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!

Review Contax Aria

Thanks, Craig I became curious precisely after reading that website on RTSIII and Aria. And thanks, Rico! Cdegroot's table answers the question.

Juan
 
After running two rolls through the Aria, my verdict is... two thumbs up!

First roll was ASA 800, 50/1.4, party at a restaurant. I did not read the instructions, but simply set P mode and matrix metering. With this casual level of usage, matrix metering failed in seemingly common backlight situations. Oh, well, I prefer Av mode, anyways.

Halfway through the party, I switched on the TLA280 flash, while still shooting P mode. This worked, although the camera chose to drop the background into darkness. All pics from roll #1 were fine.

Second roll was 100 ASA, 50/1.4, CWA metering, Av mode, chasing the cat around the yard. Aperture was f/2-2.8 which, with an active subject at close range, meant focussing was tough and DOF critical. Right away, I had to abandon the focus ring (too slow). Zone focus was impossible at these f-stops. I had to pre-focus and then wait for the cat to walk into focus, or move the camera to the right distance (like macro-photography). This worked, and even allowed one-handed shooting.

I also focussed off-center, on the ground glass. This is quicker and more precise than recompose-n-shoot maneuvers that are needed with rangefinders and AF sensors. In fact, the Aria focussing aids (split-image RF, microprism collar) were a distinct hinderance. I may switch to the matte screen.

Shooting pets and children are similar: you need a fast-focus solution, and no shutter lag. The Aria wins big time!

At least with the 50/1.4, VF brightness and focus snap is super. I must try an f/2.8 WA. The VF display, with its digital read-out, is more to my taste than the inscrutable blinking LEDs in the RTSIII and other siblings.

Does the Aria measure up to the RTSIII? In some ways, yes. The oft-maligned Power/AEL switch is stiff, but not flimsy. Camera noise is par: both are louder than the RX. For me, the Aria's light weight was a huge draw, and I'm very impressed. It about hangs off the fingertips of one hand. A wrist strap, rather than a neck strap, is my probable route.

Okay, I do miss some things from the RTSIII: all-metal construction (damn that weight), dials for all controls, the 2-second timer, flash meter. But that's why we own more than one camera, right? The feather-weight Aria is so easy to carry around: the perfect travel cam.

Let Me In! (300KB)
 
Great site and posts. Okay, here goes.....

I currently have an older Contax 139 with a CZ 1.7 and a Vario lense. I use my film camera for critical work (but its a hobby!). I also have a Canoscan 4000 scanner that I use to digitize the best work. I've noticed lately as my eye has gotten more critical that my camera is NOT keeping up with my scanner. (BTW...the scanner is terrific.) The accuracy of the camera seems to be off, resolution is not what it should be. My focus seems to be off and as much as I try to correct it or see where the true focus resides, the entire image does not accuracy. I referenced the camera with several lenses and they all seem to have this deficiency of mushy focus and resolution. Does anyone have any ideas as to what could cause this issue? As I said the camera is pretty old (but has always been a real workhorse for me). Would a service check potentially correct a problem. That withstanding, it might be time to move on to new camera.

So here is the question.....should I:

a) Should I consider a RX, S2 or Aria as a replacement? I'm leaning to an Aria, simple but reasonably featured for a non-professional.

c) Should I consider switching over to a G2?

A couple more points, I am willing to go through a learning curve ona new camera. Resolution and accuracy are key to me now. I have heard much about the G2 accuracy but is it really better than one of the other cameras that I mentioned? I'm sure someone will have a passionate view on this one.

Comments and opinions welcome!!!

joe
 
Hi Joe,

I think you might want to figure out the source of your focus problem before making a final decision on a 139 replacement. A service check is certainly a good idea.

* Are your images uniformly out of focus, or in appear in portions of the image only? Have you done simple tripod tests shooting at, say a brick wall or newspaper?
* Have you inspected negatives/slides using a good loupe to ensure it's not actually a scanner problem?
* Are your lenses clean and free of fogging or other contamination? Do they focus smoothly, and mount solidly to the camera with no or little play?
* Is your 139's pressure plate in good condition? Has the camera been dropped or otherwise abused?

I'm sure there are other things to try, these are what pop to mind.

Now, if yours is really a cry to get approval on a camera purchase, I'll vote yes! I too have upgraded from an RTS I and 139 to an Aria for SLR work, and have also gone to the G2 system.

The Aria is a thoroughly modern SLR that's a snap to switch to, for a 139 user. They're similar in weight and heft, and operate in a similar fashion using the older lenses (aperture priority only). The Aria has a big advantage over the 139 with its interchangable focusing screens for anyone having difficulty getting accurate focus. The winder is a nice plus, as are the matrix and spot metering options.

