santino
FSU gear head
Really? I quoted those cameras because they usually have a metal piece at the bottom of the mirror that prevents it from slipping. Did your Aria‘s mirror hit the lens when set to infinity? The slipping mirror problem is real and it is actually a shame how Contax just mounted mirrors with double sided tape (even when it is an easy fix).
Freakscene
Obscure member
The Aria mirror sits in a plastic cradle. It can get out of alignment but it doesn’t slip like the other Contax SLRs.
It’s always amazing to me to see how many ‘repaired’ slipped mirrors are modified in a way that puts the mirror out of spec. I’ve bought several Contax SLRs that were out of focus at the film plane when in focus in the viewfinder.
And maybe different 167s work differently, but the 167MT I have uses the usual glued on mirror that can slip. The RTS versions can all slip. I had an AX briefly but never checked if its mirror was glued on; I suspect it was.
The Aria was designed to fix the mirror slip issue, but a fragile and poorly attached plastic cradle is hardly an ideal approach to securing the mirror given its velocity and critical role in focusing. I love the Contax SLRs to the point of total irrationality, but a failure prone, potentially unrepairable system is not what I would recommend for value, even if they are cheap and have some of the nicest lenses available to shoot with.
Last edited:
Ccoppola82
Well-known
In leica land the Mp240 has to be said. I grabbed a mint one for 2300. As far as price for performance overall, I have to throw one in for the Canon 1dx. There’s a bunch of them over at FM classified for 650-800$. For what that camera can do, it’s a STEAL. Shoots forever on a single battery, Good AF, 2 slots, high iso is better or equal to most current models, numerous cheap EF glass now, weather sealed and durable as all hell. Even the JPG is fantastic imho. Not sure if canon provided better Jpg for users of this camera because they needed to get the files to news sources or publication immediately? It would make sense. I have one for 2 years now and it goes where my Leicas fear to tread.
Tim Murphy
Well-known
+1 on the Canon 1DX. I bought one about 6 months ago. I put a lens on it and commenced firing to check it out. It focused fast and seemed to be working perfectly. When I checked the pictures on my computer, they were horribly noisy. I checked the EXIF data and they were shot at ISO 25600! They cleaned up surprisingly well with Nik Denoise. I would say they look better than shots taken at ISO 1600 did that were taken with a 40D using the same lens.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
Harrisburg PA
lxmike
M2 fan.
A few from me Nikon F801s, F90, Pentax MX
santino
FSU gear head
Yeah, got my F90 for 5 Euros. Despite the sticky back, a real jewel of japanese 90s photo gear.
MISH
Well-known
As someone who has spent the last thirty years chasing the Leica dream I can’t believe how affordable my recent purchases of a Nikon F2 and a Minolta SRT 102 has been. ( light meters not working but have a couple of real expensive Leicas that don’t even have one) The F2 is as solid a camera as I have ever held. I did a little price checking and in 1972 ( the year I graduated from high school) the F2 was a top of the line camera and the new price adjusted for inflation would be over four thousand dollars today and going the other direction what I paid for the used camera now would’ve equaled about $13.50 in 1972. What a deal. And wait, they are both black paint, the holy grail in Leica land and have great lenses and still only cost peanuts. I couldn’t be happier.
( for comparison my used M4 is worth about four times the new price and the used F2 cost me less than 1/4 of the new price)
( for comparison my used M4 is worth about four times the new price and the used F2 cost me less than 1/4 of the new price)
f.hayek
Well-known
You appear to regret your "chasing Leica". The prey of the pursuit significantly appreciated in value and if you choose to sell, top-dollar awaits.
Think if you'd done this all the other way around. Not so fun.
MISH
Well-known
Sorry if I sounded like I am having Leica regrets, that is not the case I started out with a Minolta hi-mastic and have always preferred rangefinder focusing, I love my Leicas but for a small admission price I am having fun playing around with something different. These cameras are kind of the anti Leica M, they are big with big lenses and loud shutters, definitely not discrete but the build quality is there and I think if you are looking for something affordable they would be hard to beat.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Hmm.
Film:
I paid $25 for each of my four Kodak Retina IIc cameras. Yes, I had each of them overhauled which cost about $140 on top of that, but even at ~$165 it's hard to imagine a better quality, better performing compact 35mm camera. The 35mm and 80mm lenses for them, along with the optical viewfinder required, cost another $100. And, without the accessory lenses, the IIc fits nicely in my jacket pocket or in my bicycling sling bag.
Similarly, after trying a whole bunch of different medium format cameras, the one I've kept and use the most is a Voigtländer Perkeo II which I bought for $80 and had serviced for $100. 6x6 format and about the same size as the Retina IIc folded. The clip-on Voigtländer rangefinder and Voigtländer Kontour viewfinder accessories were an additional $50, and I just picked up Yellow and Green filters for it for $12. Superb Color-Skopar lens and a perfect size for carrying...
Digital:
I don't like carrying SLRs much due to their bulk and weight, but I bought the Olympus E-1 body used in 2007 for $200, along with the 11-22mm, the 50-200mm, the 25mm, and the 35mm Macro f/3.5 lenses, all new ... I am still reluctant to part with it, it's my all time favorite DSLR, despite having many "better" DSLRs since. Despite having only 5Mpixel resolution and very slow write times, the E-1 has made photos that won me recognition three times in exhibitions, printed at 20x24" size. It's a superb body and the lenses are absolutely terrific. But a bit bulky.
