Welcome to Photo.net: A Community of Photographers

Home > Equipment > Contax S2/S2b III

Contax S2/S2b III

by Tom Shea

This will be a very simply review because this is a simple and basic camera. Its appeal is limited to those who are looking for a small, solid, mechanical camera for use with Zeiss lenses. This is not to imply that it is an unworthy or undesirable camera - for some (including me), it has wonderful appeal. Its features are limited and the quality is generally high, with a couple of minor, curious exceptions. The price is also high. For those seeking automation of any kind, you can stop reading now and look elsewhere. This camera has no automation. That fact that it has a light meter is almost surprising. No DX film reading, no shutter priority exposure, no motor advance. It's all up to the photographer.

The S2 is a titanium bodied SLR that reminds one somewhat of a Pentax or Olympus of days gone by. It is about the same size and has a similar feel. The S2 has a spot meter. The S2b differs from the S2 because it has a center weighted meter instead of a spot meter and because it has a glossy charcoal grey finish (Contax calls this black, but it is not close to black).

Although this camera has no automatic features, it is an advanced basic camera. That is to say, the features that it does have are engineered with good modern technology. The shutter for example is a mechanical metal vertical focal plan shutter that is probably about as accurate and fast as one can presently make a mechanical shutter. It is not as accurate, nor as fast, as an electronic shutter, but it does its job wihout battery power.

It does have basic features that serve well. Shutter speeds vary from one second to 1/4000. Flash synch is at a relatively fast 1/250, but there is no TTL flash control. There is a mechanical 10-second self timer. There is also a depth-of-field preview button, but no mirror lock-up. The viewfinder is good but since the pentaprism is not as large as its big brothers, the image area is only about 95% of the actual picture area. All shutter speeds are displayed vertically along the right side of the finder area. When the meter is activated, the recommended shutter speed lights. The shutter speed that you've set blinks. The system works well.

In my experience, the meters in both cameras appear to be well designed and give accurate exposures, perhaps with a slight tendency to underexpose. This is in general keeping with Contax's philosophy that it is better to error on the side of underexposure than to risk overexposure. It is unfortunate and curious that Contax chose to put the separate metering systrems in two different cameras. Why not put both a spot meter and center weighted meter in one camera? Did the marketeers determine this or was there some engineering limitation? Whatever the reason, unless you want to purchase both, you will have to choose one or the other.

Most of the controls are well placed. Howver, this is a small camera so there is simply not the room that big fingers might wish to have. For example, the area around the shutter speed selector knob is a little tight. For me this is not a problem, but for some it could be an issue. The film wind knob is not ratcheted - it is one single stoke. The smallest control is the little lever for multiple exposures, for which you really need to use your fingernail.

The feel of the camera is very solid. The controls are smooth and the knobs require just the right amount of force to move. The shutter release is pleasant, but the force of the mirror return seems excessive. Curiously, the depth-of-field plunger button is made of plastic instead of metal. But the body itself is well finished (for both models). The top and bottom plates are titanium in both The center body panels are covered with a beatiful and easy to grip textured material that looks like leather (much nicer than the smooth material used on the RTS III, AX and RX).

That's about all there is. Simple and basic. Oh yes, the price. As of January 1998, about $1050 for chrome/spot-meter, $1150 for grey/center-weighted-meter from the retailers in the photo.net list.

Readers' Comments


Add a comment



Walther Adler , April 29, 1998; 07:50 A.M.

OK, the S2 is a nice fully manual SLR, but if you look for a mechanical backup for your e.g. AX or ST, there is a better alternative: Just take a Yashica FX-3 Super 2000! I did, because I wanted to have a lightweight and inexpensive body, which could make a real contrast to my RTS III. The Yashica is almost as sturdy as the S2, similar equipped, and has an equal value in use. Admittedly, the view finder information is Spartan, the shutter and mirror dampening is lousy and the speed knob is difficult to operate, but the same holds for the S2. Disadvantages like these are acceptable in a $150- but not in a $1000-body.

