An earlier discussion of the new Contax T3 on the Unmoderated Q&A board got zapped after 24 hours (about the same amount of time it took to deplete the T3 inventory at B&H), so I thought I'd try to continue it here. I'd love to hear some comments from users on their initial reactions to the camera, especially lens quality.

Does anyone want to start a user/mailing list group elsewhere? http://www.topica.com has a nice interface.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), March 29, 2001

Answers

I for one would like to hear as much as possible about the T3 so I can determine whether to accidentally back the car over our other compact cameras. Thanks, John.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), March 29, 2001.

John,

Thanks for getting this thread going, I'm really looking forward to comments from the lucky T3 owners. I have had a T2 for 5 years, and will be eager to hear how the new T3 really compares. I'd prefer we keep this thread going for now, rather than start a mailing list (at least for the time being).

Paul

-- Paul Beiser (pbeiser1@home.com), March 29, 2001.

I'll make the same grouchy comment here as I made on the unmoderated Q&A thread that got zapped.

For the price, you'd think they could afford to include a hot shoe.

-- Michael Lopez (mlopez@ers.usda.gov), March 29, 2001.

Michael, it does include contacts for attachment of a flash bracket for a dedicated flash. Given the small size of the T3, it probably will handle better with the flash attached to a bracket rather than to a hotshoe.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), March 30, 2001.

Hoping that I'm not violating any Photo.net rules, I'm posting a copy of Andrew Schank's impressions of the T3 in this Forum, since the review will be zapped after 24 hrs. in the Non-Archived Forum.

Contax T3 review

Just got my T3 and wanted to try and clear up some questions that were bouncing around a thread last week. Before I start, I should mention I am not that familiar with previous Contax compacts, so I will not be able to compare this camera to them.

This is a very compact 35mm camera, about the size of my old Minox 35 or an Olympus Epic. It is also fairly light, unlike the old Rollei 35's which were about the same size but much heavier. It is smaller than the Yashica T4. The camera feels exceptionally well made. The back closes with a nice tight thud. The finder is contrasty, super sharp and very bright and distorion free. Compared to any other point and shoot I've used, it is in another league. Reminds of the finder on my Minolta CLE. It s a dream for me to have any shutter speed indication in the finder on a P&S. Although it is not a full scale including all of the speeds, it sure is nice to know if you are at 1/30 sec or 1/125.

Another new feature for me is a distance readout on top of the camera, which can come in handy if your not sure it locked on the right subject. I love the apertures being on a dial instead of some up and down button. I plan to use the camera on A preffered quite a bit. In answer to some questions, the speeds over 1/500 are only available starting with apertures F8 both on program and Aperture preferred. This is an unfortunate limitation, as the high speed would be more useful at the smaller f stops. Another question was about battery life, and the manual says 12 rolls flash 1/2 of the time.

There is no way to remotely fire the shutter for tripod use. I quess you could use the 2 sec. self timer. The camera does have a nice metal tripod socket. It has some serious low light speeds that go to 3 minutes.

As far as controlls go, the camera is nicely designed. I have used some of the Rollei P&S cameras, and this one is easier to set exposure compensation, a feature I use a lot. The flash settings are straight forward, although the flash itself is no blinding light, it should do OK to 10 to 15 feet with 400 speed film. They do have a rig for using one of the more powerful flashes from the G system, but it seems to me to wreck the compact design of this camera.

The ability to change default settings is a dream for any "advanced" point and shooter. I've already told the flash to not go off unless I tell it too! When you turn the camera off and on, it retains the settings you customized- a big complaint many folks have about some other high end P&S. You can also use filters on this camera with an adapter.

I am in the process of shooting a roll, and will be checking for vignetting, sharpness, AF accuracy, etc. I'll report my findings in a week or so. If you have any specific questions, post them here in the next 24 hours before this thread gets the axe, and I'll try to answer them.

-- andrew schank, March 31, 2001; 01:43 P.M. Eastern

Answers Forgot to mention 2 more things. One, this camera focuses to 12 inches, which is very close for this type of camera. I kept moving in and in and kept getting a focus confirmation mark. There are clear marks in the finder for close ups, and the camera tells you when it is in "macro" mode. The other thing was about the delay time from when the shutter is pressed to when the image is recorded. On the standard setting, there is still a noticeable delay , but not as bad as a Yashica T4. But you can change the default setting so the camera will move the lens to the focus point when the shutter button is pressed 1/2 down. To take an image then is almost immediate. I just changed my default setting to this position, as it eliminates the lag time if you are trying to get decisive moment expression, etc.

-- andrew schank, March 31, 2001; 02:18 P.M. Eastern

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Thanks Andrew - sounds very promising so far. Can you set the ISO independently, or do you compensate exposure? You already mentioned that the camera, if switched off will retain the settings, but just to confirm, does it retain exposure compensation too when switched off? Thanks for you review - am looking forward to the rest!

-- Andreas Carl, March 31, 2001; 07:20 P.M. Eastern

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

One of the custom functions (number 3)is to hold exposure compensation for 1 frame only, or until the camera is shut off, or until you reset it (independant of camera being shut on and off).

-- andrew schank, March 31, 2001; 07:34 P.M. Eastern

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

looking forward to your impression of the lens

-- Graham O'Brien, March 31, 2001; 09:11 P.M. Eastern

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I have both a Yashica T4 and a Contax T2, so I am looking forward to the T3. The T2 provide aperture priority if you set the lens opening to anything but 2.8. On 2.8, it goes to auto. Has the T3 changed this? Both the T4 and T2 give me great 11X14 prints, and the T3 is supposed to be even better.

-- Phil Stiles, March 31, 2001; 11:10 P.M. Eastern

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

It has a P setting for Program, or you can set it for any aperture you want from f2.8 to f16 and it will try to choose a shuter speed within its range.

-- andrew schank, March 31, 2001; 11:37 P.M. Eastern

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), April 01, 2001.

i love my t3!! in my own tests, the t3 lens bettered my leica 35mm summicron asph in the center at f2.8 to f4 (at 5.6 and above, the leica caught up; corner sharpness is better with the leica all the way through -- but not by much!). the mtf info on the new sonnar (looks more like a tessar variant in the cross section to me!!) 35mm f2.8 available on the cosina japan website (info at initial aperture only) confirms higher center sharpness than any other 35mm lens currently available. the custom features make the camera ideal for candid street photography: you can easily preset focus distance AND set lens to extend to that distance and stay there. shutter release is then immediate. i have used hexar rf for about a year, and shutter release on t3 is MUCH quicker (the hexar rf takes way too long to "think" about exposure). also, the camera is very, very quiet. much more quiet than my m6. finally, the camera is the perfect size -- fits in the palm of the hand nicely (and feels very solid -- just the right heft). if you decide to get a t3, IMHO the following accessories are MANDATORY: (1) leather semi-hard case. i use the bottom half only. it protects the camera against shocks and perspiration from your sweaty hand, makes the t3 much easier and more comfortable to grip, camouflages the camera nicely (how long until contax gives us a special edition t3 in black a la the special edition g2?), and allows the use of a proper neck strap (the case has standard strap lugs on either side, the camera permits use of a handstrap or lanyard only). 2. filter adapter/heliopan lt yellow filter in 30.5/metal contax or rubber heliopan shade. a camera that doesn't accept filters really can't be considered a serious photo tool IMHO. contax makes provision for filters via a bayonet type adapter. this works well. i keep a heliopan MC lt yellow filter mounted all the time (i shoot only t400cn with the camera). the screw in shade gave a nice increase in contrast performance, even in conditions where you wouldn't necessarily worry about flare. the use of a filter and shade also give the lens a little more protection than that afforded by the way coo, but somewhat flimsy "venetian blinds" built into the camera. i should add that the instruction manual says that simultaneous use of filter and shade will cause vignetting. i have shot many rolls with a filter and shade without any problem. as mentioned, however, i use the heiopan filters, not the contax brand (the contax filters do not appear to be MC). the latter may have a thicker mount. there are too many great features on this camera to mention. suffice it to say, the custom settings allow almost unlimited versatility. don't overlook the fact that the flash default settings are adjustable (this is accomplished separately from the custon settings). will my m6/28mm ever see action again. i just don't know. for now, all i carry is the t3 around town, and a t3/rollei or t3/bessa ii combo when i travel.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), May 07, 2001.

