Hi, Looking for opinions-- Recently made my way back into a leica M system. I had forgotten how much the tactile sensation of the camera and lens can enhance the enjoyment of shooting. Just the feel of a really smooth manual focus lens is so much better then the "plastic" feel of my AF lenses. I use my slr system mainly for macro work, and for times when I might need an "all-around" camera with me. I have a fairly good Nikon AF system-- F5 and a few primes, that I have been happy with. I am considering a switch to Contax-- it seems as if the AX wold still provide AF when I would want it, the built in 10mm extension sounds good, and I would be able to enjoy the tactile sense of the manual lenses, and have access to a huge variety of lenses as well. Anyone made a switch like this? Any regrets or advice? Or anyonejust able to offer USER opinions of the Contax stuff? Thanks,

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), November 15, 2001

Answers

Marke

Personally, I do not think Contax lenses have a particularly good tactile feel -certainly not the equal of Leica, M or R. Their performance is meant to be good, but I have little experience of them. However, if you think that Contax lenes can give you better performance than the Nikon, then that would seem like a good reason to change - they might well be better (you do say you are happy with the Nikon though). Contax bodies also do not seem to me to be much different really in feel to the F5 either. The Leica R8 is certainly different and more "traditional" metal/chrome finish. I have heard that the AX with its moving back is not a very good (i.e. slow) AF system by the way, not a patch on the F5, but I have not tried it myself, so this is not gospel.

Are there really such a huge number of Zeiss lenses available? Their range is not a patch on Nikon, nor is it as large as Leica R (in all its incarnations). Still if you want AF then I guess you are stuck with looking at Contax unless you feel Canon offer a different experience (no, I guess not).

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), November 15, 2001.

If you want tactile feedback similar to the M, consider the Leicaflex SL. The later R bodies don't have the same "feel". The SL's viewfinder is so good that my hunch is you won't miss AF.

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), November 15, 2001.

Thanks for the input so far-- I was thinking of the Ax as a possibility, that could preserve autofocus for the few times when I might want to use it. Im not necessarily looking for the same feel as the M system-- just smoething beter than the feel of plastic af lenses. Ive found that in the 4 years Ive owned the F5, Ive used the 8 fps once. So, super performance isnt the issue, but I would like to have some degree of automation when I want it. Thanks, and keep em coming. Best,

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), November 15, 2001.

Contax makes great bodies. Rather than the AX (slowish, with some AF misbehaving with certain lenses and too large to hold properly), I would look at RTSIII or ST: magnificent build quality, supersmooth operation and the best ergonomics in the market.

I have intensively used the Contax line up and the folowing bodies: 139Q (a nice little AE body), 159MM (a bugged machine but well designed, compact and seducing), 167MT (extremely efficient), RX (similar to ST but with a useless electronic focus confirmation).

Contax bodies are, in my "humble" opinion, ahead of the R4/5/7 or anything else in the manual focus field.

However, be aware of the fact that the manual focus Contax SLR line is being phased out, and that you are in fact considering a dead end. You will be shopping almost exclusively 2nd hand soon.

Current lens catalogue offers rather outdated designs and/or superexpensive oddities. A quatuor of praised lenses (21mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 100mm f2), the rest is OK. I have used quite a few lenses of the system, and only regret the 85mm f1.4 Planar (a competitive price on that one, BTW).

Conclusion: probable bargains soon, probable 2nd hand glut on the way, but insecurity for the future.

New AF line under the N1 flagship (soon to be followed by a lighter NX) takes non compatible lens mount, and only very few lenses available (only 2 pathetically slow zooms, a 50 1.4 and a macro 100 2.8 currently available).

Conclusion: do not switch! Treat yourself with a FM3 and a couple of mint AI gems for the tactile SLR fun if you must (the M should suffice you, no?). Keep the F5 and AF-D lenses for efficency: a dream system.

Or do like I did: switch to the Leica R8 and its lovable and unaffordable idiosyncracies... ;-)

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), November 15, 2001.

Marke:

Reading all the way down thru the thread, I was thinking about recommending the Nikon FM3a, then I saw Jacques' recommendation: I second that 100%.

I recently got one and it feels like an M6 SLR. The build quality is the best I've seen in 35 yrs of Nikon usaage, the shutter is smooth and quiet, DX auto, Aperture priority auto, and, as has been said, the older non-AF Nikon lenses are great. The combo I like best is the FM3a and the Nikon 28-105 Zoom, as well as the f2 35, 1.4 50 and 1.8 85.

I got the black FM3a and it is great with the black M6 & Summi.

The M6 and a 50 mm Summicron & the FM3a with the Zoom are a great pair that gives me everyting I need plus Macro at 1/2 life size.

Even the Nikon CF27 case for the FM series fits the M6 as if it were made for it. ( Not to mention they use the same batteries!!)

Cheers

-- RICHARD ILOMAKI (richardjx@hotmail.com), November 15, 2001.

Marke:

I also have the F5 as my SLR compliment to the M. The main difficulty I now have with the F5 is trying to remove lenses by pushing its DOF preview button! When I finally get to the proper button on the other side of the body, I then end up twisting the lens in the wrong direction to remove it!! My corollary question would be, what other AF SLRs have the lens release button in the same location as the M, and same direction for mounting/dismounting?