My standard digital camera nowadays is a Leica M10, either Monochrom or -R variant. They bat much higher than their 35mm sized "FF" sensor and 40Mpixel might imply, the M10-M in particular makes B&W photographs on par with medium format digital equipment at twice to three times its price.
But the best deal today in a versatile, super compact digital camera is the Light L16, if you can deal with the limitations. It goes for $150-200 or so on Ebay, is the size of a big cell phone, and has a 28 to 150mm focal length capability with up to 50Mpixel+ resolution, depending on settings. It's not fast, and to get the most out of it you have to use its dedicated Lumen software (which doesn't run on latest macOS or Windows OS), but the quality it produces with the size and handiness has made it my most used travel camera in the digital world.
Light L16 Camera vs Keychain
Succulents - Redding, CT 2023
Pretty fun stuff.
enjoy, G
Film:
I paid $25 for each of my four Kodak Retina IIc cameras. Yes, I had each of them overhauled which cost about $140 on top of that, but even at ~$165 it's hard to imagine a better quality, better performing compact 35mm camera. The 35mm and 80mm lenses for them, along with the optical viewfinder required, cost another $100. And, without the accessory lenses, the IIc fits nicely in my jacket pocket or in my bicycling sling bag.
Similarly, after trying a whole bunch of different medium format cameras, the one I've kept and use the most is a Voigtländer Perkeo II which I bought for $80 and had serviced for $100. 6x6 format and about the same size as the Retina IIc folded. The clip-on Voigtländer rangefinder and Voigtländer Kontour viewfinder accessories were an additional $50, and I just picked up Yellow and Green filters for it for $12. Superb Color-Skopar lens and a perfect size for carrying...
Digital:
I don't like carrying SLRs much due to their bulk and weight, but I bought the Olympus E-1 body used in 2007 for $200, along with the 11-22mm, the 50-200mm, the 25mm, and the 35mm Macro f/3.5 lenses, all new ... I am still reluctant to part with it, it's my all time favorite DSLR, despite having many "better" DSLRs since. Despite having only 5Mpixel resolution and very slow write times, the E-1 has made photos that won me recognition three times in exhibitions, printed at 20x24" size. It's a superb body and the lenses are absolutely terrific. But a bit bulky.
My standard digital camera nowadays is a Leica M10, either Monochrom or -R variant. They bat much higher than their 35mm sized "FF" sensor and 40Mpixel might imply, the M10-M in particular makes B&W photographs on par with medium format digital equipment at twice to three times its price.
But the best deal today in a versatile, super compact digital camera is the Light L16, if you can deal with the limitations. It goes for $150-200 or so on Ebay, is the size of a big cell phone, and has a 28 to 150mm focal length capability with up to 50Mpixel+ resolution, depending on settings. It's not fast, and to get the most out of it you have to use its dedicated Lumen software (which doesn't run on latest macOS or Windows OS), but the quality it produces with the size and handiness has made it my most used travel camera in the digital world.
Light L16 Camera vs Keychain
Succulents - Redding, CT 2023
Pretty fun stuff.
enjoy, G
Deardorff38
Mentor
Godfrey, I agree.... the Perkeo ll is an absolute charm & the Color Skopar lens is a spectacular performer. The smallest fine quality MF camera, i've used!
Last edited:
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
The F2 is indeed a wonderful camera. There was a point in the 1990’s when I could not pass by an unblemished F2 at a camera show without buying it. After many years I just had to stop, otherwise my Camera Room would look like a Nikon retail store. I have a lot of F2’s in various configurations.
This started a few years after buying my very first Nikon: an F3/T, thanks to Jason Schneider’s vol.3 book on camera collecting which proclaimed the F3/T as an instant future collectible.
I learned a lot about the F2 mostly from books and later the MIR site:
I was astonished to learn it could do long exposures from 2 to 10 seconds using the T setting.
All of mine are still in perfect working condition - these cameras are so robust.
shawn
Mentor
That would get very expensive today. The longer exposures using the self timer is a neat trick with the F2.
MISH
Well-known
Archiver
Mentor
The problem with the 1Dx is finding one with low mileage. As they are cameras for working pros, I've seen many which have hundreds of thousands of exposures on them, which makes me very wary. There was a 1Dx Mk III with only about 60,000 exposures at my local secondhand shop selling for just over $4000 AUD and it was gone in a day. There was also a low mileage Nikon D750 for only $780 AUD and I was so tempted to get it, even though I have no Nikon lenses.
That was also gone in a couple of days.Peter_S
Peter_S
MF: Mamiya 1000s
135: Contax TVSIII
Compact digital: Sigma DP series
Mirrorless: older Fuji X-series.
DSRL: I recon Nikon D700 and related
135: Contax TVSIII
Compact digital: Sigma DP series
Mirrorless: older Fuji X-series.
DSRL: I recon Nikon D700 and related
Last edited:
GMOG
Established
Contarama
Well-known
I paid $400 total for my F2. Early numbered brick in good running condition. Finder bought separately for $100. Heck of deal...just took a lot of patience. Even the Titans were a bargain fairly recently...I haven't checked them in a while.
F2 Eye-level by Jeff Carpenter, on Flickr
F2 Eye-level by Jeff Carpenter, on Flickr
Deardorff38
Mentor
It's almost laughable, an F2 Titan.....goes for less than an unrepairable Contax P&S......I paid $400 total for my F2. Early numbered brick in good running condition. Finder bought separately for $100. Heck of deal...just took a lot of patience. Even the Titans were a bargain fairly recently...I haven't checked them in a while.
Retro-Grouch
Mentor
And what, pray tell, could possibly be wrong with having your camera room look like a Nikon retail store? It's a point of honor!