FYI - There will be a Contax Day at B&H Photo in New York city on Wednesday, May 9, 2001. A Contax rep. will be on hand in the store and I believe there will be special pricing available for Contax equipment for phone and email buyers as well as walk-ins. Check with B&H for details and times.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 07, 2001.

Have had my T3 for only a short time. Pictures so far look good, but have not projected any (use slides only). I enjoy the flexibility and features mentioned in the preceeding notes.

My only negative, so far, is the bright lines (or corners) for framing the image. The corner in the upper right is frequently difficult to see and takes some searching. The bright line for closeups is often the first thing my eye sees also. I actually emailed Contax (sending it attention Blake Edwards). Another person replied, but discussed the lines not appearing at all and suggested sending it in.. With this in mind, I sent the camera to Contax. It came back very quickly, but no specific comment. I think nothing has changed. Does anyone else find the bright lines a problem?

-- Leonard D. Schloff (len@schloff.com), May 15, 2001.

The framing lines have a tendancy to fade from view if I haven't centered my eye properly; this provides useful feedback, IMO. The lines also fade from view if they are superimposed over a bright object; I live with it.

I too have shot only slides to date. I'm curious about your exposure accuracy in bright outdoor light. I have had numerous overexposed frames, but I have yet to test it in a rigorous fashion - I might have overcompensated in some of these situations. I have heard from another user who c/o overexposure with slides in unshaded sunlight. Until I spend the time to experiment I shouldn't comment further.

Overall I am very pleased with the camera. It is soooo compact that I never hesitate to take it along. The lens is very capable; the classic Contax/Zeiss color rendetion and contrast is there, as is the sharpness that we all expected from the marketing hype. I just received some shots from the summit of St. Helens in which I see a bit of fall off (~1/3 of a stop or less).

I've considered buying the case and adapter for hood and filters but the slim design of the case that is included with the camera is awfully nice. Flare has not been a problem so far, and for me, fiddling with filter on this camera defeats the purpose.

-- Eric James (eajames@u.washington.edu), May 15, 2001.

To Leonard: I do not own one, but saw at least 4 of them ( at B&H, J&R, Adorama ) and all of them had the same problem with upper right corner, so I do not think it's a sample variation. This worries me a lot.

-- Mark Zelyony (mzelyony@myprimus.com), May 16, 2001.

as for over-exposure, i found that i was using way too much compensation in most situations. the meter appears to be more center weighted than the t2 and may other p&s cameras i have used. the pattern seems (through experimentation) very much like the one in my m6 ttl (which itself has more center weighting than the m6 "classic"). as for the filter and shade, they don't change the profile of the camera much, offer good physical protection, guard against flare (you only see it in extreme cases; flare generally just robs apparent sharpness by reducing overall microcontrast -- ALWAYS USE A SHADE WITH ANY HIGH QUALITY LENS imho), offer nice creative potential (in the case of filters -- heliopan makes a full range in 30.5), and look SUPER COOL! finally, as for the leather semi-hard case, it is much better than the pouch. it has proper strap lugs for carrying the camera around the neck, protects it while allowing you to keep it at the ready (i only use the base of the case), and keeps sweat off the camera if you carry it in your palm for candid street shots. i love this little camera. my only complaint is that they don't make it in a 28mm (or better still 24mm or 21mm) version. i also wish they had set it up so that when the AFL button is used (especially when the camera is programmed so that the AFL button sets exposure as well), you could pre-extend the lens without touching the button (as you can in MF mode). oh well, a trifling matter.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), May 16, 2001.

almost forgot: what's all this jibber-jabber about the no-see-um bright lines????? in the first place, the bright lines are so close to the edge of the finder as to be well nigh irrelevant. second, the bright lines (as in all cameras that use them) do not actually delineate the edge of the actual ultimate image. they encompass probably 85% of the image. you should not be using them as true framelines for careful composition. finally, since the camera (for obvious reasons) only has one set of brightlines, any user will learn in a short time how to frame an image without resort to the bright lines in any event. in point of fact, the hard glass finder in the t3 is AMAZINGLY good considering the cost of the camera. it is VERY bright and distortion free. the fact that it has any bright lines at all is just icing on the cake considering the price of the camera. do you expect leica quality for one-fifth the cost of an m6 & summicron combo? the display in the finder also is amazingly good -- at any price. what is all this "it worries me a lot" stuff. who could possibly complain about what contax has provided for a little more than six-hundred bucks? that's half the cost of a decent rangefinder lens (and no leica lens focuses to ten inches like the t3 "sonnar").

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), May 17, 2001.

Roger,

Thanks for your insightful comments on the T3. This thread is getting more informative as time and usage increase.

I agree with your point about the bright lines. Seems to be non-issue with this camera that only has a field of view of 85%.

I've read of one other (experienced) Contax user complaining that his T3 over exposed. Don't know whether he sent it in for repair or not.

Minor point: close focusing distance is stated to be .35m (13.8 inches) according to http://www.kyocera.co.jp/news/2001/0102/0001-e.asp This is about the same as the GR1 close focusing and MUCH better than the Minilux.

Care to comment on the T3s optical quality compared to your Leica glass?

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 17, 2001.

Well, for $700( a used Nikon 8008+35/f2+50/f1.8+flash) I'd like to be confident that what I see is what I get. Even if the bright frame covers only 90% (not 85%) of the frame, that is what gets printed in the lab, unless you custom order full frame prints, and that's what seen in the frame mounted slide. For almost half of that price Ricoh GR1 sports electronically controlled bright frame which has three preset frame settings for different distances and dispays 9 shutter speeds in 1/2 stops. For 2/3 of the price Konica Hexar has a fully compensated bright line frame.

Are you saying that I should disregard the bright line at all and gestimate what I see? How do I compensate for parallax?

-- Mark Zelyony (mzelyony@myprimus.com), May 17, 2001.

i guess it all depends on how you use your t3. mine was aquired strictly for impromptu portraits and candid street photography. if i was going to spend a lot of time framing landscape/architectural shots, did not do my own printing (or used trannie film), or planned to do all my photography with the t3, i guess i would want a reliable set of parallax correcting brightlines. even then, however, in view of how close the lines are to the edge of the finder (which may be the basis for a more significant gripe) and the general unreliability of brightlines as a critical framing aid, i still don't think the hard to see (but certainly visible) brightlines could be a serious issue. the hexar was a great -- but very big -- camera. unfortunately, it lacks most of the nice custom functions of the t3, is not as well built, and without getting into a lot of detail (i'm sue you know the details anyway) is much more limited in terms of shutter speeds and apertures than the t3 (which has TRUE 2.8 widest aperture and a TRUE 1/500 top speed + a limited range 1/1200). the GR1s is also a great camera, but is not built well, has a VERY poor viewfinder, lacks most of the t3's custom features, and has poor customer support in the us. i should add that both the hexar and the GR are also MUCH MUCH slower to fire than the t3. i got rid of my hexar RF on ebay because it took too long to fire. the old hexar and the GR are even worse. the t3 is the first point and shoot that is quick enough to satisfy me. i just can't use a camera that won't fire the instant you hit the release. anyway, i guess the bottom line -- and the main point i was trying to make -- is that i don't think that for the purposes most people are going to deploy a t3 that brightline is very important. i also think that for the money, the camera overall is a helluva bargain. put mosy bluntly, there is no feature on the camera that i would delete to reaalocate resources to improve the brightlines. happy snappin'!

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), May 19, 2001.

p.s. for the love of mike, always use a shade!! you don't know what you're missin'. p.p.s. if you like the t3, you'll love the minerva pythagore ii wristwatch -- buy 'em both the same day, you'll be in heaven.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), May 19, 2001.

Well, I mortgaged the farm and bought a T3 yesterday. I'm very pleased with the design; Contax did an excellent job on the custom functions (7 very good options); manual focusing (actually two types, scale focusing and AF lock with the separate AFL button); excellent viewfinder (the bright lines issue is a non-issue, IMO); Two self- timer options (2 second and 10 second delay); facility for adding an optional lens hood, filters (filters require an adaptor ring) and a dedicated flash bracket for using TLA-200 flash only.