I think it interesting that I have this problem - perhaps I'm a closet dyslexic! I have shot Nikons for over 20 years, and have been shooting the Leica for a little over 1 year, yet only had location/directional problems with the M for about three shooting sessions - yet I've *lost* my Nikon dexterity in less than a year...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), November 15, 2001.

Marke,

Contax/Yashicas are really fine bodies, no doubt. Zeiss glass is also one of the best to be found. The lens line is ok, though 3rd party lenses are hardly available. There is an extensive Contax SLR site maintained by C de Groot: www.cdegroot.com, where you may get lots of information.

I myself use an old RTS (I) with a couple of primes which are really nice to work with, but I have to say the RX or ST (almost similar) are tempting. The AX seems great also, but it is easy to find people saying the contradictionary. The RTS III is just out of scope. For macro work the 100 and 60 mm lenses are one of the best in the world.

But having a F5 I don't see the point of moving over to Contax, sure the cameras feel different and if you are a manual focus junkie then there seems to be no alternative (not even the FM3, the lenses are no real mf - lenses, sorry, but they don't have the right feel). But Nikon has great lenses as well, and with the FM3 they just released a manual milestone with the hybid shutter. Before changing over I'd at least try that one and also would try to rent a Contax - they're quite different from the AF-SLR stuff and you'd have to see how they operate.

Kai

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), November 15, 2001.

The closes thing to a Leica M in feel in an slr is the Olympus OM4. This is a great little camera. The lenses focus in the same direction as the Leica lenses, stopped down they have good sharpness and contrast and the same neutral color cast. The 24 is fantastic, the 50 2.0 macro is maybe better than the R Summicron and the little 75-150 zoom is just about the best most versatile lens this small on the market and can be had for close to $100. All that said I consigned my Olympus stuff last year and still receive a check every now and then. I miss it but have replaced it with R4, 4S and 28 thru 180 lenses, and Canon EOS. You can really only use so much stuff and I still have way more than I can use with a day job.

Regards.

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), November 15, 2001.

I've got an F100 with several prime lenses as my SLR component to my M6. I've seen and handled the new FM3A and I'm impressed with it.

What do you folks think about me off loading my F100 for the FM3A? I like the idea of both my systems (SLR and M) being manual focusing, being battery independant, being similar in size and weight. I know with the FM3A, I would still get telephoto abilities, which is why I want to keep an SLR system.

But here are my concerns.

I never use the continuous shoot mode in my F100, but I'm afraid that once I dump it, I'll be looking for a motor winder for the FM3A. One of those, don't know what you got 'til it's gone.

Metering systems between the F100 and FM3A. One of the things I like about having my F100 is my ability to spot-meter in tough lighting situations and the 3D Color Matrix for an overall measure. I kind of use the F100 sometimes to check my M6 meter. Do you think I can still do that with an FM3A?

I don't want to get rid of my prime lenses. Although I don't use autofocus much (only when I have an off-camera flash in one hand), all my lenses are the current autofocus versions.

Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.

-- victor (danzfotog@yahoo.com), November 15, 2001.

"what other AF SLRs have the lens release button in the same location as the M, and same direction for mounting/dismounting?"

No guarantee on this, but, if my memory serves me well, the Minolta AF has similar spatial references to the M (focusing ring rotation, mounting, lens release). No aperture ring or speed dial though...

It is true that going from M to Nikon and vice-versa is very much like driving on the "wrong" side of the road after crossing the channel....

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), November 15, 2001.

If you want the tactile feel of manual lenses, you can pick up a few Nikkors that will work on your F5. If you don't need the features of the F5, you can sell it and buy an F100 which is much lighter and smaller and still accepts the manual lenses. The Contax SLR line is, according to people I've met in the camera biz, a very slow re- seller. If you were to get one I'd look for something used, as the depreciation hit on the new stuff is pretty steep. It is also worth questioning how long the MM-mount Contaxes might stay in production.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), November 15, 2001.

1) The only knock on the FM3A is the dame FE-style meter needle, that disappears as soon as you get into low light. Main reason I'll never buy one.

2) I used Contax SLRs extensively prior moving to Leica-M via the G2. They really are the pinnacle (IMHO) of manual-focus SLR design. I think the best of the lot as a compromise between weight, features, controls, price etc. is the RX (just turn off the "useless" focus confirmation). The Aria is one of the best feeling plastic bodies around, but too light for anything longer than 85mm - the balance gets really awkward. The RTS is top-of-the-line, but is REALLY heavy - heavier than some medium format bodies.

The AX really is a kludge - the AF is slow and actually LIMITS your focusing range with anything longer than 85mm - and it actually makes an R8 feel small and light by comparison (!) Stick two M6 bodies back- to-front and try to hold both at once in your right hand - that's about how thick the AX body is! To carry all that around for OCCASIONAL use of the NSG autofocus (!) when you can get identical features (minus AF) in the RX at 70% of the weight and size....

