![]() A silent mode like the Konica Hexar used to have would have been a very good option (which is based on slowing down the transport). The lighting of the controls on top of the body is very beautiful, but with the built-in noisy winder it is not likely that you are going to use this camera in a theatre. Looking at the total concept of the camera, I see more reason to call this one the RTS III, since it is much closer to the concept of the original RTS I and II.įurther reasons for favouring the ST are the date-imprint between the frames, large analog controls, built in dioptre-adjustment, very discrete classic feel and look, flash-sync up to 1/200th, common AAA batteries. I have always been very much in favour of the LED indications in the viewer over the more applied LCD’s, and since I was going to use the camera alternatively with my RTS-II, this was especially important for me. The ST has the expensive ceramic film pressure-plate. The covering is brass, where the Aria's is plastic. ![]() The shape of the Aria is very simular, but the ST is a much more heavy duty camera. ![]() ![]() Since this seems not to be the most popular Contax body (it is not in production anymore), this choice needs some explanation. After carefully comparing the available bodies (new or second hand), my strongest affection however was for the ST. This year I decided I wanted a second Contax body, and eventually I was tempted to buy an Aria. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |