Contax TVS vs Leica DLux

[fotografz]

All of the P&S digital cameras are pricey little toys that fund the coffers of the camera manufactures. They sport more gadgets and doodads per square inch than can be found in the space shuttle. Few if any are intuitive in use and require three rotations of the earth to set-up for a shot opportunity that happens in a nano-second. Depth of field is there and lots of it, whether you want it or not. Many are so noisy you want to put ear plugs in your eye sockets. Seriously good photographers can pull shots out of them, but they could do that with Kodak Instatamatic or a Polaroid sticker camera. In short, if you want your photos to look like Aunt Bob took them, get a P&S.

Me? After a Canon Digi-Elf, G3, G5, S-10, Contax TVSD and shooting with a friends Pano-Leica-Sonic Digiluxury 2X the price... I just went back to my little Leica M... you know, the one my Canon 1Ds shoulder crusher competes with for image quality.

 

[msadat]

DJ, the N digital is by no means a success rather a failure; there are many cameras on the market much better than the ND, one ex&le, and Nikon d1x is far superior to the ND and not just the canon 1ds.

Software (that was written by freshmen collage kids), power, no buffer,…..

I know, after paying 7k for such a beast, I had to go through the frustration of dealing with the short comings.

I was talking to the contax Japanese contingent @ PMA and he said our goal is make cameras and lenses better than canon/Nikon but it seems with the whole N series they have failed miserably


Overall contax is @ a cross road much the same Olympus was at the era of AF, they can not match canon or even Nikon in terms of R&D (even though they are a big co) and they are too slow for this age and market. My guess is they will concentrate on P&S mainly and no ND II for a long while

 

[msadat]

yes, i also stopped buying the P&S digital in favor of M

 

[djg]

Mehrdad,

A good friend of mine, arguably a better photographer, has a D1x and we have yet to see it make better images than my ND, although in many respects it's a better performing camera, especially if you need to reliably and consistently take action photographs.

The point some ND owners have made is that for many situations, the ND can take beautiful images in a very satisfying manner, once you understand and deal with the inherent shortcomings mentioned.

I know you were one of the early adopters and rightfully frustrated, so I can definitely commiserate. They did make some improvements I believe around the June-July 2002 timeframe, if I recall. I sort of cheated and came in later, after a few of you had started sorting it out, and was able to skip much of the growing pains

.

As you well put it, they are at a definite crossroad. Let's see what develops, if anything.

 

[msadat]

and i will hold on to my ND till there is a new one on the horizen. once you get past the fact that you got ripped off, it is an ok camera

 

[rico1]

Since we're all confessing, I also bought into Leica M. The depreciation of digital cameras is truly frightening - and I'm in the computer biz!

Part of any craft is working with your tools until they are second nature. Digital P&S cameras are not built to last, and cannot be repaired. Many times I want something smaller than my film and digital SLRs, but I also want a familiar friend, not "toy of the month".

Anyways, my M is 35 years old, had recent DAG CLA, and will last forever. Love those analog devices! I recently acquired a second RF, the venerable Contax T (160KB image): solid build, tiny, battery that runs forever. A digital P&S can only dream to be this much fun. I'm also confident about service and repair in the future.

 

[fotografz]

"My guess is they will concentrate on P&S mainly and no ND II for a long while"

Why not? This is the path to success demonstrated by all the other manufactures. As the infamous Willy Sutton quipped when asked why he robbed banks: "it's where the money is".

Mehrdad, If someone can't pull a better image out of a ND than a D1-X, someone doesn't know how to use the ND. I used a pair of D1-Xs for 2 years before going to Canon for full frame digital (which Nikon still doesn't have). The D1-X is a very nice camera, and I used the best ED glass, but image quality just wasn't as good as the ND/Zeiss combo by any stretch of the imagination.
Is the D1-X better in low light, faster, better flash system, better power supply? Yes. Image performance? No.

But why we thought the ND would be better than a N1 in the areas of focus and low light performance I don't know. It was the camera the ND was based upon.

Rico, for years I had a Leica SM made in 1932. It worked like a Swiss watch. If maintained, I'll bet it is still working ; -)

 

[rbudding]

Im staying on the sidelines with digital. My next camera will be a Contax IIIa. It is a camera that exceeds my capabilities and it will hold its value. MAybe I'll buy into digital after the technology matures - and a 20 MP full-frame 35 mm can be had for $1000.

 

[irakly]

Oh, I forgot to share something. I was talking to a Kyocera rep in Moscow the other week, and he told me that an official Kyocera policy now is not to come forward with another professional digitala camera before they they will have captured at least 5% of amateur digital P&S market. That's why they are spitting out these little toys like crazy.

 

[lotusm50_is_Jensen]

Why, will producing all those little toys help them produce a better ND? Or is that only with the revenue generate by these toys will they be able to justify and secure Kyocera R&D funds sufficient to produce it? If that is the strategy, it seems pretty arbitrary.

Is a functional NDII considered to be little more than a vanity product to Kyocera?

What happened to Kyocera's "committment" to Contax? Or is Contax little more them than another brand name they have to slap on a Kyocera product?