Minor quibble: The viewfinder does not display exact shutter speeds, only six "ranges" plus overexposure and long-time (LT).

---->>>>NOTE TO T3 OWNERS: <<<<<---- When you turn your T3 on or off, does the motor make a sort of stuttering/twittering sound? Mine sounds like a bird chirping. I didn't notice this in the two different samples I played with in camera stores. Maybe the ambient noise in the store masked it.

Will report on optical quality as soon as I get some pictures developed.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 20, 2001.

John, Mine chirps - isn't it just the motor retracting the lens?

I consider $180 for a lens hood ($40 for the adapter, $30 for the hood, and $100 for the case to accommodate the hood) a bit much, especially when the lens DOESN'T need a hood (in part, because it's already shaded!). It amounts to nothing but worthless camera jewelry - kind of like spending a grand on a watch that doesn't have a date function. But $185 bucks for a protective UV filter - now there's money well spent!

To each his own.

-- Eric James (eajames@u.washington.edu), May 20, 2001.

I'd also very much like to hear an unbiased assessment of the image quality produced by the system. I don't expect elaborate laboratory testing, but an honest subjective appraisal would be welcome, particularly if it were by comparison to well-known point and shoots, such as the T4, which has sort of become the standard - for value, if nothing else. The problem I've encountered is buying cameras on the basis of web reviews and testimonials. Sometimes, you suspect the reviewers are "shills" for the manufacturers, but more often, I suspect they see their results through the rose-colored glasses of someone who has just dropped hundreds of dollars on something, and needs to justify it in his/her own mind: an unconscious bias in other words. I'm sorely tempted to buy this camera, because of a Zeiss preference and because it would be nice to have something a little more rugged and sophisticated than the T4 - which is great for value and portability, delivering results that, though definitely a cut below my Contax SLR lenses, are very nice for informal, spontaneous work - but suffers from shutter lag, having to cycle through flash options to turn the flash off, etc. But I'm still looking for a fair and convincing appraisal of the T3, and unwilling to buy one until I've heard it. Also, does anybody else wish they would make more of these cameras with a black finish? I don't like toting a gleaming seven-hundred-dollar object around public, nor trying to operate discretely unposed shots with same.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), May 20, 2001.

In particular, any feedback on shutter lag, and shutter lag with prefocusing/Ae lock would be useful. Also, comments on speed of use in actual spontaneous situations, and speed of repeat shots and shutter lag in follow up shots.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), May 21, 2001.

Regarding shutter lag, I think the design of the T3 has coped with this problem better than any design I've seen on a P&S, including the guessomatic focusing of the Minox. Shutter lag can be dealt with in several ways on the T3:

1. Custom Function 2 lets you set the lens so that lens extension is performed when you press the shutter 1/2 way down. This locks focus and extends the lens making shutter release time almost instant. Or, you can set CF 2 to extend the lens when the shutter is fully pressed (less desirable for short shutter lag/quick releases but still pretty fast, in my opinion);

2. You can set the camera in Manual Focus mode (MF). In MF the lens extends, the MF setting is displayed, in meters or fraction therof, and the setting and the lens stays extended until you release the shutter. MF is retained until the user resets the mode to AF or Infinity or some other mode. You can also set CF 7 to hold the MF setting until either the camera is turned off or until the MF setting is reset. In the latter setting, the MF will remain set even after the camera is turned off;

3. You can quickly lock the distance (and extend the lens) with the AF lock button (AFL). CF 5 lets you customize whether you want focus lock only or focus lock and AE lock when using AFL button. CF 6 lets you customize whether you want AFL to lock the distance for one shot only or until the camera is turned off.

By the way, using the above combinations along with exposure compensation settings (+/- 2 EV in 1/3 or 1/2 increments) and a memorized/retained flash setting, makes the T3 pretty nimble. For example, you could customize the T3 to power up with default settings like MF at 2 meters, Flash to OFF, Exposure Compensation to +1, film leader out, etc. You could shoot all day with these settings if necessary, say while climbing or XC skiing.

PS. There's no mindless "Auto Power Off" on the T3, so need to worry about it turning itself off just when you want to take a shot.

PPS. I am not a Contax shill (The T3 is my first Contax camera.)

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 21, 2001.

Info very helpful, as usual, John. Thanks. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), May 21, 2001.

Thanks John for your detailed and precise information. Looks like a real winner of a high end P&S camera.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), May 21, 2001.

Re he shutter lag: sorry, can not agree with the view that "T3 has coped with this problem better than any design on a P&S". The shutter lag problem has been solved in many better P&S cameras years ago. Just one example: Canon Sure Shot Z90w (below $200) and its Real Time Release option of 0.02sec...

For me the very basic requirement for P&S camera is: grab it, press the shutter release, expect to hear 'click'. Only once I know that the camera can 'click when I press' I am showing interest in lens, build quality, manual overrides, etc, etc. But if I wait with my finger pressed for the shutter to fire, what good is superb Carl Zeiss lens? The end effect of using $10 disposable camera and a $700 camera with shuter lag is too often the same: a photograph goes to the rubbish bin.

On the other hand, if single seconds do not count, if you enlarge your prints to poster size and expect them to be razor sharp -- why not get a bit larger, fully manual rangefinder or SLR and a good hand held spot meter? Or even mid format gear?

-- Derek Bem (derek@hermes.net.au), May 21, 2001.

In answer to Derek's somewhat rhetorical question, I would say that the quest for the "perfect" point and shoot is driven by one thing: portability. It's the idea of having a camera from which pro or near- pro results are possible, with you all the time. It is simply not practical to do this with an idustrial-strength SLR, a Hasselblad, or a view camera. So all these folks - myself included - are hoping for something along these lines without the minor annoyances that characterize so many of these little cameras, developed as they are more for the amateur market. That's why the T3 is intriguing at the moment. We're looking for something that has all the best characteristics of this type of camera, with as few drawbacks as possible - from the point of view of discriminating photographers, that is. Serious photographers really do have uses for this type of camera, despite its inherent limitations. Some of my nicest prints have been made with negatives from my Yashica T4. If you were to use a Hasselblad to take the same pictures under the same conditions, you could compare them side-by-side and judge the Hasselblad print to be technically superior, but it's academic: most of those pictures I could never have made with a Hasselblad - I grabbed them by being able to pull the T4 out of my pocket, point, and capture a fleeting situation - no lens-changing, focussing, exposure determinations, fitting on external flash, etc. That's why these cameras are desirable.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), May 22, 2001.

I agree with Charles, portability is very important. So is quality. But so is speed of using the camera: I press, click it goes. Yes, selecting a P&S is always a compromise, and two out of three (portability, speed, quality), or even one out of three is perfectly acceptable in a $150 P&S.

However we have here a $700 equipment which is the result of many years of model evolution. This means that it should be judged using stricter criteria: how well it implements all three requirements, or even: has it pushed the standards a bit further?

So what has happened here -- the T3 designers 'forgot' about 'no shutter lag' option, which can be found even on some $190 P&S's? Or did marketting assumed that labels 'new', 'Contax' and 'Carl Zeiss' will sell the camera anyway, so why bother?

Yes, T3 is intriguing, it is very nice, very well build. And with a price tag, say $250 I can forgive it the shutter lag. For $700 I can not forgive it anything.

-- Derek Bem (derek@hermes.net.au), May 23, 2001.

How does the T3 lens compare to the Minilux lens in terms of image quality? Also, how is focus accuracy with the T3? Is focus lock easy to engage without inadvertantly triggering the shutter? How about fill flash - easy to use and accurate exposure-wise? Finally (and I know this is subjective), what do you think about the 35mm focal length as a general-purpose lens? Thanks, everyone.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), May 23, 2001.

Re: "So what has happened here -- the T3 designers 'forgot' about 'no shutter lag' option, which can be found even on some $190 P&S's?"

I think you're missing the point of the shutter options on the T3 listed in my 5/21/01 message above. Contax didn't "forget" about shutter lag and then say, "Oops, we better fix that." The T3 *offers* these options which result in minimum shutter lag at least as quick as the Real Time release of the Canon Sure Shots. Even in normal operation (lens extension after pressing shutter 1/2 way) the T3 responds very quickly.

