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 S2 successor

How does the Aria "balance" longer zooms or primes? When I bought my ST, I considered the Aria, since it has a "matrix style meering system", but many of the reviews stated it didn't balance well with longer "lens". Also since it was smaller than some of the other models, it didn't "fit well" into larger hands. I have larger hands. I also read that the rubber coating had a tendency to deteriorate more rapidly.

It's too late for me, but is any of that true? Those are the reasons I choose not to go with it. Unfortunately where I live there isn't a Contax dealer for 150 miles, and he didn't have any in stock - go figure.
 
Rico, I would agree that you need an elephant (preferably a large one) to carry around my RX with the two lenses I use most, the 35-70 and 18-28. I used to carry around a Leica 11f but recently that has got a little cranky. That's why I have just bought a G2/45mm. I originally went over to Contax some 20 years ago as I had two plastic bodied SLR's have body problems after use in very hot climates, an Olympus and a Nikon. I would be very reluctant to trust them again. It's the same reason when I was driving big single seater racing cars on the European Hill Climb Ch&ionship, that I preferred to have aircraft quality alloy round me rather than carbon fibre. You know what alloy will do when it hits a tree but you just don't with carbon fibre. Plastic and composite materials are wonderful stuff but they can still behave unpredictably just when you least want them to. My 20-year-old 139Q still does sterling duty as my spare B&W body with only a couple of professional cleans during that period. I also have a Minox LX for those situations where you don't want to be seen carrying a camera at all but in spite of what the sub-mini enthusiasts would have you believe, it really doesn't take very good photos unless you are into that grainy effect. wilson
 
Interesting how it moved from being about S2 into Aria vs. RX vs. everything else. I have Aria and I really like it. I have small hands, but it's a little bit too small for me as well. That's why I'm thinking about getting RX or RXII or RTSIII. However, I'm not going to get rid of my Aria for a simple reason. It's light and very comfortable. I carry it arround in the flex-case all the time with either P50, D28 or S85 attached to it. It's great for street photography and for getting around in tight spaces. In my personal opinion, in entire manual-focus line Aria is the biggest success story. I'm absolutely certain that total sales figures probably put Aria on the top. I would even think that for each 5 Arias sold there might be one other Contax manual-focus camera sold. However, I would personally prefer to have something like RXII with mirror lock-up (or mirror-lockup via 2sec time as it's done on N1), higher speed TTL flash control, 1/8000sec top shutter speed and optional vertical grip. Matrix metering would be nice too, but not necessary to have. If anything like that would ever come from Kyocera - I think they can retire RTSIII then.


Mike.
 
>=20 >=20 >=20 > Earlier Leica ( before R8 & R9 ) used Minolta body platform but it perfor= ms > differently and which is also very common in auto industries, it is much = more > than just dress up and absolutely R has nothing to do with Dynax. The opt= ical > is still the key of quality, film or digital. Aria is light weight, > accountable like the old 167MT and can give you picture quality same as o= ther > higher end bodies and with its portability, it perhaps may assist you get > better pictures. Brgds/kaisern >=20 >=20
 
>>>>>>>>>>>Re: Wilson's comment: I may be wrong but I thought Leica R series were just dressed up > Minolta Dynax's. The R3 was built on a XE-7 (I think) chassis, reworked with Leica electronics, lens mount, etc, etc. The R4 was built on a XD-11 chassis, allowing for Tv priority in addition to Av, etc. Took them 3 tries to achieve reliability. When the agreements were made between Leitz/Minolta and Carl Zeiss/Yashica, some felt that both of these were just dressed up versions of their cheaper Japanese counterparts. But several models later, we see models such as the AX, RX, RTSIII, which are quite different from the Japanese nameplate cameras. Gone are the days when something was made solely by a single company, or in a single country. Even patents are licensed/shared. Look at the partnerships in addition to the above. Carl Zeiss with Sony/Hasselblad/Rollei. Leitz with Carl Zeiss (including their Japanese facility, Sigma, Matsushita (Panasonic), etc. Olympus had OTF metering in the OM-2, but the patents came from another Japanese company. Consider the Yashica FX-3, some made by Cosina. Manufacturers are not anxious to divulge much of this. Look at the advertising of Hasselblad (V-series), and Leica. You will not find photos of their Japanese lenses showing "Made in Japan" on the bottom.
 
Roberto:

I can only confirm the positive comments on the Aria. I have owned two in 5 years (1st one was stolen in Africa) and think it is a super price-performance ratio, very nice design & balance of features. With the 2.8/45 Tessar the Aria is very compact. I recently bought a used 5.6/400mm Sigma which balances superbly on the Aria. (Wished there was a 400 mm MM lens, however). I bought the Aria first and now I am trying to find a Contax S2(b) as a backup.
Jan
 
> Dear Jan,

Thank you very much for your advice. In fact. I have bought an Aria and I am waiting for it to reach me. I was reluctant to rely on an all-electronic camera, but according to Kyocera U.S.A. and what the posts say it's a truly well-built,balanced and rugged camera. In the beginning I wanted to buy a RX or RXII but finally I gave up because I found it bulkier, heavier and with no important features by comparison to the Aria.

I will let you know how my handling with the Aria goes. Thank you very much and best regards.

Robert >
 
Jan, If you want to find a 400mm non-C/Y MM lens, I think there was a manual focus Adaptall/Tamron around 380 to 400mm for which you can get an MM C/Y adaptall2 coupling. Your dealer may tell you that only an AE coupling is available but insist that the dealer contact the main Tamron importer and they will find the MM is available but perhaps only to special order. There should be some of these lenses around S/H and there may still be some new ones available from old stock. I have the 80 - 210mm BBAR Tamron with a C/Y Adaptall2 MM coupling and it works very well. Wilson
 
> Wilson, > Yes, there was a Tamron Adaptall 4/400 LD lens and I even still have > the Tamron Adaptall 2 MM adapter from when I owned the Adaptall > 2.8/80-200 LD and briefly the 2.5/180 LD. All three lenses are quite > large and don't balance too well on the Aria. Would probably be a > much better fit for Contax RTS III or AX. My current "plain" Sigma > 5.6/400 (non-Apo version) is very compact and well-built. Image > quality is tolerable, about on par with the Novoflex folllow focus > lenses. > I might still purchaase the Tamron 4/400, if it is as good as the new > N4/400 Apo Tele Tessar for N1 and NX. Need to find a comparison test. Jan
 
Back
Top