Q: venture into Contax SLRs
Sam HK Chiang
I have been interested in the Contax line of SLR recently mainly
because of its T* Zeiss lenses. I am very interested in RTS II
because I want a manual focus SLR w/ excellent fixed prisms, a 100%
and bright/easy-to-focus viewfinder (I do my own prints in negative
film or I shot slide film) and a fast X-sync speed. I am also
interested in 159MM because of its good reputation and fast
sync speed. I am not a pro. and my work mainly centers
on family candit shots, portraits, and vacation landscape. I only
shot 50 rolls of films per year. Currently we have Canon EOS
Rebel/ElanII/A2, Canon 28-105 USM, Sigma 70-210 APO, Canon 300 f/4 L,
and Mamiay RB Pro S system. Notice that I use zoom lenses mostly in
AF SLR while prisms in Mamiya and possible Contax.
Questions:
1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II? My information
is incomplete (I have searched the whole web for a week already and
found many interesting posts by Marc, Qi, Alex and others, and even
a Contax vs Leica thread).
2. RTS II is what I want but I might want to try 159MM first. Is
this a good choice or I should go for RTS II directly?
3. What's the main differences between a AE and MM lens except the
MM allows you to use program mode in later bodies? Also, there are
quite a few old lenses made in German. Which is good ?
3. I'll buy a brand new 135 f/2.8MM from CWO or B&H as my first lens.
Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
models are fine.
Appreciate your time in helping me out.
Sam.
--
+------------------------------------+
Computer Science Dept.
U. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
chi...@cs.uiuc.edu
qi bao
Sam HK Chiang wrote:
> Questions:
> 1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II? My information
> is incomplete (I have searched the whole web for a week already and
> found many interesting posts by Marc, Qi, Alex and others, and even
> a Contax vs Leica thread).
RTSII 159MM
Construction all metal metal chassis
plastic top and
front covers
Viewfinder 97% coverage 95% coverage
Focusing screen interchangable dealer interchangable
Shutter horizontal titanium vertical aluminium
Shutter speeds up to 1/2000 up to 1/4000
Sync speed 1/100 TTL 1/250 TTL
Mechanical shutter 1/60 n/a
Multiple exposure yes yes
DOF preview yes yes
Motor winder up to 3 fs up to 3fs
Motor drive up to 5 fs n/a
AE Lock yes yes
Metering mode centre-weighted centre-weighted
Exposure modes aperture priority aperture priority
manual 3 programme modes
manual
External power source yes n/a
ease of use 7/10 9/10
operation noise low medium/high (winder)
These are the major differences between these two cameras which I think
are important in chossing one of them. If you are interested in
obtaining detailed specifications for both of them, I can fax them to
you if you post your fax number to me.
> 2. RTS II is what I want but I might want to try 159MM first. Is
> this a good choice or I should go for RTS II directly?
RTSII on the whole is not as intuitive to use as you would find with a
159mm particularly for someone who just switched brand a separate
metering activation button on the RTSII takes a lot of getting used to
and quite a few wasted shots. But on the other hand, RTSII being a
professional calibre machine is much better constructed and the feel of
rugged precision will certainly instill a degree of confidence in the
photographer. The manual winding lever on the RTSII is also not as
slick as that on the 159mm. To answer your question, it doesn't really
matter which one you should get hold of first as long as you are
prepared to spend a little time to familiarise yourself with the Contax
operating logic.
> 3. What's the main differences between a AE and MM lens except the
> MM allows you to use program mode in later bodies? Also, there are
> quite a few old lenses made in German. Which is good ?
No other differences really between these two types other than the one
you already mentioned (shutter priority is also enabled with MM type on
the right camera). RTSII does not differentiate AE and MM incidentally.
There have been many opposing views on the quality of German vs Japanese
made Zeiss lenses for Contax. IMHO, the very early lenses, most of them
made in Germany with all-black lens mount, tend to show signs of wears
and tear more readily than the more recent versions (most of them were
made in Japan) either with a chrome rim at the very rear of the lens
mount or an all stainless steel mount for selected lenses (like 60mm
macro and 180 Sonnar). I have no preference to one over the other in the
optical department. They are equally excellent.
