RX plus 45mm Tessar, FM3A and 40mm Ultron or...

[kertesz]

This is my first post so please be kind. I've promised myself a wee treat, along the lines of a classy film SLR and a 40mm-ish lens. There are quite a few combinations, in no particular order: OM2 and 40mm Zuiko, Pentax MX and 40mm M, Nikon FM3A or FM2 or F3 with the 40mm Voigtlander and a Contax of some description with the Tessar. I love Contax cameras and have had an original RTS and a 137MD in the past. I don't have any experience of the later models such as the RX. I know there's quite a difference in price between the outfits above but I'm not too bothered about price. I've got a budget of about £500-£600. Can anyone say how the the RX/Tessar combo might shape up against the others? Are there other Contaxes I should be considering?

I'd be using the camera for general shooting in towns and cities and as a walkabout outfit using black and white exclusively. I've never taken to Canon cameras which is why there's no Canon option.

 

[Arminius]

Hi Kertesz, this is my first post on this forum, as well. Welcome to you and me! Anyway, to try to answer your question: I have used the 45mm 2.8 Tessar on both my Aria and RX. Didn't like it. There's nothing wrong with it optically, in fact it's great, but the 45mm FOV and the tiny size wan't for me. I found it hard to operate. However, I used to have the first type Voigtlander 40mm f/2 for my Nikon, and that was a joy to use. I like the 40mm FOV better than 45. I also used to have the Nikkor 45mm 2.8 GN lens. Same thing, didn't like it. I now have the Konica Hexanon 40mm 1.8, and I like it quite a bit. That's about the extent of my experience with SLR lenses in that range. Now, don't get me started on rangefinder lenses in the 40-45mm range...

 

[gidion27]

Hi Mate, Welcome to the forum, seems that we are all New.

I have used both Tessar 45 mm and a 50 mm 1.4 Planner on my Aria and RX. I have to say I prefer the Planner insetad of the Tessar. Do not get me wrong the Tessar is a great lens. But prefer the feel of the 50 mm.

Good luck with picking the right lens

 

[MaxBerlin]

I don't have the pancake but I have found the 1.7 and 1.4 Zeiss lenses a blast to use - the 1.7 is a huge value and is often around $200. Most of my good shots I take using a tripod. I compose and focus better with one. So the fast glass isn't always needed or worth the money.

Having a lot of good luck also with the 35-70 and using wide angles more often than the tele lenses.

The 28mm on my NEX7 puts me in the '45mm' range so it's like a 45 on my camera.

 

[gidion27]

The 50 mm 1.7 is indeed great value. Maybe even better than my 50 mm 1.4.

 

[MaxBerlin]

Some tests I've done indicate so as well. Not only that even at other apertures the 1.7 seems easier to focus for me. Quicker and more certain. I've considered leaving the 1.4 at home.

 

[gidion27]

I received my 50 1.4 for very cheap so am not complaining but if that wasn't the case I would have gone with the 50 1.7.

 

[crocus63]

I simply adore my RTS2 and 45/2.8. It is so compact and a great walkabout SLR kit. I do use the 50/1.7 from time to time and it is also a great lens but just not as compact. My 40/2.0 Summicron-C is also great and would say they're on par with each other. I haven't tried the CV 40/2.0 but have read great things about it. Of course if you go the Nikon route they also have their 45's, but I've not seen the 45P at a reasonable price as they've become a collector's item.