Karl Frank , May 06, 1998; 11:22 P.M.

Why the world is lucky to have the Contax S2 available.

A mechanical backup to an electronic automated gizmo is NOT THE MAIN POINT of a good mechanical camera. The main point is to have a more reliable camera at all times so you DONT NEED A BACKUP in the first place. Some people have been spooked by the times the automation fails and the battery store is a day's travel away, and others don't want a computer program in control of their camera. For them, there is the Contax S2. I say this as a user of Leica M series cameras who has seen generations of electronic gimmics go obsolete while I still get pictures with my double-stroke M3 and folding Summicron that fits in my pocket.

Walther Adler , May 15, 1998; 04:00 A.M.

I have used mechanical cameras (Voigtldnder, Zeiss Ikon, Practika) for more than twenty years, so I know their advantages. The point is: Is the Contax S2 worth $1.100? I doubt it; the Leica R6.2 or the Olympus OM-3 show how a top-class mechanical camera should look nowadays. O.K., they are even more expensive but IMHO worth their price.

james lam , January 28, 1999; 09:10 P.M.

I have heard a lots of Contax S2 ,Leica R6 or M6,but how about Nikon F2 ! It may not be a modern camera but as a back up or even main body is not bad at all....

Cam Era , February 05, 1999; 09:36 P.M.

I found this comment by Tom Shea to be fascinating:

"The shutter for example is a mechanical metal vertical focal plan shutter that is probably about as accurate and fast as one can presently make a mechanical shutter. It is not as accurate, nor as fast, as an electronic shutter, but it does its job wihout battery power."

I would like to know, has anyone using a reasonably well maintained, reasonably high quality mechanical shutter ever actually noticed the slightest deficiency in any of their actual photographs that could be attributed to the fact that their shutter was "not as accurate as an electronic shutter"? I would really like to see such a photograph.

Also, that the S2 shutter is not "as fast as an electronic shutter": has anyone ever noticed a situation where 1/4000th of a second simply wouldn't do, and only 1/8000th of a second would?

And how many electronic shutters go up to 1/6000th or 1/8000th anyway?

The long and the short of it is: the Contax S2 has a great mechanical shutter that frees the owner from the tyranny of batteries. Electronic shutters are of no practical benefit for a camera without autoexposure.

Shawn Gibson , June 18, 1999; 03:08 P.M.

I have owned my S2 and 50mm 1.4 for a few weeks now, and I am much happier than I was with either my Nikon F3 or my F4 (I had 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 105mm lenses...now the joy of having one lens!). This camera feels great, looks great, works great, and inspires my greatest confidence, except when the lights get low (C'mon Contax...EV4?)--I bet half the people who have considered the S2 and then looked at the metering sensitivity have said "what?" and bought themselves an FM2n and a spotmeter instead. Anyways this is a small problem and I hope to own this S2 for a long time. One other little quirk: mirror is too loud.

Maarten Heijkoop , July 06, 1999; 10:21 A.M.

I bought my 'S2 60years' two years ago and I traded my 2 mt167's for it. I have never regretted this, the S2 is a very reliable companion. And yes the lightmeter could be more sensitive, but as an experienced photographer I know the light-situations and use the meter only for contrast control.

Detlev Horst , July 22, 1999; 12:04 P.M.