> 3. I'll buy a brand new 135 f/2.8MM from CWO or B&H as my first lens.
> Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
> models are fine.
That's a tricky one to answer really having no idea how much of a
spending spree you're gonna let yourself indulge in for your new-found
Contax joy. If I were you, having acquired a 135/2.8, I would go next
for something like a 25/2.8 followed by a 60/2.8 followed by a 85/1.4
followed by 80-200/4 or 100-300/4.5-5.6 (where saness ends) followed by
a 18/4 or 21/2.8 followed by 35/1.4 or 35/2.8 PC followed by a 55/1.2
followed a 100/2 or 100/2.8 followed by a 200/2 followed by a divorce
followed by a 300/2.8 followed by selling the house followed by a
1000/5.6.
Seriously, the 180/2.8 is an odd one out. Its performance (not a lot
better than the 80-200/4 at equivalent focal length IMO) and handling
(long and heavy focusing action and lack of IF) at that price never
managed to sway me towards it. Maybe Marc Hanke can give you a more
objective view on this one.
> Appreciate your time in helping me out.
you call showing you to the poor house fast helping you out?
cheers
qb
Kevin Hecht
chi...@cs.uiuc.edu (Sam HK Chiang) wrote:
>
>
>I have been interested in the Contax line of SLR recently mainly
>because of its T* Zeiss lenses. I am very interested in RTS II
>because I want a manual focus SLR w/ excellent fixed prisms, a 100%
>and bright/easy-to-focus viewfinder (I do my own prints in negative
>film or I shot slide film) and a fast X-sync speed. I am also
>interested in 159MM because of its good reputation and fast
>sync speed. I am not a pro. and my work mainly centers
>on family candit shots, portraits, and vacation landscape. I only
>shot 50 rolls of films per year. Currently we have Canon EOS
>Rebel/ElanII/A2, Canon 28-105 USM, Sigma 70-210 APO, Canon 300 f/4 L,
>and Mamiay RB Pro S system. Notice that I use zoom lenses mostly in
>AF SLR while prisms in Mamiya and possible Contax.
>
>1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II?
100% viewfinder.
>2. RTS II is what I want but I might want to try 159MM first. Is
> this a good choice or I should go for RTS II directly?
These are two different cameras. Try to check each out before buying.
The 159 is compact in comparison.
>3. What's the main differences between a AE and MM lens except the
> MM allows you to use program mode in later bodies? Also, there are
> quite a few old lenses made in German. Which is good ?
MM allows for shutter priority/program modes. The smallest aperture is
green on the aperture ring.
>3. I'll buy a brand new 135 f/2.8MM from CWO or B&H as my first lens.
> Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
> models are fine.
WELL having both a 28mm and 35mm -- the 35mm gets a lot more usage. My
80-200 f4 is also used quite a bit. My 50 f1.4 isn't used very much, and
is my 'closeup' lens until I buy a macro. Just bought a 35-70 zoom, and
don't have an opinion yet. (this will be my standard lens for a
lightweight setup). Can't justify the cost of a Zeiss superwide, and I'm
using a Tokina 17mm -- actually use this more than I thought possible, so
I may go for a 21mm T*. The 85mm 1.4 will probably be my next purchase,
and I'm curious about the 100-300 as well as a macro.
As mentioned by qi, this can get out of hand very fast. Use your
judgement, and you will be pleased with either the 35mm or 28mm f2.8 -
and both are
relatively inexpensive.
Kevin.
>
>Appreciate your time in helping me out.
>
Sam HK Chiang
qi bao <q-...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk> writes:
hi qi,
Thanks for your helpful followup. If there is a web site w/ Contax FAQ
that will be great!
>prepared to spend a little time to familiarise yourself with the Contax
>operating logic.
I'll try. You know what? I couldn't quite imagine I would go
from my manual foucs Nikon FG20 to auto-focus EOSs and then
back to manual focus Mamiya RB Pro S. Getting used to Mamiya
RB takes a little time but I found it's nature now. My
interest in Contax is for still life, protraits and landscape. For
actions and candid shots, I'll stick with my AF EOSs. I am NOT
switching to a new system. Instead I am acquiring a new system for
different purpose.
I only plan to buy 5 T* lenses in a near future. A wide angle (21 or 25),
a standard lens (50 f/1.4), a short portrait (85 f/1.4), a long portrait
(135 f/2.8) and a telephoto (180 f/2.8). I consult w/ my wife on
*almost* every purchase, and she is pretty supportive (no way to divoice,
grin..). After your comments, I might as well drop out 180 f/2.8.
>Seriously, the 180/2.8 is an odd one out. Its performance (not a lot
>better than the 80-200/4 at equivalent focal length IMO) and handling
>(long and heavy focusing action and lack of IF) at that price never
>managed to sway me towards it. Maybe Marc Hanke can give you a more
>objective view on this one.
One poster (is that you?) said the 80-200 f/4 is worser than his
EOS 80-200 f/2.8. Now you said 180 f/2.8 might not be as good as
80-f200 f/2.8 in equivalent focal length. I thought it's a very
good lnes since it got 5 star (*****) from Chasseur d'Image.
Marc, can you comment on this?
>you call showing you to the poor house fast helping you out?
Well said. It's better to know the neg. first!
Marcus Hanke
In article <58ja41$a...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> chi...@cs.uiuc.edu (Sam HK Chiang) writes:
>From: chi...@cs.uiuc.edu (Sam HK Chiang)
>Subject: Q: venture into Contax SLRs
>Date: 10 Dec 1996 09:22:09 GMT
>I have been interested in the Contax line of SLR recently mainly
>because of its T* Zeiss lenses. I am very interested in RTS II
>because I want a manual focus SLR w/ excellent fixed prisms, a 100%
>and bright/easy-to-focus viewfinder (I do my own prints in negative
>film or I shot slide film) and a fast X-sync speed. I am also
>interested in 159MM because of its good reputation and fast
>sync speed. I am not a pro. and my work mainly centers
>on family candit shots, portraits, and vacation landscape. I only
>shot 50 rolls of films per year. Currently we have Canon EOS
>Rebel/ElanII/A2, Canon 28-105 USM, Sigma 70-210 APO, Canon 300 f/4 L,
>and Mamiay RB Pro S system. Notice that I use zoom lenses mostly in
>AF SLR while prisms in Mamiya and possible Contax.
>Questions:
>1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II? My information
> is incomplete (I have searched the whole web for a week already and
> found many interesting posts by Marc, Qi, Alex and others, and even
> a Contax vs Leica thread).
>2. RTS II is what I want but I might want to try 159MM first. Is
> this a good choice or I should go for RTS II directly?
>3. What's the main differences between a AE and MM lens except the
> MM allows you to use program mode in later bodies? Also, there are
> quite a few old lenses made in German. Which is good ?
>3. I'll buy a brand new 135 f/2.8MM from CWO or B&H as my first lens.
> Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
> models are fine.
>Appreciate your time in helping me out.
>Sam.
Dear Sam,
there more or less is nothing left to add to qb's elaborate answer except the
address of a good lawyer who can help you save enough money after your
Contax-related divorce to buy another lens.
But after having read your personal photographic preferences I would like to
make an alternative proposal:
Did you look at the Contax 167MT? It was the following model of the 159MM and
offers some fine goodies: Integrated winder with 3 frames/sec. (IMO more
silent than that of the ST and RX), spot metering,
automatic-bracketing-control (ABC). You can change the viewfinder screens
yourself. The material quality is good, it is compact (I use it as an
everydays camera in my briefcase together with the ultra-compact Tessar
2.8/45mm) and not expensive, especially when bought used.
The only drawback are the ergonomics. Kyocera tried to jump on the
LCD-display-button-control-train with that camera, and it is next to
impossible to change shutter time or automatic modes in winter with gloves on.
I personally would prefer the 167 to the other bodies you quoted.
What concerns the lenses you want to buy, the 135/2.8 is a very fine starting
point, it is an ideal lens for shooting portraits and street candids (I think
Walrus will agree). A nice lens to combine it with would be a Vario-Sonnar
3.3-4.0/28-85mm or a 3.4/35-70 together with a 2.8/25mm wideangle. The 28-85
is bulky, but less heavy than a combination of a 35-70 with another lens. And
far cheaper.