I can't comment authoritatively on image quality compared to the Minilux; more testing needs to be done (by someone more skilled than I.)

AF is usually quick, but it's the Passive type so not as fast overall as the Active type on the Minilux if focusing on a blank surface.

Fill flash is easy to use and can be set as the default at power up. Flash exposures have been very good so far, except when using the macro mode at less than about two feet (some overexposure noted).

Overall metering is excellent (I wish I knew more about how the T3 meter reads a scene.)

My first posted T3 image (print scan only) is at: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=236471&size=md

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 23, 2001.

Correction: "Even in normal operation ([NO] lens extension after pressing shutter 1/2 way) the T3 responds very quickly."

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), May 23, 2001.

"Even in normal operation (lens extension after pressing shutter 1/2 way) the T3 responds very quickly."

Sorry, John, it appears that I did not make myself clear. In NORMAL operation T3 has noticable, measurable shutter lag, and it normal operation T3 DOES NOT offer an option of instant shutter release.

I know that 'shutter lag can be dealt with in several ways on the T3' but my point is: for $700 this should be solved in a more elegant way, as $200 Z90W demonstrates.

-- Derek Bem (derek@hermes.net.au), May 23, 2001.

True instantaneousness of shutter response is a will-of-the wisp, in any case, since focussing is tied into the sequence with a P&S in one way or another. Even if you have prefocussed, you have had to take the time to, well, prefocus, and then of course your subject can move. Derek's question seems to be whether response on the T3 is fast enough, given a $700 outlay, and his answer seems to be no, while it's "yes" from John's point of view. Seems fine to agree to disagree there and let it go. What's fast enough for one won't be for another. I have a sure shot classic 120, which is only marginally slower in response, I believe, than the Z90W; in fact the basic operations of the camera are in most all respects very good, and fast, but the prints - fast response or no - can't equal my Yashica T4, not at 8X10, anyway. What's elusive is the blend of characteristics: operational efficiency and versatility, good focussing and optical resolution, compact size. I'd scrounge up the $700, and gladly for a fixed focal length camera - I'd rather let my feet do the zooming if I gain something in image quality - if I thought some manufacturer had it all together. I may have to wait before they come out with something that will allow me to leave the big cameras home with any confidence.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), May 23, 2001.

Anybody can comment on T3 firing sequence noise vs. the GR1 ?

I have the latter and eventhough the autofocus operation is raisonably quiet, I find the film advance to be quite annoying indoors in a quiet environment as it is very long (1s+ I guess).

-- Fabrice Bodet (beud@hotmail.com), May 23, 2001.

The camera is pretty quiet. The film wind is low-pitched. You really cannot hear the camera in normal street noise...

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), May 23, 2001.

My two cents, mostly in response to Charles's comments -- it seems to me that folks interested in a T3 are primarily looking for a compact camera that provides aperture control and an excellent lens. Therefore, as long as the shutter response is not unreasonably slow in pure point and shoot situations, I don't see where there is a problem. I say this because I rarely use any camera by pointing it at my subject and expecting the shot to be completed almost instantly. Instead, in the vast majority of situations, I obtain focus on my subject, recompose, and check the frame for clutter. If I am also adjusting aperture, then the process is slower still. Because the T3 offers both a focus lock button and the choice of moving the lens during half-depression of the shutter release button, shutter response should be nearly instantaneous after focus is achieved. So, to me, it seems almost irrelevant that in pure point and shoot situations, the shutter lag may be 1/4 to 1/2 second rather than something less -- too few of my photos are pure "point and shoot" to let that potential drawback diminish the T3's other features.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), May 25, 2001.

Yes, Chris, I agree: people's needs are going to vary as to performance of individual components, such as shutter delay. I, too, find I focus and recompose a lot, and there it is the portablility - the "always having a camera with you" aspect that shines with a point and shoot, rather than it's strength as an action camera. I do find there are times when I want to capture something like dancing, where a given moment or instant gives the "right" image, and my T4 super won't oblige me in those situations, so that's why I'd like a camera with comparable or better image quality, and the ability to seize a key moment during more rapid action. All these cameras have one thing going for them in that respect: there is no image blackout at the instant of exposure, as there is with an SLR, so you do get confirmation in that the sound of the shutter gives a very good approximation of what you will have captured as you look through the finder. The trouble with the T4 is that the focusing, shutter click, and advance are difficult to separate aurally, so you don't *know*, the way you do with a Leica M camera, for example. But with the traditional rangefinder, unless you zone focus, you have the same focus/recompose steps to slow you down if you don't want the subject in dead center. There the SLR is better, as you can focus anywhere on the groundglass, essentially eliminating the recompose step. Does anybody have any experience with the eye-focus cameras - Canon, isn't it? - where the camera reads where your eye is looking and focusses there? Does it work as billed? I've been in photography a long time, and have learned to get at least some of these shots with effort and perserverance - anticipating where action peaks will occur and focussing there, etc. - but I'm lazy enough to go for any technological shortcut if I'm convinced it will work.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), May 25, 2001.

If you bought T3 for $700, you now own a great P&S. If you are reading this list because you are still uncertain -- have a look at soon to be released Rollei Prego 30 (around $200), and ask yourself this question: isn't T3 terribly overpriced? Is it three and a half times better then Rollei?

http://www.photographyreview.com/tradeshow/pma_01/General/general3.sht ml

-- Derek Bem (derek@hermes.net.au), May 30, 2001.

I'm a new Contax T3 user, formerly a Leica Minilux user. I can attest that the lenses between the two are neck in neck in terms of sharpness. Pleasant bokeh on the T3 and corner falloff is not unpleasant at wide aperatures. The T3 seems a quiter overall-- focus is definitely quieter, and advance is slightly quieter. The noisiest thing about the camera is turning it on-- the lens pulls out with a loud motor noise similar to the Minilux.

The T3 is a clear winner over the Minilux in terms of portability (it's pocketable). The ability to remember your default flash setting is reason alone to consider the T3 over the Minilux. The T3 is more unwieldy when it comes to manual focus, but for a point-n-shoot like this you probably won't be using MF too much. You can always prefocus the lens, and even lock focus for the duration that the camera is on, a great feature (handy for street photography-- ASA 400, outdoors, lock focus at 2 meters, and shoot away!)

-- J. Woo (noemail@please.com), May 30, 2001.

I just purchased a T3 and think its a fine camera. However, the camera has a major omission. AEL cannot be used independant of AEF unless you are in manual focus mode. This is a really silly configuration . You can't step up close to your subject lock in an exposure and then step back and recompose. The focus will lock at the distance you metered!

-- LS Green (lsgreen@ix.netcom.com), June 01, 2001.

The more I work with the camera the more I learn to appreciate the logic of the custom settings. For example, the T3 focus options are perfectly adequate for action shots or for more careful composition shooting when constant racking/focusing of the lense is not needed.

For instance, the T3 can be set to autofocus at half shutter release. This results in virtually no more shutter lag than would be experienced with any other autofocus camera when it telescopes and racks the lense to lock-on focus. The T3 lense focusing is very quick.

For example, if I am shooting my 2 year old son and other action shots I keep it at this setting and am satsfied that I am catching the action.

If I am using the camera to do more careful (non-action shot) compositions, I set it to default so that the lense will be constantly racking to focus until until after the shutter release is pressed completely down.

That way while repeatedly composing and metering a scene, the lense is not constantly, (and needlessly), racking to and fro on the subject (as would be required on a SLR to properly view the prospective photo). This preserves batteries and avoids extraneous wear and tear on the camera.

Another useful custom setting is the option to engage/disengage AE when using the separate focus lock button that is located on top of the camera adjacent to the shutter release button. One can select whether to lock both focus and AE upon depressing focus lock button or to lock-in only focus.

If only autofocus is selected then one can take focus an exposure setting sfrom two separate spots on the subject, i.e; Lock focus and then take a separate AE reading by depressing he shutter release halfway down.

This camera's functions are exceptionally versatile; particularly for a cameras as small as a hard pack of Marlboro cigarettes.

