I am a fan of Contax cameras. The Aria usually sells at a premium, but I saw one at a more reasonable price a couple of years ago so I snapped it up.
For what its worth my thoughts on the Aria pros and cons:
Pros:
- Viewfinder is superb. Excellent focussing screen, Perfect tradeoff between eye relief and magnification. Intuitive and easily legible exposure information.
- In-built motor is fast and quiet.
- matrix metering is a nice to have feature, but not sure how much difference this makes if not shooting slide film.
- very compact and light. With the 45mm f2.8 the camera balances nicely and is not much bigger than many ‘point and shoot’ cameras.
- The mirror mounting frame looks like it has a corner trapping design that would stop the sliding mirror problem that affects all other Contax cameras. This was the last Contax SLR made. Posts on forums suggest that it is only Contax camera that doesn’t have the sliding mirror problem.
Cons:
- The CR2 batteries do not seem to last particularly long.
- The build quality is not anything special (mostly plastic to save weight).
- The camera is so light that it becomes front-heavy with most Contax prime lenses (for example I have found it poorly balanced with 50mm f1.4, 28mm f2.8 and 85mm f2.8).
In summary, a great camera to treat as a compact ‘point and shoot’ with the 45mm f2.8. For using other lenses I would lean towards other Contax cameras. My favourite is the RX, which has an F4-like feel to it, without the extreme weight. The RX has a whisper quiet shutter/motor, and sufficient weight to feel nicely balanced with most Contax primes.
andrewd01 wrote:
For what its worth my thoughts on the Aria pros and cons:
... This was the last Contax SLR made. ...
Probably for most markets, the Aria was the last Contax/Yashica SLR available. In the Japanese market, the RX II was released several years later. Other than being available new, it could also be ordered with factory-custom skins in various attractive colors. As for other Contax-branded SLRs, the 645 (medium format) and the N line (AF) were available until Kyocera shut it all down.
I agree that the Aria is super user-friendly with its low weight and simple operation. It also offered a databack which I still have in an unopened box. Contax fanatics are like that.
tile_86 wrote:
Beautiful collection!! What two would you pare down to?
The Mamiya and the Leica. I just love the rendering of the lenses and ease of use of the Aria and Konica but they are less versatile so I suppose I could do without them.
andrewd01 wrote:
I am a fan of Contax cameras. The Aria usually sells at a premium, but I saw one at a more reasonable price a couple of years ago so I snapped it up.
For what its worth my thoughts on the Aria pros and cons:
Pros:
- Viewfinder is superb. Excellent focussing screen, Perfect tradeoff between eye relief and magnification. Intuitive and easily legible exposure information.
- In-built motor is fast and quiet.
- matrix metering is a nice to have feature, but not sure how much difference this makes if not shooting slide film.
- very compact and light. With the 45mm f2.8 the camera balances nicely and is not much bigger than many ‘point and shoot’ cameras.
- The mirror mounting frame looks like it has a corner trapping design that would stop the sliding mirror problem that affects all other Contax cameras. This was the last Contax SLR made. Posts on forums suggest that it is only Contax camera that doesn’t have the sliding mirror problem.
Cons:
- The CR2 batteries do not seem to last particularly long.
- The build quality is not anything special (mostly plastic to save weight).
- The camera is so light that it becomes front-heavy with most Contax prime lenses (for example I have found it poorly balanced with 50mm f1.4, 28mm f2.8 and 85mm f2.8).
In summary, a great camera to treat as a compact ‘point and shoot’ with the 45mm f2.8. For using other lenses I would lean towards other Contax cameras. My favourite is the RX, which has an F4-like feel to it, without the extreme weight. The RX has a whisper quiet shutter/motor, and sufficient weight to feel nicely balanced with most Contax primes. ...Show more →
The Aria hits the sweet spot for me because of its size even though it has downsides that other Contax SLRs don't have. For instance the 139Q is smaller and all metal so feels better to use and it has a brighter viewfinder but I kept getting light leaks on my particular camera. The 167MT is really nice, viewfinder much bigger than the Aria and the exposure readout on the top is very useful to have for me, but that is super paparazzi loud when the shutter goes off.
Despite all that, the only reason I use Contax at all is because that lens is just what I'm looking for. First time I loaded up the scans I said to myself, "this is it." Not sure what it is. I really need to get the 50mm f1.7 as I'm sure it will have the same wow factor.
damonnomonon wrote:
The Mamiya and the Leica. I just love the rendering of the lenses and ease of use of the Aria and Konica but they are less versatile so I suppose I could do without them.
The Mamiya and the Leica would be a great combo, they're really rad cameras. For the Aria and Konica I get the thing of technically being able to do without a camera, but I think as long as they still bring you joy/offer something it's definitely worth holding onto them. Plus, 5 cameras is a very reasonable number to have, lol.
I took the GW670 out and shot a roll. It's easy to focus and didn't mind the weight all that much. I'm not sure but I may have a light leak or just poor development. I posted a couple in the post your recent shot thread.
damonnomonon wrote:
The Mamiya and the Leica. I just love the rendering of the lenses and ease of use of the Aria and Konica but they are less versatile so I suppose I could do without them.
@damonnomonon I've never tried a Leica, but am curious: how slow are you able shoot handheld and still get a sharp image? The reason I ask is I picked up a Mamiya 6 recently, and have found that I'm able to shoot at 1/30 and still get a sharp shot. On film, I'd only previously used Nikon SLRs, and never was able to shoot slower than 1/60 handheld. The lack of mirror slapping in a rangefinder is making me wonder about the Leica.
Cloud75 wrote:
@damonnomonon@ I've never tried a Leica, but am curious: how slow are you able shoot handheld and still get a sharp image? The reason I ask is I picked up a Mamiya 6 recently, and have found that I'm able to shoot at 1/30 and still get a sharp shot. On film, I'd only previously used Nikon SLRs, and never was able to shoot slower than 1/60 handheld. The lack of mirror slapping in a rangefinder is making me wonder about the Leica.
In my experience it's around 1/8th-ish with a 35mm lens.
tile_86 wrote:
In my experience it's around 1/8th-ish with a 35mm lens.
For me 1/15th and of course using the correct technique.
My recent acquisition of a gorgeous OhMm2n was a wake up call w how slow I can hand hold an SLR. I guess I got sloppy/spoiled from using Leicas because I was getting shaky pics w the Olympus at 1/30. Getting sharp images at 1/30 would be a breeze with a Leica M.