Try to find the lenses on the used market, if in excellent condition you can
still save a lot on the price of a new one. I personally would rather buy the
camera new with full warranty and used lenses. The sophisticated electronics
and mechanics of a camera are more likely to cause problems than the optics.
Greetings,
Marcus
Paul van Walree
In <58l0fk$o...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> chi...@cs.uiuc.edu (Sam HK Chiang) writes:
>qi bao <q-...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk> writes:
>I only plan to buy 5 T* lenses in a near future. A wide angle (21 or 25),
>a standard lens (50 f/1.4), a short portrait (85 f/1.4), a long portrait
>(135 f/2.8) and a telephoto (180 f/2.8). I consult w/ my wife on
>*almost* every purchase, and she is pretty supportive (no way to divoice,
>grin..). After your comments, I might as well drop out 180 f/2.8.
Be careful. I presume the negative comments on the 180/2.8 are based
upon the experiences with one single lens and the interpretation of
one person.
>>Seriously, the 180/2.8 is an odd one out. Its performance (not a lot
>>better than the 80-200/4 at equivalent focal length IMO) and handling
>>(long and heavy focusing action and lack of IF) at that price never
>>managed to sway me towards it. Maybe Marc Hanke can give you a more
>>objective view on this one.
That is a good idea. I am confident that Marcus will join the
discussion.
From my own experience, I would say that the 135/2.8 Sonnar
is a truly wonderful piece of glas, and a very good choice
to start your collection with. I carry 28/2.8, 50/1.4, and
135/2.8 with me all the time, but 75% of my shots are with
the 135/2.8. Candids and portraits are two of my favourite
subjects, and there would be no better choice for me than
this lens. It also combines very well with extension rings,
as does a Sonnar type lens in general (it is my experience
that the Sonnar is much better suited for macro work than
the Planar.)
Finnaly, I must tell you that as far as I know, the
Contax 159MM is not good at all. I have been told
by a Contax dealer that this camera was taken off
the market because there were severe problems, in particular
with the electronics.
However, this is just what I have been told. I am sure that
there are people around who have positive experiences with
the 159MM.
>Sam.
Walrus
qi bao
Sam HK Chiang wrote:
> Thanks for your helpful followup. If there is a web site w/ Contax FAQ that will be great!
Not I am aware of. Marcus has been calling for a contax FAQ for some
time now and if I recall correctly he's already got a rather complete
FAQs ready to go. It looks he has spent all his money on his beloved
CZ lenses that its gonna be quite a while before a state-of-the-art
network computer will be winging his way.
>For actions and candid shots, I'll stick with my AF EOSs. I am NOT
> switching to a new system. Instead I am acquiring a new system for
> different purpose.
I also use EOS mainly with zooms alongside my Contax. Indeed they are
complementary to each other.
> One poster (is that you?) said the 80-200 f/4 is worser than his
> EOS 80-200 f/2.8. Now you said 180 f/2.8 might not be as good as
> 80-f200 f/2.8 in equivalent focal length.
Yes, I did say in one of my previous posts that the EF80-200/2.8 is on
the whole a better lens optically than the Zeiss 4/80-200
vario-sonnar, especially in the performances at full open aperture. In
he mid-range apertures, however, one would really be hard pushed to
spot the edges in contrast and resolution the Canon might have over
the Zeiss under a 8x lupe. As I mentioned in my response to the lens
survey, the vario-sonnar is one of my favourite lenses and will remain
so until CZ brings out its 80-200/2.8 in 2025, allegedly. I pray it'll
be hand-holdable.
I wasn't saying the CZ 180/2.8 is worse than the vario-sonnar at
euivalent focal length. It IS in fact better, IMO, but the improvement
is too small for my money and nowhere near my expectation for a lens
of fixed focal length in this price bracket. Coupled with a heavy
handling, it never turned me on. Sorry.
>I thought it's a very
> good lnes since it got 5 star (*****) from Chasseur d'Image.
> Marc, can you comment on this?
I can also cite a few mag tests in which the CZ 180/2.8 was at best
rated slightly above average.
A pinch of salt to them all including mine.
Don't let my comments put you off the this lens, which is not a bad
lens at all. Have some hand-on feelings about it or even better take a
few test shots. Who knows it might end up being one of your darling
lenses!