I love mine and was hearbroken when I dropped it onto some rocks while on vacation last week in the mountains. It still continued to take perfectley exposed pictures. However, since it suffured a serious ding to the top of the case, I sent it in for a check/repair to revalidate the three year warranty.

BTW I also have a Minilux Zoom for my wife who is not proficient in making cameras exposure settings. I believe the photos from my T3 are ever so slightly sharper than her Minilux zoom.

However, since I do not know the settings, (aperture, speed) made by each camera when making the shots of the same subject, I could be mistaken. Also we use different films in each camera and, if I must say so myself, I am a far better picture taker.

Suffice to say, both cameras consistently deliver beautiful, stunning, crisp photos and we are immensely pleased. The Leica with CF flash seems to produce a slight, lovely luminescent to perfectly colored flesh tones using Fuji NPS 160.

The T3 produces eye popping, vividly clear outdoor/sunlit shots with Reala and NPH 400. John McComack's T3 sample photo using NPC is likewise vividly stunning. I've got to try some of that stuff (NPC).

Untill my disaster dropping the T3 I was happily experimenting with both cameras. Both have their own unique, great solid feel.

I'll file a follow-up report on the T3 repair and Contax customer support. I can't wait to get my gem of a camera back in-hand.

After seeing my T3 bounce off some rocks, I've been getting in the habit of slipping the wrist strap over my hand whenever I remove my P & S cameras from their cases.

-- Phil Bonner (plpb@earthlink.net), June 04, 2001.

Corrrectin to my Posting, directy above:

The incorrect sentence, "I set it to default so that the lense will be constantly racking to focus until until after the shutter release is pressed completely down."

Should read: I set it to default so that the lense will NOT be constantly racking to focus until until after the shutter release is pressed completely down.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 04, 2001.

Re: "AEL cannot be used independant of AEF unless you are in manual focus mode. This is a really silly configuration . You can't step up close to your subject lock in an exposure and then step back and recompose."

Not completely true. You can lock AF independent of AEL with the AFL button and custom function five set to 'A' (focus lock only with AFL button).

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 06, 2001.

Has anyone seen (and better yet tried) the accessory flash and bracket? I'm curious about their size and weight, and the quality of light provided. Also, re the filters: can anyone comment on how useful a polarizing filter is with a non-SLR camera? I wonder how successfully you will be able to predict the effect of a polarizing filter with the T3. Thanks, everyone.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), June 08, 2001.

what's all this about shutter lag??? as i said in my prior posts, this is the fastest auto camera i have ever used in AF mode. AND the release is instantaneous when you prefocus using af lock OR preset focus in MF mode (as i do for candid street photography). just use custom setting for pre-extension in any event. shutter lag is JUST NOT AN ISSUE with this camera. p.s. i'm glad we stopped talking about the brightlines!! buy this camera -- you will never regret it. p.p.s. use the shade -- i know it's too expensive, but you will not believe the improvment in most outdoor settings. you can also use the FULL RANGE of helipan 30.5 filters once you buy the adapter. they make everything in this size!! a great benefit.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 08, 2001.

Is one required to make manual adjustments to exposure to account for filters? (I'm ignorantly assuming that metering is done through some other port besides the taking lens as in other P&S's)

-- Skyler Timmons (skint39@hotmail.com), June 08, 2001.

Regarding the earlier thread regarding AEL (auto-exposure lock) vs. AFL (auto-focus): you cannot operate AEL independently of focusing. That is, you cannot step up close to your backlit subject to lock exposure without also being forced to also focus at a close distance. Someone please correct my if I'm mistaken.

-- J.M. Woo (wooismyid@yahoo.com), June 09, 2001.

I don't own a T3 (yet,) but with my T2 it is possible to focus manually and then set exposure independently with the shutter release button. Perhaps this would work with the T3 as well.

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), June 09, 2001.

Re: Metering and filter factors on the T3

Yes, metering is done through a separate port, so you must compensate for the filter, esp. if using slide film. The T3 allows you to set compensation factors in 1/3 or 1/2 EV steps.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 10, 2001.

Re: "...you cannot step up close to your backlit subject to lock exposure without also being forced to also focus at a close distance."

Yes, you can. You can set focus and exposure independently in a couple of ways:

1. Lock focus with the AFL button and then walk up to the subject and set exposure. Return to original postion and shoot. CF 5 lets you set the T3 so that focus but *not* exposure is locked when using the AFL button.

2. Lock focus with the MF button. Repeat as in 1. above.

3. Using standard AF lock exposure on a mid gray subject (grass, pavement) at the *same* distance as the subject by pressing shutter button 1/2 way, recompose and release shutter. Any P&S can be used in this way to fool the meter.

Or, just set exposure compensation for backlit scenes. +1.5 - +2 should be fine.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 10, 2001.

Here's an example of using the T3 AFL button using f/2.8 in aperture priority and shooting through a chain link fence in harsh midday lighting. The workers on this site were not comfortable with having their picture taken - maybe they thought I was an inspector or something, so I waited until they lost interest in me before shooting this grab shot. Image is only about 1/6 of the full frame. See:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=253096

A couple of sky shots showing minimal (no?) light fall off from the T3 are also in this gallery:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=122840

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 10, 2001.

John, about your construction workers shot -- you list the aperture as f2.8 and shutter speed as 1/1200 (?). I guess I'm still confused about what shutter speeds are available with the T3, as I thought 1/500 was the maximum shutter speed with larger apertures when using aperture-priority exposure. Are the full range of shutter speeds available at all apertures, or is there some limitation? Thanks.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), June 12, 2001.

Chris,

You are correct. 1/1200 shutter speed is only available in P mode, not aperture priority. In aperture priority, the fastest shutter speed is 1/500.

I put the "?" mark in the image caption because I thought at the time the shutter speed readout was blinking when I grabbed that shot. I *thought* that indicated 1/1200. If it was blinking it was indicating overexposure, but I can't really remember. The fact that the T3 only indicates a *range* of shutter speeds in the viewfinder can be frustrating at times.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 12, 2001.

John,

I thought that the 1200 speed was available at f 8 and smaller apertures in aperture priority mode.

I figured the shutter could operate faster when the lens was closed down and demanding less travel.

I did not realize that 500+ speeds were not available in aperture priority mode/only available in program mode.

That full face photo is great. I am going to have to try some of those rather then stepping back for standard head and shoulder portraits. That is, when my T3 comes back from repair.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 13, 2001.

Re: "I thought that the 1200 speed was available at f 8 and smaller apertures in aperture priority mode. "

Hmmm, I think you're right about the f/8 and 1/1200. I went back and looked at the manual - again. The confusion on my part was in relying on the brief note about P mode on the specification's page (page 62) without examining the exposure control table for the aperture priority mode (diagram on page 37).

If we look at the exposure control table on page 37, it's clear that in Aperture Priority mode the shutter speed will increase above 1/500 to a maximum of 1/1200 when f/8 is selected AND the light value is at EV 16 or above.

What I don't quite understand is the asterisked footnote on p. 37 that states: "* If the available light on the subject is too bright for the pre-programmed automatic-linkage range, the program will automatically shift to get a correct exposure." There is no asterisk anywhere else on the page, but I think they're restating the obvious - that the shutter speed will increase with increases in the EV level. Maybe I'm missing something. Anyone care to comment?

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 13, 2001.

John, that footnote sounds mostly like gibberish to me, but here's my guess anyway: if the camera can't select a fast enough shutter speed given the available light and the aperture you've selected, then the camera will override your aperture selection and close down the aperture to achieve correct exposure. If my theory is correct, then you can't overexpose a shot except by using exposure compensation.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), June 13, 2001.

That sounds right, Chris, and fits with the complaint you sometimes read about this camera - that you can't select a wide aperture for selective focus and get the corresponding high shutter speed if that speed is above 1/500. I believe you are interpreting the footnote right, although I suppose we'd have to ask a Canon tech. person: if you have ev 16 with ASA 100, for example, and choose f4, it would have to change your aperture to f8 or smaller, since f4 @ 1/500 would be overexposure, and it won't use the higher range unless you're at 8 or more. (Whew.) The resultant exposure would be "correct", but would spoil the selective focus effect you planned for by choosing f 4. Exposure comp. would probably be the easiest way to overexpose intentionally, but I guess you could also meter lock on a darker area of the scene to force the higher exposure.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 13, 2001.

