<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN”>

Contributed mostly by Markus Hanke in Austria.

RTS, RTS II

Q: In am in a used shop and I saw what seems to be a RTS in mint condition. How can I tell the difference between the RTS and the RTS II?

A: If the body in question has a manual self-timer on the front, it is the original RTS. The follower RTS II had an electronic self-timer with a LED. There is also a sync-terminal on the front of the RTS II. These are the only visible differences besides the small designation near the serial number on the camera back. The dimensions are the same, and the RTS II is only 20grams heavier.

In the viewfinder, the difference is more obvious: The original RTS featured a speed display with simple LED's (as in the Contax 137/139), the aperture was shown by a mechanical needle like in the Yashica FR-I. The RTS II had a similar design as the new one, red numerical LED's for time and aperture (the latter is a multi-segment display) and exposure compensation. Due to the manual film transport there was no frame counter in the finder. The RTS II-finder showed 97%, the RTS only 92%.

The shutter speeds were nearly the same, but the RTS II offered a mechanical 1/50 additionally, in case of battery failure.

The electromagnetic shutter release you refer to was introduced with the first RTS already (the first "first-on-market-development" of many to follow), the extraordinary speedy release (when compared to the mechanical releases at that time) was the reason for the RTS's name: Real Time System.

The two cameras have different shutters, the RTS I had the traditional cloth-type, the newer model featured a quartz-controlled shutter made of titanium foils, both had aperture-priority and manual modes (RTS: 1/2000-15sec[1/2000-4sec]; RTS II: 1/2000-16sec[1/2000-4sec]).

Other differences: The RTS II had an exposure-lock and TTL-flash-mode.

I fear it would not be easy to find system components for both of the cameras. The RTS I could make use of a winder (2 fps) or a large motor-drive (5 fps). For the RTS II there was a very beautiful winder with 3 fps and two additional releases (one on the handgrip and the other for vertical use), AFAIK it was possible to interchange the winders between the two RTS-bodies.

RTS III quality problems

Q: I often heard of troubles which the RTS III concerning its electronics. When I was in the shop the last time, a man entered. (Now follows an exact quotation) "He bought a new RTS III three weeks ago, and had already sent it back for repair: his batteries were finished after six films. He put in new batteries, and got himself an unwanted double exposure. The next film stopped rewinding at frame 34, and after that the camera was completely dead. I must say that my confidence in the legendary Contax quality is fading away at this time (not in the lenses, just in the bodies)."

A: I think it is a pity for the brand and tradition of Contax if there really are quality problems. But I am not so pessimistic as you are. If you take a look on the different rec.photo newsgroups over the time you will read descriptions of problems with different cameras, often combined with a very disappointed comment of the unlucky owner concerning material quality (in the last time there were such postings about Olympus-SLR's in general, the Nikon FA, F4 and FE2, nearly all Canons and Minoltas etc.). But on the other hand there were much more positive comments about quality (especially concerning Olympus and Nikon - one friend of mine uses Olympus since twenty years without a problem). I think that in modern times, where cameras are more and more stuffed with electronics, the possibility of serious failures has increased dramatically (are we just lucky that the operating system of our SLR's is not made by Microsoft!!), and most "material quality defects" reported were in fact electronic quality defects.

I cannot recall having read anything bad about purely mechanical cameras like Contax S2, Nikon FM2, Yashica FX-3 or Olympus OM3. Maybe their sales numbers are not high enough to deliver a representative base for computations about reliability, but I think - recalling how often people debate about mechanical cameras on the net - that there simply are no failures, due to lack of electronics.

All in all I think that we hear of Contax-problems not more often than from other high-class products. Its the same problem with cars: All the world knows that Mercedes, BMW, Saab, Volvo etc. have a reputation to build extremely solid cars with perfect finish. Within minutes, I could list at least ten people who are really disappointed with the quality of their car produced by one of the quoted companies. But I'm sure there are many, many more who are very satisfied with them.

I used my 167MT for ten years, and I had it sent for repair only once. The camera had the same problem as my CD-Player: The small plastic buttons tended to stick and were more and more "unpushable" because I used them so rarely, so it was necessary to lubricate them. And I had another problem which is a result of a true design flaw: The RTS's battery compartment/base plate is locked by a large "screw" you have to turn for a half rotation in order to lock or open it. The 137MA had the same system. But the 167 and the ST with their micro-batteries have a small screw you have to tighten by means of a coin or something similar. After a time this screw can get loose and the base plate will fall off. I lost the plate of my 167 in that way, and I couldn't find it because I realized my loss only when I was home again (the spare plate was - untypical for Contax - not expensive). And only some days ago I lost the base plate of my ST in the same way, but it was in the town and I heard it when it fell to the floor. But this have been my only problems I ever had with my (until now) four Contax cameras.

This is also true for battery capacity, be it AA (mignon), AAA (micro) cells or lithium (currently I am using a spare lithium battery in my RTS, it was left behind when my Yashica T3-Super P/S went into the eternal hunting grounds). In the ST I have the second set since I bought it in 1994, in the RTS the batteries I bought it with only brought some three films, but I bought the camera used and the batteries have been the original ones which are packed with the body for function-checking purposes only. Since then I am using the lithium cell, having used some 25+ films.

So maybe you think of me being too enthusiastic about my cameras, and you might be right. I am not a professional photographer, my cameras are not strained to the maximum limit, but since my Yashica FR-I locked its electronics after having served for six years in 1986, I never had any other "casualty" with my SLR's. And therefore I won't change a winning team until being convinced from the contrary.

ST and RX

Q: What is your opinion concerning the Contax RX? How does it compare to the ST?

A: I don't own the RX myself, but I tried one for several days. I have the ST which I bought before the RX came out. If you compare those two models, each camera has something the other hasn't, so it's up to the customer to decide which one would satisfy the wishes more.