>
> >you call showing you to the poor house fast helping you out?
>
> Well said. It's better to know the neg. first!
>
> Sam.
cheers
qb
Mike Rott
In article <walree.8...@ruunat.fys.ruu.nl>, wal...@fys.ruu.nl (Paul
van Walree) wrote:
(it is my experience
> that the Sonnar is much better suited for macro work than
> the Planar.)
Do you really mean that the 135/2.8 sonnar is better at macro work than
the 60/2.8 makro planar or the 100/2.8 makro planar? I have never used the
135 sonnar but I have used both planars, somehow I doubt this.
mike
Quentin Bargate
Zeiss zooms are excellent, but they're still zooms, and
inevitably involve some compromise when compared to
fixed focal lengths. I once owned the 35-135 vario-
sonnar, which was outstandingly sharp, but bulky. imho,
to realise the full potential of Zeiss lenses, it is
best to go for their fixed focal lengths.
I have a thing for fast lenses, and have recently
acquired a Zeiss 100mm F2 (replacing an old Yashica
100mm F3.5 macro for portrait & mid-tele work) and a
Zeiss 35mm F1.4 (replacing a F2.8). As it is still
early days for me with these latest acquisitions, I
would appreciate other users comments. My current lens
lineup is completed with a 25mm F2.8.
If money was no object, I'd love the 15mm...
--
Quentin Bargate
q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk
Axrd
>>Did you look at the Contax 167MT? It was
>>the following model of the 159MM and
>>offers some fine goodies: Integrated winder
>>with 3 frames/sec. (IMO more silent than
>>that of the ST and RX)
It is with great trepidation that I contradict Marcus on the subject of
Contax cameras: I tried out the 167MT before opting for the RX. There's
no way the 167MT is quieter. In fact, I found the noise to be one of it's
few detrements. (The other being its funky sliding bar which sets the
shutter speed.)
But, the 167MT is the only way to go if you don't want to spend over 1000
USD on a new Contax camera body.
Paul van Walree
In <rott-11129...@mc26157.mpib-tuebingen.mpg.de
>ro...@mailer.mpib-tuebingen.mpg.de (Mike Rott) writes:
No, I am sorry for this confusion. I meant to say that the 2.8/135 Sonnar
combines better with extension rings than the regular Planars such as
the 1.4/50, 1.7/50, ot the 1.4/85. I never tried a genuine Macro Planar,
but I may hope that it outperforms any other lens used with extension
rings.
>mike
Walrus
Marcus Hanke
In article <MPG.d191c4fa...@news.prestel.co.uk> q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk (Quentin Bargate) writes:
>From: q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk (Quentin Bargate)
>Subject: Re: Q: venture into Contax SLRs
>Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 19:32:29 -0000
I own the 1.4/35 and love it. Besides the 2.8/45mm it is more or less my
standard lens. It seems to be sharp and I like its color reproduction even at
widest aperture. You can recognize the benefits of an aspheric element under
those circumstances!
I am also dreaming of the 15mm. I bought the new 2.8/21mm which I consider
being the best Zeiss lens I currently own (35/1.4, 45/2.8, 85/1.4, 180/2.8 and
Mutar II being the others), but for architecture and scale model photography I
would prefer something more extreme. The 18mm offers not enough difference to
the 21mm to be attractive for me.
I could have bought a very well preserved 15mm once, but 3.500 D-Marks were
too much for me.
Greetings,
Marcus
Alan Ball
Paul van Walree <wal...@fys.ruu.nl> wrote in article
> there are people around who have positive experiences with
> the 159MM.
I have. It is very compact, light and sports perfect ergonomy. It gives a
1/250 flash sync speed. Viewfinder info is very clear (big led read-out of
aperture) and simple. It works great. But I did have random problems with
aperture info remaining stuck at f5.6. Touching the coupling mechanism
fixed this and leads me to believe it is purely a question of maintenance.
I find it a little loud for a non-motorized camera compared to new
generation bodies. I would trade it in for a S2 if a good opportunity
should arise, but prefer it without hesitation to the 167MT.
