Is it worth buying a Contax RX?

[wilsonlaidlaw1]

Some two years ago when various of the children had walked off with my Yashicas and my 139Q was reaching the stage when it should become a spare body rather than the main tool, I decided to buy an RX. This is a decision I have never regretted for a moment since. The five main USP's which attracted me to the RX were: 1) The ability to use my various CZ lenses 2) The all metal construction 3) The digital focus assist 4) The DOF indication in the viewfinder and 5) the very quiet, well d&ed mirror action. From recent posts, it would seem that the RXII has deleted items 2 and 4 and downgraded item 5. Simultaneously the price seems to have gone up by about EUR 200. Overall, if this is true, it sounds like an attack of the cost accountants and should, therefore, deserve to succeed as well as all such ventures. It is now the third most expensive 35mm SLR after the RTSIII and Leica R8/9, with little to recommend it other than CZ lenses and the digital focus assist. Do I think they will sell many - no. The only upside is that it will probably increase the value of secondhand RX 1 cameras. Wilson

 

[swoolf]

Overall, if this is> true, it sounds like an attack of the cost accountants and should,> therefore, deserve to succeed as well as all such ventures

To be fair , Kyocera were no longer able to source the components for the digital focus assist , and that is why the RX2 came about in the first place . Other than that it is supposed to be much the same camera - also , on other lists many users have said they never bothered with the DFI anyway....... Steve

 

[jerzy]

I don't use DFI as a focus assist, but quite often I use "depth of field scale" - which is helpful. Sometimes view darkened by "normal" depth-of-field button is simply too dark for me.
Buying an RX was a very good decision for me!

Jerzy

 

[kgardas]

> The five main USP's which attracted me to the RX were: 1) The ability to > use my various CZ lenses 2) The all metal construction 3) The digital > focus assist 4) The DOF indication in the viewfinder and 5) the very > quiet, well d&ed mirror action. From recent posts, it would seem that > the RXII has deleted items 2 and 4 and downgraded item 5. Simultaneously > the price seems to have gone up by about EUR 200. Overall, if this is > true, it sounds like an attack of the cost accountants and should, > therefore, deserve to succeed as well as all such ventures.

Wilson,

reading RXII pressrelease, I've thought that even point 3 has gone. In addition I remember that the cost went down and not up as you think. I'm still curious about rumors that the RXII shutter is not the same as in the original RX, but is copied from Aria and so different with different sound level... Is there anybody here how owns both RXx bodies?

Cheers,

Karel

 

[lwang]

> I must agree with the previous posts supportive of the RX. The RX > has the most vibration-free shutter/mirror action (very important in > obtaining vibration-free photos) I have experienced in using various > manual focus SLR's over 30 years. My primary point of reference is > the Olympus OM series, which was notably compact - the slightly > heavier RX (versus flyweight OM-1 and OM-4) is a joy to use and > perfect for my style of shooting and exposure adjustment. > I meter exposure by leaving the camera on +1 exposure compensation > (on aperture or shutter priority auto-exposure) and then taking a > meter reading off the palm of the hand not holding the camera, then > lock exposure (using the exposure lock/on/off switch) with the index > finger of the hand holding the camera - very convenient/ergonomic to > do with the RX (and perhaps other Contax cameras as well, though I > recall reading that the exposure lock switch on the Aria feels > different and not necessarily better - I will leave Aria users to > provide comment in this regard. The Contax Y/C lenses I have used have been nothing short of spectacular!