I switched from Nikon FM2 to Contax S2b because I wanted a mechanical body with a viewfinder that suits my eyeglasses, offers good lenses at a reasonable price and is not too bulky. My experiences so far: After a few days of use the viewfinder display went mad and eventually stopped working. I opened the battery chamber, rubbed and warmed the silveroxyde cells and it went back to work only to stop again after a few minutes. I changed to a lithium cell to watch the same problem occur. I send the body to Kyocera in Hamburg, they fixed it by loosening the battery chamber's contact ring. I returned the body to get that ring fixed and now the thing mostly works but sometimes the display quits working again ... I decided to forget about Kyocera's so called customer service and cleaned the battery chamber's contacts with isopropyl alcohol from time to time and was able to take some very nice pictures. The S2b is a mechanically very reliable but rather loud camera and with certain lenses (Zeiss Distagon 2,8/28) the shutter tends to vibrate and sound like a bell. The quality of my four Zeiss lenses (2,8/28, 1,7/50, 2,8/135, 4,0/300 all MM) equals or is slightly above Nikon AIS and Canon FD. They are good tools to take pictures with though there is no special glory in the name Zeiss, except, perhaps, for the ZEISS customer service - when my 28 broke its diaphragm Zeiss fixed it and send it back within four days. When the 300 lost a small metal plate of its tripod mount I got the piece fixed and send back within 5 days. I only can recommend the Zeiss lenses and Zeiss service - but you have to forget about Kyocera Hamburg!

James Fogarty , August 21, 1999; 02:10 A.M.

Hi...this a great site. I'm trying to make a decision on buying a new Nikon F3 or a contax s2,and a sekonic 508 meter.(I'm selling my N8008, I've had it with the inconsistant auto-everything-wipe-your butt-during-the-full-moon-with-fresh-batteries camera). I think the F3 is quite good...except for the 1/80 flash sync,the s2 has the EV4 problem and limited accessories. My main problem is Nikon,I think that Nikon marketing has blown it...big time! In 19 years of production they couldn't upgrade the flash sync on the F3? I've noticed that some of the AIS lenses are not being imported any more (180/2.8!!!). Nikon has made a huge mistake in not offering a High-Tech manual camera, haven't they noticed what happens to their LCD panels in the sunlight (turn black-make you nuts),don't any of them use reading glasses (have to take a course in juggling to set the camera and take a shot)! This AF thing is totally out of hand (you see the shot,Formula one car at 180mph...remember trust your AF...in the heat of the moment you press to hard on the shutter button and take a fuzzy picture of the overwieght woman in front of you). I would like someone with more experience than myself to comment on the limitations of the 1/80 flash sync on the F3,and the EV4 problem on the Contax. I would say that I'm worried that I will buy the F3 and Nikon will come out with the F5m super manual camera (30 days after I buy the F3) and contax will come out with the new and improved S2 with data back and super light metering (same time frame). I'm an Aero Prof. (in NYC) and I go to airshows a lot and I do a lot aircraft interior shots (structural), for play...I shoot landscape, archit,girls in short skirts etc. I've looked at the MTF curves(at photodo.com) for both lens systems...so this is not a problem. Any comments on the s2 and the F3 would be welcome...thanks, Jim.

Joe Buechler , September 20, 1999; 11:56 P.M.

I use a Leica M6 for general photography, and a Contax S2 for when I need a telephoto lens or a polarizer filter, for macro, or when I just want to use an SLR. A lot of Leica M photographers seem to like the S2 for its high quality, excellent optics, mechanical construction, manual operation, and small size.

The Contax S2 is a small camera. The M6 is slightly wider than the S2, and the top deck of the M6 is a full =" higher than the top deck of the S2 (although the prism dome raises the hot shoe of the S2 =" higher than the M6 shoe). The Zeiss lenses are NOT small, however. You should seriously consider the tiny 45mm f2.8 lens for times when you want to keep things small and light, even if you also use the 50mm f1.4 lens.

Theres no reason to use a circular polarizer on the S2. I use a Heliopan linear polarizer to keep image degradation to a minimum. For macro, I use a tripod and mirror lock-up via the self-timer. The RTS III is the only other Contax SLR with any kind of mirror lock-up.

I love the S2. Theres a couple of things about it that I would have done differently, but thats true of every camera Ive ever used. In any case, criticizing one of the few remaining mechanical cameras in the world seems like extremely bad karma to me.

Wolfram Schnuebbe , December 18, 1999; 06:08 P.M.