Sampo Kolkki
qi bao <q-...@nimr.mrc.ac.uk> writes: > Sam HK Chiang wrote:
> > Questions:
> > 1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II? My information
> > is incomplete (I have searched the whole web for a week already and
> > found many interesting posts by Marc, Qi, Alex and others, and even
> > a Contax vs Leica thread).
>
> > this a good choice or I should go for RTS II directly?
>
> 159mm particularly for someone who just switched brand a separate
> metering activation button on the RTSII takes a lot of getting used to
> and quite a few wasted shots. But on the other hand, RTSII being a
> professional calibre machine is much better constructed and the feel of
> rugged precision will certainly instill a degree of confidence in the
> photographer. The manual winding lever on the RTSII is also not as
> slick as that on the 159mm. To answer your question, it doesn't really
> matter which one you should get hold of first as long as you are
> operating logic.
>
> > MM allows you to use program mode in later bodies? Also, there are
> > quite a few old lenses made in German. Which is good ?
>
> you already mentioned (shutter priority is also enabled with MM type on
> the right camera). RTSII does not differentiate AE and MM incidentally.
> There have been many opposing views on the quality of German vs Japanese
> made Zeiss lenses for Contax. IMHO, the very early lenses, most of them
> made in Germany with all-black lens mount, tend to show signs of wears
> and tear more readily than the more recent versions (most of them were
> made in Japan) either with a chrome rim at the very rear of the lens
> mount or an all stainless steel mount for selected lenses (like 60mm
> macro and 180 Sonnar). I have no preference to one over the other in the
> optical department. They are equally excellent.
>
> > Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
> > models are fine.
>
> spending spree you're gonna let yourself indulge in for your new-found
> Contax joy. If I were you, having acquired a 135/2.8, I would go next
> for something like a 25/2.8 followed by a 60/2.8 followed by a 85/1.4
> followed by 80-200/4 or 100-300/4.5-5.6 (where saness ends) followed by
> a 18/4 or 21/2.8 followed by 35/1.4 or 35/2.8 PC followed by a 55/1.2
> followed a 100/2 or 100/2.8 followed by a 200/2 followed by a divorce
>
I've had the 180 mm /2,8AE for about 8 years, and find it better than any
of the Contax Zooms I've tried.
Contax body can be fooled to think it had a MM-lens by having something to
push the lever on the out side of the lens mount. Some lenses have notch
set on different places. Does anyone know anything on this?
Sam
Lirpa
In article <58ja41$a...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, Sam HK Chiang (chi...@cs.uiuc.edu)
wrote...
>1. Can someone give me detailed specs of 159MM and RTS II?
RTS II 159MM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
titanium horizonatal steel vertical shutter
shutter
shutter speed 1/2000 sec to shutter speed 1/4000 sec to
16 sec. in auto mode 60 sec. in auto mode
single 1/60 sec mechanical no mechanical shutter speed(?)
speed.
Aperture priority and TTL Aperture priority, program and TTL
flash flash
97% picuture visible, eyepiece 95% picture visible
shutter
user interchangeable focus screens interchangeable focus screens (requires
camera to be sent to service center)
mirror lock n/a
body weighs 735 grams body weighs 520 grams
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both offer AE lock, external motor drives, multiple exposure capability,
interchangeable camera backs, and exposure compensation dial in 1/2 stop
steps.
>3. I'll buy a brand new 135 f/2.8MM from CWO or B&H as my first lens.
> Can someone recommend other lenses for 20-25mm, 85mm, 180mm? AE
> models are fine.
Get the 100 mm f/2 instead (if it is still available), it was reputed to be
one of the, if not THE, sharpest lens in 35 mm photography.
Quentin Bargate
> ...Get the 100 mm f/2 instead (if it is still available), it was reputed to be
> one of the, if not THE, sharpest lens in 35 mm photography...
I was not aware they had stopped making the 100mm F2. I
recently bought one (AE, German, mint) second - hand,
and have been impressed with it so far.
--
Quentin Bargate
q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk
Marcus Hanke
In article <MPG.d2285b27...@news.prestel.co.uk> q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk (Quentin Bargate) writes:
>From: q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk (Quentin Bargate)
>Subject: Re: Q: venture into Contax SLRs
>--
>Quentin Bargate
>q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk
Not the 2.0/100mm is still produced and there is no information it being
discontinued.
Marcus