an according profit.

However, I agree that the price purge of the Contax ND is particularly extraordinary.

Till
 
I think Till is "on the money" here, and I'll even go on to say that a drastic price change is really necessary to gain market share, clear current inventory and to move on and stay ahead of the competition.

Digital photography, unlike emulsion photography will mature over the next ten years. Contax was ahead with of the field with its CCD sensors that allowed photographers to take full advantage of their wide angle glass (unlike the completitors), but to my way of thinking, the only unforgivable sin for Contax would be if they discontinued their research and development and rested on their laurels, and allowed others to surprass them. I know it sounds counter intutitve, but costs must come down if digital technology is to progress.

Imagine the X3 technology (which could currently replace CCD technology with vast improvements) configured to a full sensor using Zeiss lenses. Beyond X3, in perhaps only a couple of years, who knows?

In terms of development (to draw a parallel),
digital today as compared to that available in 10 years, in emulsion terms, is probably what pin hole cameras were then to what a Sinar is today. When we consider that that in 10 years or less, nanno chip and sensor technology will allow us to capture images in even smaller hand held cameras than we have today, and that those images will be able to be blown up into bill-board dimensions with no appreciable grain, the only limiting factor will be optics and printing technology.

After all, a camera is only a tool, and the price we pay for that tool is for quality, regardless of the name. I like to think that I made my investment based only on the best optics, not the brand, and certainly not for resale value, but if we base it on brand alone, it's our own faults. I'd like to believe it was for quality.

So to Contax, I'd say, we purchase Contax/Zeiss and have paid a premium for the quality, so do what you must to continue to deliver the best, but if you don't deliver ... there's always the competition.

David
 
Dear Friends,

I think most of you did not get the point of Marc:

On one hand some are complaining about price cuts for digital cameras, on the other hand some are disappointed with overpromising and underdelivering.

For the first issue, the price cut, I guess everybody is on the same boat more or less. It hurts, but this is life as soon as high tech is involved. Get over it.

Another issue is the point Marc is trying to explain and most are overseeing because they only think about the price cut.

There is a very well known company in a niche market called Contax/Kyocera. This company is living from few costumers (compared to Nikon, Canon etc.) and is asking for high-end prices for their products.

As a return the company gives "his word"/promise to deliver outstanding quality. This is the only reason why the costumer is buying the products.

As we all know by now, the ND is not the outstanding quality which was promised over the last 2 years to all.

This fact by itself is not that bad, but Kyocera did not face it and communicated the pros and cons of the ND to prospective buyers in advance. So the loyal costumer is paying for something Kyocera made him believe to get and later found out that it is not the case.

Kyocera just closed their lips, not talking about the "shame" - typical Japanese by the way: Hide problems if they arrive and do not report bad news.

I think if Kyocera would have been honest and communicated in advance about the limitations of the ND, nobody would have complained. Then it would have been up to the costumer to decide whether he is willing to pay the price for it, knowing exactly what to expect and what not.

But as Marc said, Kyocera stayed silent, they even do not try to face the criticism all over the internet. Look at dpreview, luminous landscape etc., you name it. No reaction. Kyocera is sitting in Japan, daydreaming that they can hide with this. But they can't.

As long as we, the costumer, are paying the salary of the Kyocera employees, they should make better for sure, that they make this mistake not a second time.

Wait til Leica comes out with a digital body and then start counting your costumers again. Leica made many things wrong in the past, but they always listened to their costumers and communicated with them - also the mistakes.

Harry
 
I'm not a professional photographer and I do this purely for the fun and I truly do care only about the optical differences. When I sold the ND I played with a D1X I had which I sold because I bought a D100 (which can't seem to reproduce white walls when there is daylight nearby and you are using flash) but in any case Nikon lenses aren't Zeiss lenses. Luckily I can afford to spend $4,000 without having to worry about earning it back and just consider it the fancy vacation I didn't get around to this year - but Contax is clearly wrong and Marc is clearly right - this mentality is what killed the American auto business once upon a time - if you don't think about what the customer wants - and build it and price and deliver it then there is no reason for the customer to come back. Read Lee Iacocca's book and then ask why did we have to pay billions of dollars for a government bailout of Chrysler? Because they acted like Contax and didn't listen.
For $7,000 - The price of 1 3/4 Contax 645 Systems you should have been able to take it out of the box charge the batteries read a manual (even a 2-300 page manual if necessary) put a magnificent lens on and REPRODUCE YOUR IMAGE ! The body is only a tool to move the image to another your computer -another tool. You then should have a piece of software included FOR THE SAME $7,000 even if it has an online manual of another 4-500 pages to manipulate that perfect image. But the body didn't capture the image enough of the time. The batteries didn't keep going enough of the time. And the software confused the hell out of me SOME of the time. And I didn't buy a Vega, I never even bought a AMC Pacer in those days with all the glass in the front. I had a Mercury Montego for a while, a Cutlass 442, a few other cars. No two of the cars I bought in the seventies together were as much as the ND.
Marc's right - our expectations should be high. But not to buy anything again - I won't spite myself. I've already taken it out on the dealer who I bought my first ND from and I will find a way to express myself to Contax's main office so that the Contax sales reps we see on Contax days who behave so arrogantly understand that their compensations are not immune to dissatisfied buyers. As soon as I can confirm the "discontinuance" I will let you know.
 
Contax was not ahead of its time regarding CCD sensors. The larger sensors were around for at least 3 years prior. Contax integrated it within a 35mm camnera. No small task, but clearly not innovation ahead of its time. The Kodak 14mg cmos sensor- that's a significant jump. So much so, that Kodak does not know what to do with their CCD DCS backs. They may in fact merge the markets together.
 
The Leica ex&le is a more viable comparison as opposed to a P&S from Nikon or a Chevy Vega. When Leica introduced the M5 there was a howl from their customer base. Leica chalked it up to their customers being quite conserative and set in their ways...for a while. Then they listened and tried to alter the camera to no avail. While the camera was (and still is) a great camera, it did not meet the expectations of their consumers who still wanted and demanded a smaller, reliable camera to hold the superb Leitz lenses ( a direct parallel to Contax and Zeiss in terms of optics being the driving reason to own a Leica). Leica did not instantly slash the price of the M5, 6 months after introduction. They bit the corporate bullet, reverted to building a meterless M4 and eventually found a way to get a meter into the M4 design.

Rather than beating a dead horse concerning the ND,
perhaps we can (as we have) help one another overcome some of the shortcomings of this camera.
It took awhile but most of us figured out how to solve the power problem. 1800 MaH to 2000 MaH
batteries, and a better charger helped some, as did getting extra battery carriages.

What else still needs attention in your opinion?
Here is what I think could use some help...

Working in sRGB color space is a problem as the color gamut is shorter than Adobe RGB 1998.

Shooting at ISO 400 or above is a problem.

The Moire' as described by Irakly is a problem.

The buffer is a problem that can only be altered by changing the firmware in the camera. I don't know if Contax designed in the ability to alter firmware in the camera the way Kodak cameras and Polaroid scanners did.

Some of these problems have been discussed here already. Irakly and a few others have their solutions
to a coulple of problems, but for me as a photographer not a computer geek, they are difficult to fully understand and impliment.

Perhaps someone like Irakly should do a step by step manual "for dummies" and publish it here on line.
 
Back
Top