The lens line is very limited at the long end, but they are generally very well-built metal lens mounts. equal to, but different from Leica-R mounts. The Zeiss glass runs a little red compared to Leica/Leitz. Also note that many of the Zeiss lens designs are the same ones they were making for the Contarex in the late '60's (18,25,85's,135,300 f/4) and they show their age now, although they are outstanding (esp. in contrast/clarity) by the standards of their time.

Aside from color differences, the 85 f/1.4 is in the running with the Leica 75/80 'luxes - the 135 and 28 f/2.8s are exceptional and quite inexpensive (the 135 M-lenses f/3.4 or 4 may be better, but not the Leica 135 2.8's). The 25 is so-so: contrasty, but not as sharp as any Leica 21/24. The 50 f/1.4 runs neck-and neck with the 50 f/1.4 Summilux-R for sharpness, but is a little hot for contrast. Duds (IMHO) the 18 (lots o' fall-off, not too sharp); the 180 and 300 (lot's of chromatic aberration/color fringing (no ED glass)) - the comparable Nikkors are much cleaner image-makers. The best Zeiss/Contax tele is the 100-300 f/5.6 zoom - essentially an APO lens - the best for sharpness/contrast I've ever seen, and about 1/2 the weight of the 105- 280 Leica-R, but a little slow and dark for focusing. It handily beat a Nikkor 300 f/4 AF and Leica 250 f/4 (last version) in the one test I did of all three.

3) For a pure match of feel, the Leicaflex does come close. I held one the other day for the first time in years. But if you're used to motor- wind, it can be very difficult to find a working motor and keep it working.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 15, 2001.

1. AFAIK Nikon still makes and sells a full line of MF (AIS) lenses. If your wallet's fat, you don't have to hunt the used market for mint examples.

2. If you find the new FM3a's finder a bit short on eye relief, B&H is still selling new F3HP bodies, both USA and grey market........

-- david kelly (dmkedit@aol.com), November 15, 2001.

While I was glad to provide the Contax info, the more I think about it, you could do worse than buy a few manual-focus Nikon primes, keeping some/all the AF lenses for "when you need AF." Some recommendations that will be right up in the Contax/Leica ballpark in sharpness: 20 f/ 2.8 AIS, 28 f/2.8 AIS, 180 ED f/2.8 (actually a tad better then the AF dead center at 2.8), older 85 f/1.8 in AI mount (it beats the newer f/2 wide open), 55 Micro-Nikkor 3.5/2.8.

I switched to Contax to get bodies with real dialsand knobs on them - but I had no interest in AF whatsoever.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 15, 2001.

I heartily endorse Andy's suggestion above, and his lens choices are similar to mine. I do have an 85/2.0 that I'm very happy with, though.

For an M-like Nikon body I really prefer the F3HP. I have an FE2, and I don't like it as much because it feels a bit light and the eye relief is too long. Unlike others, I love the FE2's match-needle metering system (compared to the FM2 or the F3) because it shows you how far off your settings are.

I just love the solidity of the F3, though.

-- Paul Chefurka (chefurka@home.com), November 15, 2001.

>>>Some recommendations that will be right up in the Contax/Leica ballpark in sharpness: 20 f/ 2.8 AIS, 28 f/2.8 AIS, 180 ED f/2.8 (actually a tad better then the AF dead center at 2.8), older 85 f/1.8 in AI mount (it beats the newer f/2 wide open), 55 Micro-Nikkor 3.5/2.8. <<<

My experience with the 85 f/1.8 and the 55 Micros suggests optical quality isn't quite up to the Leica R standard, at least in the flare/color quality department. The tactile feel isn't there either. They're fine lenses but not up to Leica standards.

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), November 15, 2001.

Well, you could do this:

ping!

and have a Nikon SLR body which uses Leica R lenses. If it works with an F2, it should work with an F3.

-- john costo (mahler@lvcm.com), November 15, 2001.

One last Contax-related item, since I brought them up.

I have never had an autoexposure system that gave me results as good as did the Contax auto-bracketing system (included on all their cameras at least for the last decade.) One of the slides was always dead on.

But it does eat film. And since it's completely alien to the all-manual Leica ethic, I'll leave it at that.

Marke: in closing, I think you have two contradictory needs. Except for the AX, autofocus cameras HAVE to have light flimsy plastic lenses wherever possible - the AF motors can't handle moving heavy amounts of glass. If you want tactile MF lenses, they pretty much go with tactile MF only bodies.

I think the discussion here has covered most of your options - you may have been right in picking the Contax AX since it IS about the only option that really offers both - But it's still a handful.

Let us know how it turns out.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 15, 2001.

Without doubt, the best SLR to compliment Leica M are Leica R, same workmanship and next to none optics

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), November 17, 2001.

The perfect SLR compliment to the Leica M is a Hasselblad.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), November 17, 2001.

I second what Martin says. I gave my M6 outfit to my son when my glasses got in the way and now use R7 and R8. The R8 is closest to my M in many ways, even though it is heavier than I would like, the quality feel is there. It just feels like a Leica. I switched to Leica from a Nikon F2 years ago and never looked back.

-- Ivor Quaggin (iquaggin@home.com), November 17, 2001.