The G system, IMHO is wonderful, but very different to use than an SLR (although again, the layout is Contax-familiar). I'd go to a shop and handle a G2. If you like it and its idiosyncrasies, the wonderful G lenses are a powerful reason to switch over, or add it to your kit.

Today, I use SLRs for tele and closeup work, and the G2 for everything else. I feel pretty lucky to have both, because I can match the tool to the task.

--Rick
 
Hi Joe, I'm sorry you are experiencing this focusing problem. I have both the RX and the Aria, both excellent cameras. You say that you "use my film camera for critical work", I notice in your profile that you prefer to shoot landscapes. The RX is such a fine camera and the DFI (assuming you would get the original RX and not the RXII without the DFI but with a 20% brighter view finder) is a definite aide to sharp focus. The RX is sturdy and hefty at nearly 29oz. If you use a tripod for your lanscapes the weight should be no problem. It, like the Aria, doesn't have mirror lock up -- but the RX is so nicely d&ed that it limits camera shake to a great degree. The Aria is also a fine camera. It is considerably lighter than the RX at 16.2OZ and it has no DFI. It has a fairly bright view finder, is well. I love both of these cameras -- the Aria is great for street photography and for very hot steamy New York City summers. The RX oozes quality. I hope this is a little useful to you. In any event best of luck to you. Vincent
 
Joe,

The camera might be restored with a simple adjustment. Have you, umm, had your eyes checked lately?

Never used the 139, but I shot the 159 for a week: the Aria would feel right at home in your hands, and no learning curve. The G2 is a different animal, and after researching RF cameras for awhile, I decided the SLR is my instrument of choice. If I get the RF bug one day, the Bessa R2 and Leica MP sure look nice...
 
Rick/Vincent/Rico:

Thanks for the helpful insight. All three of you brought a different and good perspective to the problem. One of the difficult aspects that I think I still need to determine is the original premise what to expect in terms of resolution. The scanner is so good that DOF issues that were meaningless in slides thrown up on the screen are much more noticable in the slide to photoshop workflow. If you have ever done high resolution scanning, you'll see it once you get a 100Meg+ file to review and critique.

To answer some of the basic questions that have been posed:
1) My eyes are good (but it wasn't a bad suggestion at all!). Still good enough to focus a split screen.
2) My camera is very clean but probably needs a check. All seals are excellent, no dust apparent, and the operation (although a little noisy) seems right on. I still am wondering if there is such a thing a shutter bounce at ~1/60 and slower on a low mass camera is this. The suggestion of the RX was good. I have held this camera and it feels like a brick (but designed by the Porsche Design group). The d&ing qualities of this camera must be excellent by the shear mass.
3) The idea of the Aria is appealing for the feature set versus cost. I have not played with one yet but my sense (and all of you confirmed it) is that although it is lightweight, its a very serious and accurate camera. Basics done well.
4) The G2 would be a departure for me but I like new challenges. It seems that this is a very advanced camera with optics that cannot be beat. I'll check, that the AF is accurate pastthe probable learning curve.

If any of you would like a CD of a couple of s&le images scanned both good and bad, just private message me and I'll send you a couple.

Thanks again. I'll let you know how it turns out.

Joe
 
Seeking some owner feedback...

For close to the cost of a new Aria, I can also get a nice condition ST or RX. Why would I choose one of these over the others?

I've visited the individual review areas but many of the posts regarding the ST & RX are from some time ago. I'm looking for current thoughts on the pros & cons of these cameras.

I currently use a 139Q and any of these will certainly be a jump in features. (Although I'll never part with my 139) All have the features that I want and are lacking on the 139;

Higher shutter speed
Spot metering
Long eye relief
Motor

On paper, I don't seen anything that puts one above the others. That's why I'm asking the people who own & use these cameras. (The DFI feature of the RX does not sway me one way or the other.)

TIA,
Dave
 
Hello, I just decided to buy a used ST instead of a Aria. One thing was the price: I got the ST for 400 EUR in used but good condition, which is a good argument. Other Pros to the ST are: - Batteries: ST uses AAA standard batteries, where the Aria needs Lithiums - Weight and Size: The Aria is too small for my hands whereas the ST fits very well. When handling the Aria with heavy lenses the balance is not very good. - Flash Synchro at 1/200s !

So in my opinion, if you do not need a light travel equipment, buy the ST (if you get one). But it is your decision. Matthias
 
Back
Top