I've never heard the complaint before that the camera comandeers the user-selected aperture setting when the metered EV is too bright.

I could be splitting hairs but the wording of the annotation on p. 37 stating, "too bright for PRE-PROGRAMMED automatic linkage," leads me to believe they could still be referring to the Program mode (and not aperture priority mode), operation of the camera.

Why offer the feature of a user selectable aperture priority mode if the camera over-rides it and reverts back to Program mode?

Yet, by virtue of the fact that this annotation is found in the manual in the aperture priority mode instructions section, it appears to apply to aperture priority mode operation of the camera.

I'll see if I can email an inquiry to Contax for clarification.

I finally received my SA-2 flash bracket ($149) which has a shoe for attaching the TLA 200 flash.

I learned today that the repair estimate for my T3 is $300 smackers.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 13, 2001.

Re: "I could be splitting hairs but the wording of the annotation on p. 37 stating, "too bright for PRE-PROGRAMMED automatic linkage," leads me to believe they could still be referring to the Program mode (and not aperture priority mode), operation of the camera."

It wouldn't be the first time that a camera manual had misplaced references. There was a recent rant on the ContaxG list about misplaced references about using fill flash on the G cameras. Whole sections were misplaced, leaving users totally confused, not to say misinformed.

Anyway, my T3 continues to perform admirably. I just shot a roll of Kodak T400CN B&W and the results were excellent (printed on Kodak B&W paper by a good processor.) I'll post some scans in a few days.

For a test I tried holding a 58mm polarizer in front of the lens but my technique was flawed; finger tips and filter ring are visible on the prints. :( Guess I'll invest in a filter adaptor.

Phil, let us know how the flash bracket works and if you hear anything from Contax on the "too bright for PRE-PROGRAMMED automatic linkage" question.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 14, 2001.

Phil: I've been scouring the web for reviews of the camera, and can't cite exactly where I read it, but one or two reviewers said something like: "weaknesses: have to use smaller apertures for the faster shutter speeds; too bad, since fast speeds are appropriate for wide apertures..." I was speculating on the meaning of the footnote in the light of that. A fairly minor flaw, in any case, when you compare the camera with the competition and consider its intended use, which is not primarily slow and deliberate work for carefully controlled results, like a view camera.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 14, 2001.

I just came back to this thread after several months, and its great to see so much interest in the T3. I find I take mine with me more often than any other camera I've owned, and am still totally blown away by the image quality. To clarify a few things I saw above, the high speeds are only available at f8.0 and smaller. What is very special about this camera that no one has mentioned, is that the twin shutter eliminates the dreadful corner fall off at high speeds/small apertures. I took some shots at the beach with a Rollei Prego and Yashica T4, and it looked like I used a matte box the corner fall off was so bad. The Contax tech rep told me they also had the same problem with the T2, and that is why they changed the shutter design on the T3. Shoot away in bright sun if you need to, even with 400 or 800 speed film. I set my default for focusing the lens as soon as you press 1/2 way on the shutter, and the response when fully pressing the button is nearly instant. The camera is so quiet, when shooting outdoors I am not sure it actually went off sometimes. I have checked out the G flash set up, and it is kind of funny looking and too expensive/bulky for my uses. The built in flash is more powerful than it looks, and covers the 35mm lens very well. I use mine without flash whenever possible, and love the "Leica like" natural light shots it is capable of. I can see the bright lines in my camera with no problem-I am not sure what people were referring to. As far as AF lock and AE lock at the same time, this is not a problem either. If you hold the button down to step one, it locks focus and exposure. So if you need to focus lock with exposure, do it that way instead of with the AF lock button. I have shot right into the sun with no noticeable flare, so a hood will not be on my want list. I like the small case it came with,(I wear it on my belt) and enjoy not having a camera hanging on my neck looking like a tourist. Best 699.00 I've spent on a 35mm camera or lens.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 14, 2001.

Someone mentioned above "I did not realize that 500+ speeds were not available in aperture priority mode/only available in program mode" They are in fact available in aperture priority mode, but ONLY at f8, F11, or f16.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 14, 2001.

Charles: I speculate that the higher speeds are available only with 8,11,16 apertures because the shutter leaves have to travel only about half the distance that they would need to travel at aperture 2.8; the shorter the travel/the faster the available shutter speed. The graphs in the manual show that the 1200 is achieved at 16 aperture and about 1000 speed at an 11 aperture opening.

I also saw this speculation in a consumer review (not photographyreview.com) with a editor's annotation confirming it's accuracy.

I'll see if I can find the review again and post it in it's entirety.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 14, 2001.

Andrew: My wife has the Leica Minilux zoom which also delivers beautiful pictures; particularly people shots. The zoom makes it easy and neat work to frame individuals and small groups at a gathering or in a roomfull of people. I could be mistaken but the Leica lens seems to lend a cetain luminescence to flesh tones.

On the other hand the T3 is faster to deploy and to shoot; especially with the lens focusing set to activate at half shutter release. Although I like the Leica's bigger heft and fit/feel in my hands, I prefer the T3 for it's truly pocket-size compactness, speed (ease of use) and wide flexability.

The crisp sharpness of the T3's images is simply terrific to behold and iut's images compare favorably to any images that I have taken including the Leica and any SLR prime lenses I have ever used.

John described comparing Lieca Minilux and T3 images as being like comparing two kinds of gourmet ice cream. Both are equally pleasing and have their own subtle unique quality.

Given the choice I reach for the T3 more often due to it's larger, brighter and more comfortable viewfinder, plus, speed and ease of deployment and shooting. I can get from Point "A," camera in the pouch, to point "B," image captured, twice as fast with the T3 as with the Leica Minilux zoom.

In fact since it's compactness facilitates always carrying it with me, it had quickly became second nature to reach for the T3 on my belt, capture the image and stow it in nearly one seamless motion.

In sum, by becoming second nature to carry and to use, and by delivering 1st class images, IMHO the T3 most successfully fulfills the role of a point and shoot camera.

The flash bracket is suprisingly small. My intention is to have it for use in photo sessions where I'll be taking multiple shots - like of my 2 year old scooting around or at gatherings where I need more range and better fill. We'll see how it delivers versus the Leica with it's separate flash which does nicely.

(Actually I may have subconsciously gotten the separate T3 flash and bracket to just to see how it would measure up against the Leica Minilux with separate flash).

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 14, 2001.

John McCormack, thanks for posting those example pictures at your site. I think I know what's going on with the sky shot. Was the sun on your left? If the sky is lighter on the left side of the picture and darker on the right side, it has the effect of minimizing the apparent light falloff on the left but exaggerating it on the right. This can make it look like there's "more" light falloff on the right side when actually the camera's falloff is symmetrical.

The higher shutter speeds only at smaller apertures are typical of small leaf shutters. I don't know if the T3's is a two-blade shutter, but I believe the Konica Hexar's is, and that's what keeps the Hexar's maximum shutter speed at 1/250th. You can actually chart the opening time, the fully open time, and the closing them when testing a leaf shutter. Obviously, the wider it has to open, the greater a percentage of the final exposure is taken up with opening and closing; it can greatly exacerbate mechanical (as opposed to optical) falloff. On the Contax T2, they cleverly "hid" the problem by limiting the high (1/500th) shutter speed to program mode--in aperture-priority it was limited to 1/125th. The miniature leaf shutter on the T3 must be very good indeed, to offer 1/500th speeds on f/2.8 and higher speeds at f/8 and smaller. It's an impressive spec.

I can't wait to try this camera, I've heard so many good things about it.

-- Mike Johnston (michaeljohnston@ameritech.net), June 15, 2001.

Double-Between-Lens-Shutter: How It Works

Thanks to Bob Shell of _Shutterbug_ magazine for providing an explanation of the T3's double-between-lens shutter. Bob says it really isn't two shutters in the sense that mental image might be. It's really more like one shutter with two sets of blades. What makes achieving really fast speeds with a leaf shutter difficult is that the mechanism must open the blades all the way, bring them to a stop, and then reverse direction to close them.

