New Contax 645 - Smart Or Dumb?

[Mort54]

A camera dealer told me a little while ago that he thought he could find a brand new Contax 645. My question to the forum is this - is it a good idea to go for a Contax 645 if they're no longer in production? Specifically, I'm wondering how I would get it serviced. I like the feature set and lens selection, but the servicing has me spooked. For those of you who have a Contax system, how are you getting it serviced?

I'm in the process of getting quotes on both Hy6 and Mamiya 645 AFD II systems, but I would like to price a third alternative if possible before I make a selection, so I'm mulling over whether a Contax system could be that third alternative. Of course, there's also a Hasselblad option, but I've never really warmed to that system (not sure why).

Regards,
Hans.

[rainer_v]

after reading too much good opinions here in LL about the contax i bought a 645  some weeks ago, together with several accessories as battery grip, waist level and prisma finder, 5 lenses ( 35/45/80/140/250 ) and a zoerk adapter for hasselblad lenses. all together might have been around 6000 $ or so. the system works great together with my emotion backs, no cables are required. the camera handles perfect, the lenses are as good as they can be and the system feels very modern.
if the body would break for some reason i would buy another one, they are cheap. there are several service options also, so i do not think about that service could be a problem .
i am a contax mf  fan now....

[Gary Yeowell]

Hans,

The system is still serviceable in the UK and is done my a company who was associated with the official Contax importers. Just a thought however, considering that the bodies can be purchased second hand at such ridicluous prices it makes more sense to just back up with a second unit.  I have just purchased 2 bodies & prisms and 5 lenses for less than the cost of an new complete H2 plus a zoom, food for thought?

Gary.

[Gary Yeowell]

Rainer,

Looks like you just beat me to the keyboard in giving the same advice as you!
A second body/prism is the way to go.

Gary.

[samuel_js]

I just purchased an almost-new Contax 645 and I find it a wonderful camera. Of course I was considering the Mamiya but the Zeiss lenses are a big plus for me. I recently sold my H1 because I consider it ridiculously expensive and because I don't like the fuji lenses. They're sharp, but the bokeh is nothing compared to Zeiss. I also find the Contax a "real" camera. The ergonomics are fantastic and a pleasure to hold.  It doesn't look as plastic as the Mamiya and the autofocus is far better than I thought.
I actually didn't think about servicing it. I hope it doesn't break but if there's no service avaible I'll buy it again for sure.
I personally don't consider the Contax discontinued from a photographer point of view. You'll find accesories and parts everywere (or ebay) and all the major digital vendors support the system.

Good luck

/Samuel

A camera dealer told me a little while ago that he thought he could find a brand new Contax 645. My question to the forum is this - is it a good idea to go for a Contax 645 if they're no longer in production? Specifically, I'm wondering how I would get it serviced. I like the feature set and lens selection, but the servicing has me spooked. For those of you who have a Contax system, how are you getting it serviced?

I'm in the process of getting quotes on both Hy6 and Mamiya 645 AFD II systems, but I would like to price a third alternative if possible before I make a selection, so I'm mulling over whether a Contax system could be that third alternative. Of course, there's also a Hasselblad option, but I've never really warmed to that system (not sure why).

Regards,
Hans.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109457\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Mort54]

....I was considering the Mamiya but the Zeiss lenses are a big plus for me....

Hi Samuel. In considering the Mamiya, did you get far enough in the evaluation process to checkout the viewfinder? I've heard (but haven't yet seen for myself) that the Mamiya viewfinder is somewhat dark. What are your thoughts on how they compare?

Regards,
Hans.

[samuel_js]

After having a H1 I find both the Mamiya's and Contax's viewfinders a little smaller but the Contax's is as bright as the H1, and almost the same size. The Mamiyas is a little darker but I can't say it's a huge difference. Maybe like a full format 35mm. It was a 645AFD, i don't know if this has been improved in version II.
I personally prefer the Contax's viewfinder as it's almost the same as the H1.

/Samuel

Hi Samuel. In considering the Mamiya, did you get far enough in the evaluation process to checkout the viewfinder? I've heard (but haven't yet seen for myself) that the Mamiya viewfinder is somewhat dark. What are your thoughts on how they compare?

Regards,
Hans.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109471\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[paul_jones]

After having a H1 I find both the Mamiya's and Contax's viewfinders a little smaller but the Contax's is as bright as the H1, and almost the same size. The Mamiyas is a little darker but I can't say it's a huge difference. Maybe like a full format 35mm. It was a 645AFD, i don't know if this has been improved in version II.
I personally prefer the Contax's viewfinder as it's almost the same as the H1.