The double-between-lens-shutter has one set of blades which are closed between photos and one set which remain open. When you take a picture the first set opens and stays open, and the second set closes. So neither set has to change directions during the exposure. When the camera advances the film the two sets of blades are returned to their original positions for the next photo. Bob said this is possibly not a 100% accurate description, but is how he understands it to work.

Hope this helps.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), June 16, 2001.

Please help me understand why my T2 has such wicked light fall-off when used in aperture priority mode with a small aperture. In that mode the aperture is determined by the blades of the lens diaphragm, but the leaf shutter still has to go through its full range to open and close. Does this results in relatively more light falling on the center of the film frame?

Through experience, I have learned to avoid aperture priority with the T2. In Program mode, there is less light fall-off. The lens itself is extraordinarily good, and if it weren't for this issue, I would feel no desire to move up to the T3.

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), June 16, 2001.

I have not been able to find the T3 review that I had mentioned in my last post. In it the reviewer also stated that the light fall off problem of the T2 was corrected in the T3 by the new type of shutter described, above, by John McCormack.

Miss my T3 badly. Can't wait to get it back.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 16, 2001.

A favorite shot from the T3.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=259510

My 1st upload. I reformated a 20MB tiff image to 200KB JPG. I noticed that it appears to have lost it's stunning "Contax" snap and clarity.

Would appreciate any suggestions on resizing images for upload so they keep their clarity.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 16, 2001.

Has everybody seen the black one? I don't think they're here in the U.S. yet.

http://www.kyocera.co.jp/news/2001/0104/0402-e.asp

-- Mike Johnston (michaeljohnston@ameritech.net), June 17, 2001.

Looks nice in black, looks nice in silver. I wonder if the black finish is as tough against abrasion as the silver.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 17, 2001.

An exposure/EV chart may answer some of the questions regarding speeds available in aperture priority (see section 5):

http://contax.kyocera.co.jp/product/T3/t301.htm

or

altavista tries to make a translation from Japanese...

-- Skyler Timmons (skint39@hotmail.com), June 17, 2001.

I posted a favorite shot from ther T3 next to a favorite shot from my Minilux zoom at;

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=128499

At these resolutions I do not know if they will be any help.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 18, 2001.

FYI, Popular Photography has reviewed the T3. They rated the lens "outstanding" and concluded that it was the finest P&S lens they had tested. (The article mentions that the T3 lens is substantially better than the "other two" posh P&S cameras tested as part of a "shootout" in 1994. I think those "other two" cameras were the Minolta TC-1, the Leica Minilux, or the Nikon 35ti.) Also, they seemed impressed with the speed and accuracy of the autofocus system, and with the accuracy of the exposure meter.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), June 20, 2001.

The Popular Photography article (July Issue) gave an overall outstanding rating to the lens, no flare, no distortion and outstanding rsoution and contrast. The reviewer concluded that, by a comfortable margin, the T3 has the sharpest lens of any point and focus that they have ever tested and that the T3 is the best point and focus camera available.

Now if I can just get mine back from the shop...

I must say that I am also highly impressed with the crisp, sharp results that my Yashica T-5 is providing while filling-in for the T-3.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 21, 2001.

I"m not surprised the lens tested out so well as its the sharpest 35mm lens I've ever shot with-it must be approaching the theoretical limits for that focal length and is probably out-resoving most of the film emulsions. Makes the 35 f2.8 I had on a Minox 35 look soft by comparison. If I could by the same exact lens with a Leica mount for the cost of the T3 camera, I'd order one today.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 21, 2001.

I found a few more T3 photos online at:

http://www.fogel.net/t3/

Of course it's really tough for me to tell anything about a lens from photographs online.

--Mike

-- Mike Johnston (michaeljohnston@ameritech.net), June 24, 2001.

Also, there's a better diagram of the lens assembly here:

http://www.mamut.com/homepages/Norway/1/9/meridianfoto2/n ewsdet226.htm

Also a shutter speed chart for the aperture-preferred mode. The chart does show that if there's too much light in aperture-priority mode, the camera lens will close itself down.

-- Mike Johnston (michaeljohnston@ameritech.net), June 24, 2001.

I've uploaded higher resolution versions of my favorite shots from the T3 and the Minilux Zoom. Note the fine detail of the wood grain in the tree on the T3 shot and the texture detail of the terry cloth on the Mililux shot. Seen on a print both have very sharp, rich detail. I always thought that the T3 has a slight edge on overall "snap" while the Minilux imparts a subltle luminesecence or warmth to skin tones.

If my house was on fire and I could only save one P&S, either the T3 or the Minilux Zoom, it would be the T3. However, I would grieve the loss of the Minilux - the zoom and optics makes it a great people framer/shooter. Great for framing individuals or small groups at parties. It has a great feel about it.

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 24, 2001.

Can someone say kind of AF system the T3 uses? The passive AF in the GR1 is one of my GR1 peeves. It's accurate but it's fiddly in low contrast situations. I'd prefer that they used an IR system like cheap cameras do. Sure, they may have trouble shooting through glass and stuff like that, but in normal situations they're fast and positive. Also, is it multi-zone by default? Can you set it to be single zone? Thanks.

-- Paul Rubin (no@spam.please), June 25, 2001.

It's passive AF with near Infra-red beam assist. Popular Photography rated the AF as "fast, fast, fast" and stated that the IR assist range was over 15 feet and worked in complete darkness.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 25, 2001.

I found Phil's comparison scans really interesting, and John's contax scans, as well. The boy with the towel has a magical look to it on my screen. What would really be cool is if somebody felt like doing a more controlled comparison - nothing fancy, just take the T3, maybe a T4super, and a Minilux non-zoom would be best; compare apples to apples, that is -, then use the same camera position (tripod preferable but not absolutely necessary if careful. Maybe step back a tad with the minilux to get the same magnification. Same emulsion, same lab on the same day. Scan the same, maybe sharpen slightly, the same amount for all. If a human subject, have 'em hold their head up to the same angle to the light, etc. To answer the obvious question as to why the hell don't I do it myself, my excuse is that I only have the Yashica. Just a thought. Chas.

-- Charles Stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 25, 2001.

The difference between the lenses of the Minilux's and the T3 is negligible for most P&S purposes. Even the Minilux zoom lens which in theory should be the worst performer of them all, produces beautiful and immensely pleasing, results. Wiht the exception of the T4, they appear to be built to last a few lifetimes.

I recommend you handle them and get the heft of them to see which fits/feels best and then decide which feature set would best fulfill the demands of your shooting.

I wonder if Leica feels sufficiently challenged by the T3 to consider upgrading the Minilux?

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), June 25, 2001.

Yes, it would be nice if they'd incorporate some of those T3 features in the leica, but the Wetzlar folk may be too conservative or smug for that. We'll see. Thanks for the advice. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 26, 2001.

After discovering this thread yesterday, I read through it with considerable interest. Based largely on Greenspun's recommendations and the testamonials on photo.net, I purchased a Yashica T4 Super (T- 5) a couple of years ago. My impression of that camera after moderate use is mixed.

In bright daylight, I've gotten some very pleasing crisply-focused, nicely color-balanced 5x7 prints. No doubt, a stopped-down aperture has been helpful in this regard. But not always. At times, the AF has not captured the subject at the center of the image and there was insufficient DOF for subject focus. Maybe it's a user problem, but I've come to believe that the T4's AF is not entirely predictable. Indoor exposures with flash are often a bit washed out (ISO 400) and fuzzy.

Not long ago, I came across the Contax T3 in a camera shop and was intrigued with its features. Viewfinder shutterspeed info is nice. (However, had Contax included the focus distance *in the viewfinder*, that would have been much nicer.) Having aperture control is very attractive. But now, upon learning that the maximum shutterspeed is limited below F8 apertures, some shine comes off that feature. When the aperture is set lower than F8 and the available light calls for a shutterspeed faster than 1/500, one ends up with overexposed images.

I'm very much of the mind of Charles Stewart in his first message of May 20. An honest (though subjective) appraisal of the Contax T3 vs. Yashica T4 would be very much appreciated by, I'm sure, many people. That means, loading both cameras with the same type film and shooting the same images under the same conditions with each. Less shutterlag, programmable options, (limited) aperture control, etc. are nice, but to my mind can't justify the price difference between the two cameras.