/Samuel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109475\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i put my h1, my contax and my 1dsmk2 (i had all 3 for a breif time) side by side on tripods and looked through each camera consecutively. the h1 finder is far brighter- i would say 1-2 stops and far larger. the contax and canon looked very simlar in size and brightness.

the h1 uses a combination of mirrors in the finder, like the cheaper old mamiya 645 finder you could get a few years ago (the tall priamid shaped one). the canon and contax use a block of glass as the prism.

in defence of the contax(mamiya and canon)-

although the h1 is larger and brighter, it has a blowing distortion around the edges- its really anoying when trying to shoot things that need to be squared up. the contax, canon, and mamiya has a perfectly square image rectangle.

paul

[paul_jones]

i put my h1, my contax and my 1dsmk2 (i had all 3 for a breif time) side by side on tripods and looked through each camera consecutively. the h1 finder is far brighter- i would say 1-2 stops and far larger. the contax and canon looked very simlar in size and brightness.

the h1 uses a combination of mirrors in the finder, like the cheaper old mamiya 645 finder you could get a few years ago (the tall priamid shaped one). the canon and contax use a block of glass as the prism.

in defence of the contax(mamiya and canon)-

although the h1 is larger and brighter, it has a blowing distortion around the edges- its really anoying when trying to shoot things that need to be squared up. the contax, canon, and mamiya has a perfectly square image rectangle.

paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

just to add, the h1 with the p30 crop marks in the finder shows about the same size as the contax without any.

paul

[samuel_js]

i put my h1, my contax and my 1dsmk2 (i had all 3 for a breif time) side by side on tripods and looked through each camera consecutively. the h1 finder is far brighter- i would say 1-2 stops and far larger. the contax and canon looked very simlar in size and brightness.

the h1 uses a combination of mirrors in the finder, like the cheaper old mamiya 645 finder you could get a few years ago (the tall priamid shaped one). the canon and contax use a block of glass as the prism.

in defence of the contax(mamiya and canon)-

although the h1 is larger and brighter, it has a blowing distortion around the edges- its really anoying when trying to shoot things that need to be squared up. the contax, canon, and mamiya has a perfectly square image rectangle.

paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, maybe the diference is bigger. It didn't feel so big to me. Maybe different screens?   I also had a 1Ds. I supose is better to check that side by side.
You're totally right about the distorsion. It allways felt disturbing when shooting architecture or interiors.

/Samuel

[paul_jones]

Well, maybe the diference is bigger. It didn't feel so big to me. Maybe different screens?   I also had a 1Ds. I supose is better to check that side by side.
You're totally right about the distorsion. It allways felt disturbing when shooting architecture or interiors.

/Samuel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109486\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

im not completely sure exactly what my preference is with finders. obviously, the brighter the better. but size of finder i think is a preference.
when i shoot and really concidering the composition, i actually prefer the smaller-far away finer, its like holding  a picture back, rather than looking too close to your face.
but when it comes to seeing a small detail in the frame, like someones expression when they are small in the background, the bigger the better.

does anyone know how well those "brighter screens" like maxwell ones are?

paul

[Mark_Tucker]

A camera dealer told me a little while ago that he thought he could find a brand new Contax 645. My question to the forum is this - is it a good idea to go for a Contax 645 if they're no longer in production?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109457\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Brand new Contax body kits are on ebay every day, out of Hong Kong, from reputable dealers. Around $2800 plus shipping.

KEH.com in Atlanta will work on them, as will any number of places in the U.S. Should not be a problem. If it's really bad, keep it for parts and buy another one. I keep two in my bag all the time.

They are rock solid. They can be found, clean mint, used, with some searching.

Contax 645 viewfinder is smaller than H1, Mamiya 645, or 1ds2. Somewhat darker too. But no distortion. H1 viewfinder is largest, followed by 1ds2. H1 is brightest.

I would have no hesitation in recommending Contax. Sweet, sweet lenses, and unlike H1, has vertical grip shutter release.

[jeff_singer]

I currenlty am using a Hasselblad V system with my P25.  However, I just bought a Contax kit and made my P25+ order for a Contax mount.

I haven't used the Contax yet other than a couple rolls of film.  I do like a larger viewfinder and the Contax is quite small compared to the V and the H systems... however, it does seem like things snap into focus better on the Contax.  This could also be because the Contax lenses are all faster by a stop.  The size of the viewfinder is my only complaint with the Contax.  The viewfinder is one reason I couldn't see using a P30 on the Contax although I know many here do it and have no issues.

Jeff

[Khun_K]

I currenlty am using a Hasselblad V system with my P25.  However, I just bought a Contax kit and made my P25+ order for a Contax mount.

I haven't used the Contax yet other than a couple rolls of film.  I do like a larger viewfinder and the Contax is quite small compared to the V and the H systems... however, it does seem like things snap into focus better on the Contax.  This could also be because the Contax lenses are all faster by a stop.  The size of the viewfinder is my only complaint with the Contax.  The viewfinder is one reason I couldn't see using a P30 on the Contax although I know many here do it and have no issues.

Jeff
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109885\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I use Contax 645 shortly after its introduction and I use the same body until today, still feel like a modern designed camera, easy to use, faultless. I cannot remember how many shots I made on my Contax and along the way I picked up 2 more bodies for back-up, of course nothing build forever, but I have to agree the Contax 645 is among the most robust medium format platform in the market with nice fill line up of lens.  Combine wiht P25 or P45, it produce beautiful images.

[vgogolak]

FWIW

I have two systems of Contax 645 and may add a third.
as a hedge
but, then again, in many years I havent had any problems, so...

You need to be careful There are many Contax 645 RABID fans out there...
so go for it..
you are already bitten...
and it didn't kill you...
join a very happy club!

Regards
Victor

[Mort54]

You need to be careful There are many Contax 645 RABID fans out there...
so go for it..
you are already bitten...
and it didn't kill you...
join a very happy club!

I get to play with one next week with a P45 back attached. Quotes should be coming in next week also, on both Contax and Hy6 based systems, so hopefully a decision is near.

[AustinFranklin]

Contax 645 viewfinder is smaller than H1, Mamiya 645, or 1ds2. Somewhat darker too. But no distortion. H1 viewfinder is largest, followed by 1ds2. H1 is brightest.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109518\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

According to the literature I have for those cameras, the Contax 645 has a %95 viewfinder, and the Mamiya 645 a %94 viewfinder.  Obviously, the 1DS2 is a 35mm camera, and has a much smaller viewfinder than any of the others.  The H1 does have a %100 viewfinder, so it's clearly the largest.  Which one is brightest, I can't say.  I just wanted to set the record straight that the C645 wasn't the smallest of your list.

Regards,

Austin

[Gary Ferguson]

I used a Hasselblad V for about 20 years, thought the future was 645 so moved to the Contax 645 for about two years (using every lens including the 350mm) with film and with a Kodak pro-back, then moved to the Hasselblad H for a year with film and a Phase One back, and finally went back to the Hasselblad V with a Phase One back. I'd be open to moving again if something better for my needs comes along, but to be honest I'm a little tired of reading instruction books by now so it'd have to be a really significant improvement!

The Contax 645 was possibly the prettiest camera I've ever used, no small matter if you're handling the thing all day everyday. It had one or two outstanding optics, I'm thinking of the 120mm macro in particular which I miss to this day. And for a portrait photographer say, prizing a fluid and mellifluous transition from in-focus to out-of-focus, virtually all the lenses would be gems.

However, ultimately the camera wasn't for me. Creamy though the lenses are there's a shortfall in ultimate sharpness with some of them. I realise this may ignite the passions of several forum members, so I'd suggest an objective solution. Go to the Zeiss web site and look up their MTF curves and compare the Hasselblad V 350mm superachromat with the Contax 350mm; or go to Hasselblad's site (they use Zeiss MTF equipment with exactly the same test protocols as Zeiss so it's a rare case where MTF comparisons between manufacturers is valid) and compare the Contax 140mm and 210 lenses with similar H series optics.

Also the viewfinder on the Contax was simply darker than both the Hasselblad alternatives, I eventually found a third party Contax screen option that helped, but at an incredible price.  Battery power was always a problem with the Contax, there's a larger battery pack accessory that helps, but it also turns a silk purse into a sows ear. And finally there's the Contax auto focus, which was painfully slow and halting in poor light, the H system auto focus is just so much superior, and the V system may be manual focus but you get the screen brightness and focusing aids necessary to deal with that. However, if I were a portrait photographer I'd probably still be using the Contax and be singing its praises to the heavens, so I guess it just goes to prove that it's the photographer's own foibles and the needs of the application that count when it comes to choosing a camera!

[william]

Re: the Contax 645 lenses: I'd have to agree, they probably are not objectively the sharpest medium format lenses available (with the exception of the 120mm).  They've always seemed sharp enough for me, but everyone has different criteria.  For a while, I had a Rollei 6008 system with Schneider lenses and a Contax 645 system at the same time and I almost always preferred the "look" (necessarily sharpness) of the Contax lenses.

I'd agree that the Contax viewfinder is dimmer than I'd like.  And it is a battery hog, but much less so with a digital back than with film (because the battery's not getting drained with winding the film).

I used a Hasselblad V for about 20 years, thought the future was 645 so moved to the Contax 645 for about two years (using every lens including the 350mm) with film and with a Kodak pro-back, then moved to the Hasselblad H for a year with film and a Phase One back, and finally went back to the Hasselblad V with a Phase One back. I'd be open to moving again if something better for my needs comes along, but to be honest I'm a little tired of reading instruction books by now so it'd have to be a really significant improvement!

The Contax 645 was possibly the prettiest camera I've ever used, no small matter if you're handling the thing all day everyday. It had one or two outstanding optics, I'm thinking of the 120mm macro in particular which I miss to this day. And for a portrait photographer say, prizing a fluid and mellifluous transition from in-focus to out-of-focus, virtually all the lenses would be gems.

However, ultimately the camera wasn't for me. Creamy though the lenses are there's a shortfall in ultimate sharpness with some of them. I realise this may ignite the passions of several forum members, so I'd suggest an objective solution. Go to the Zeiss web site and look up their MTF curves and compare the Hasselblad V 350mm superachromat with the Contax 350mm; or go to Hasselblad's site (they use Zeiss MTF equipment with exactly the same test protocols as Zeiss so it's a rare case where MTF comparisons between manufacturers is valid) and compare the Contax 140mm and 210 lenses with similar H series optics.

Also the viewfinder on the Contax was simply darker than both the Hasselblad alternatives, I eventually found a third party Contax screen option that helped, but at an incredible price.  Battery power was always a problem with the Contax, there's a larger battery pack accessory that helps, but it also turns a silk purse into a sows ear. And finally there's the Contax auto focus, which was painfully slow and halting in poor light, the H system auto focus is just so much superior, and the V system may be manual focus but you get the screen brightness and focusing aids necessary to deal with that. However, if I were a portrait photographer I'd probably still be using the Contax and be singing its praises to the heavens, so I guess it just goes to prove that it's the photographer's own foibles and the needs of the application that count when it comes to choosing a camera!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[doncody]

I used a Hasselblad V for about 20 years, thought the future was 645 so moved to the Contax 645 for about two years (using every lens including the 350mm) with film and with a Kodak pro-back, then moved to the Hasselblad H for a year with film and a Phase One back, and finally went back to the Hasselblad V with a Phase One back. I'd be open to moving again if something better for my needs comes along, but to be honest I'm a little tired of reading instruction books by now so it'd have to be a really significant improvement!

The Contax 645 was possibly the prettiest camera I've ever used, no small matter if you're handling the thing all day everyday. It had one or two outstanding optics, I'm thinking of the 120mm macro in particular which I miss to this day. And for a portrait photographer say, prizing a fluid and mellifluous transition from in-focus to out-of-focus, virtually all the lenses would be gems.

However, ultimately the camera wasn't for me. Creamy though the lenses are there's a shortfall in ultimate sharpness with some of them. I realise this may ignite the passions of several forum members, so I'd suggest an objective solution. Go to the Zeiss web site and look up their MTF curves and compare the Hasselblad V 350mm superachromat with the Contax 350mm; or go to Hasselblad's site (they use Zeiss MTF equipment with exactly the same test protocols as Zeiss so it's a rare case where MTF comparisons between manufacturers is valid) and compare the Contax 140mm and 210 lenses with similar H series optics.

Also the viewfinder on the Contax was simply darker than both the Hasselblad alternatives, I eventually found a third party Contax screen option that helped, but at an incredible price.  Battery power was always a problem with the Contax, there's a larger battery pack accessory that helps, but it also turns a silk purse into a sows ear. And finally there's the Contax auto focus, which was painfully slow and halting in poor light, the H system auto focus is just so much superior, and the V system may be manual focus but you get the screen brightness and focusing aids necessary to deal with that. However, if I were a portrait photographer I'd probably still be using the Contax and be singing its praises to the heavens, so I guess it just goes to prove that it's the photographer's own foibles and the needs of the application that count when it comes to choosing a camera!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Gary,

Are you comparing the Contax finder to the WLF on the V or one of the Prism finders?  If so which one?

Thx,
Don