What would be useful to know is whether the T3's AF is distinctly more robust. Is the flash superior? Can one generally distinguish one camera over the other based on image quality from similar exposure conditions? (See Charles Stewart above, June 25)

Phil Bonner writes that he's "highly impressed with the crisp, sharp results that my Yashica T-5 is providing while filling in for the T3." (It should be noted that the repair cost alone of his T3 could buy two new Yashica's.) Phil, in what ways were the images (not features) from your T3 more pleasing than from your T-5?

All constructive comments appreciated.

-- Marc Ditz (mditz@nospam.world.std.com), June 27, 2001.

It's obvious that the T3 has many features the t5 lacks, including some that correct the several annoyances and slownesses inherent in the t5 design. Not to speak of the vastly superior materials for construction. (my T5's have been durable, though *providing they're kept in a soft pouch and not just thrown in the purse/pocket, where the plastic windows get terribly messed up)* The only thing I can contribute to this question is that the T5, especially at close range, gives me some remarkable enlargements. I simply don't find it as convenient to use as a P&S ought to be, because of the shutter slowness, maddeningly uncertain focus-position detente in the release, etc. Beyond that, I can only add the general observation, noted over many years, that in photo equipment, the real "premium" items do not give results differences corresponding to the price differences. But if you're a quality freak (I confess to it), that *little bit* of extra quality can be worth a lot to you. The manufacturers know that about us, and charge "what the market will bear". That's my theory anyway. The reason I'm pumping all the T3 owners for info is that I have a closet-full of misc. photo junk that I've essentially had to buy in order to test (and reject), and my budget won't stand it any more. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 27, 2001.

I own both, having picked up a T4 nearly 6 years ago and shot over 100 rolls of film with it. Even after 5 rolls of film with the T3, I can safely make the following comparisons:

The lens is better in all ways on the T3. Its noticeably better at the widest aperture,which is very important on a P&S. Virtually all flash shots are taken at maximum aperture on P&S cameras, so any flash shots with the Yashica are at f3.5-its worst performing aperture. There is less distortion on the T3, and there is no corner light fall off which can be intense on the Yashica in brightly lit shots with a lot of sky in them.

The focus is much more refined and very accurate on the T3. The response is very fast-I've never used an AF P&S that is faster. On the Yashica, I got many good in focus shots and some randomly out of focus for no known reason to me. The T3 has nailed the focus on nearly every shot I have taken with it so far. Gives me a confidence in using the camera for special shots. The ability to check where it has focused on the top plate even adds more to the certainty that the image will be in focus.

The flash is more powerful than I thought it would be, and handels most indoor stuff when needed just fine. Watch out for the red eye, however. Fill flash outside has worked well also.

Feature wise, there is no comparison to the Yashica and T3. To be able to choose the aperture and easily set exposure compensation are the two biggest selling points to this camera besides the impecable optics. The T4 just drove me nuts in any kind of backlit situation-- you might as well not even take the photo because it will turn out underexposed. I use the shutter info in the finder all the time. It may not be an exact speed, but it sure is nice to know if you are near 1/30 or 1/250, which on most P&S cameras like th Yashica you have no idea what it is picking.

I'm glad I bought the T4 and have many treasured images I took with it. If the T4 had exposure compensation and a bit faster response time, I'd have probably skipped the T3 and have $700 more in my checking account. I'll probably give the T4 to my son in a few years when he's old enough to start taking photos with something besides a disposable.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 27, 2001.

Good information. Thanks. You're absolutely right: the t4 does vignette, and everything I've read indicates that the t3's new sonnar largely eliminates the problem. Also correct is that the t4 does not shine in backlight situations where you can't eliminate the bright background with the centerweighted metering. The way out is to go with "flash on" and use the little flash for fill, and there is probably also a way of getting neutral density over the meter sensor, but those are clumsy or unpredictable methods. Much better to be able to meter separately on a substitute area, or spot-meter the area of prime interest, as you can with the T3. I've never had the problem of the t4 misfocussing, though. I treat the 3-point AF as single-point, avoiding any ambiguity that would allow the camera to "make a decision" for me. What is true is that you sometimes get coarse focus rather than fine, since the camera has to choose one of its "zones", or stopping-places (there are 160, I'm told), and sometimes you are luckier than others with fineness of focus: I don't get out-of-focus shots, per se, but some are more impressionistic, where others are tack-sharp. Another problem is that the T4 IR autofocus seems to crap out in the middle distances. Either it's that the zones are fewer out there, or that the IR just doesn't reach there - I don't entirely understand how the IR AF works. You're OK at infinity with the infinity setting, I've found. My way of working with the T4 is to confine myself to what it does best - well-illuminated subjects somewhat close in - and the results can be stunning, but it's obvious that the T3 eliminates many of those limitations and gives you a machine with greater versatility and fewer limitations. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), June 29, 2001.

I just had a message from Heike Maier of Zeiss in Germany informing me that the 35/2.8 Sonnar lens for the Contax T3 will be profiled in Zeiss's _Camera Lens News_ #15 (next issue).

-- Mike Johnston (michaeljohnston@ameritech.net), July 03, 2001.

Popular Photography July 2001 issue has a full test report on the new Contax T3, with lens resolution figures, at f5.6 and f11, outstanding 86 lpmm, negligible pincushin distortion, no flare or ghost at any apeture. Conclusion: sharpest compact camera POP every tested ( Pop tested Contax T2, Nikon 35Ti, Minilux ).

I own and use Contax T2 for nearly ten years. Great camera.

I like the styling of T2 better than T3. T2 has a classic elegant look, very neat, no holes here and there. T3 looks like another Canon Elph. I am going to keep my T2.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 07, 2001.

I have a question about the flash synch speed of the T3. Does anyone know what it is? I would also like to see some pictures of the flash bracket and external flash mounted on the T3 so I can see what I would be getting into before laying out that kind of money. I haven't recieved my T3 yet but I must admit I am pretty excited to be able to back up my M6 with such a nice little P&S.

-- Gus Hagberg (grhagberg@snet.net), July 08, 2001.

I think the T3 flash sync up to 1/500 sec, as T2

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 08, 2001.

I have a question concerning the flash too. Do the flash goes to slow sync mode when used in aperture priority as the GR1 do it? I found the flash settings of my GR1 to be ideal and i am wondering if the T3 is as logical/simple on this point. Any comment form a former GR1 owner would be great!

-- Fabrice Bodet (beud@hotmail.com), July 08, 2001.

I would be interested in using the T3 in indoor available light situations, often with black and white film. The problem with point and shoots (including the posh ones) has been the wide angle ofhe meters. The GR1 allowinws some selectiviity. What experience have people had with the T3? I'm talking about people photography not the insides of big buildings.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), July 30, 2001.

The POP Photo review ofthe T3 says that in low light it sends out a NEAR infared focus assist beam. Is this noticeable? does one see a red beam?

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), July 30, 2001.

Rollei Prego 30 note: I purchased a Rollei Prego 30 based on the excellent results and sharpness of the slides shot with the Rollei Prego 90. The P-30 was smaller, with a fixed fast lens and I hoped to have the quality of the P-90. Got results back. Disappointed in that the exposures were off (underexposed), and the close focus indicator didn't seem to function well. But, the pictures that came out were sharp. So I thought it might be worth pursuing. I called Rollei and spoke to a tech. He said send the camera in for adjustment. Well, I got a call from Carmen, who runs Rollei USA. He said, and I quote, the Rollei Prego 30 CANNOT handle the constrained latitudes of slide film - it was primarily designed to be used with the looser latitude of negative film. There is no way to compensate. He offered me a QZ35W at the same cost as B & H, and really wanted to make me a happy Rollei customer, but in the end, I have a Prego 30 past the 14 day return policy for B & H and hoping to make a deal with B & H to buy the T3 if they will take the P-30 back. I was very curious on anyone's comments on the T3 versus the Ricoh GR-1s particularly anyone who has both and can compare. Accuracy of metering, close focus, viewfinder. T3 viewfinder is astonishing for such a sma

-- Newton (eyeworks@sirius.com), August 19, 2001.