Just open the bottom of the S2 and the one of the FX-3 and you will see, that the S2 is just a titanium-covered FX-3 with a release button ring, that is tending to shut the camera off by itself. My S2 produced overexposed pictures (except my FX-3). But try to tell this to the Yashica-Service - they will blame you. The FX-3 is a fairly good and robust camera, that never leaves you alone (except the S2). Anyway, why didn't Kyocera use the more pleasant design of the Contax 159 (with the shutter dial of the 137 MA) and the more smooth mechanism of the RX (e.g.)?

tree cui , February 25, 2000; 09:53 P.M.

A backup body for over$1000? No way!I had the S2 for about 18 hours before I return it back to the shop where I got from. The S2 is just a Ti bodied Yashica FX-3.The sound of shutter, quake of mirror, feeling of film advance lever and shutter release , meter sesitivity ,and the way all the parts fit together; all the sign show S2 is a pair of Yashica FX-3 . A $1000 USD camera should mechanically compete to at least Nikon FM2 , even leica M6. For the same price I can get 9 Yashicas.Do you think those are enough to back you up ??

Richard Wozniak , June 05, 2001; 03:44 P.M.

I think the view that the S2 is the same camera as the FX-3 Super2000 is an oversimplified one. Saying there are many design similarities would be closer to fact, I suspect.

Excellent reviews of both cameras are found at: http://www.pagedepot.com/timrogersphoto/contax1/crindx.html.

In reading these I note these differences:

1. Construction. S2 machined from alloy and titanium FX-3 is plastic. Whether this makes a real difference other than esthetics is an endless debate I suppose.

2. S2 has interchangable screens. FX-3 does not.

3. S2 has a depth of field preview feature, FX-3 does not.

4. Author states: "I suspect that the camera (FX-3) has a mirror prism assembly instead of a true glass pentaprism which is found on the Contax-brand bodies"

5. FX-3 has simpler "3 point" viewfinder exposure readout

6. 1/4000 sec s2 vs. 1/2000 sec FX-3 max shutter speed

7. Spot meter (S2 only, S2b is center meter like FX-3)

Whether these differences are worth the $850 price difference can be debated. I note that in the Nikon range the FM-10 and FM2/T (the Titanium version of the FM2) is about $700. On the Olympus side it is even more stark with the OM-3ti costing fully $1350 more than the OM-2000. Of course as others have pointed out the OM-3ti does have a superb multi-spot metering system.

M Derkach , June 15, 2001; 02:56 P.M.

I agree with the comments above that the S2/S2b is not based just a titanium clad Yashica FX-2000. The engineering evolution and refinement of the mechanical 35mm camera body has caused many design similarities in various brands and models of cameras. Opening two camera bodies and making a statment that "they're the same" is like opening the hood of a BMW and a Pontiac and wonder why the BMW costs so much more. They are both based on similar mechanical designs, however, one is engineered to tighter tolerances and made with better materials which will allow for greater performance and longer life.

A better comparison for price purposes would be the Nikon FM2 Titanium. The fact that these two camera share the same shutter mechanism makes that comparison even more compelling.

Laszlo Horvath , November 13, 2001; 05:33 P.M.

I read all the coments above. I wonder why some people are thinking the Yashica FX3 is the same camera as the S2. It is all different except both are mechanical cameras. Just take a look at the flash sync. speed. The Yashica has X.-sync at 1/125 sec, the S2 has it at 1/250 sec. This means the two cameras have entirely different shutters. Besides the max shutter speeds are 1/2000 for the FX3 and 1/4000 for the S2. The wiewfinder coverage is 92% for the Yashica and 95% for the S2. Probably the shutter of the Yashica is engineered for 20000-50000 shutter cycles and the S2s for 100000-150000 cycles.

The point of buying the S2 body is that some people like me wants to be in full controll of he's camera. There is much little chance for a simple camera to fail compared to a very sophisticated one. After you get used to these mechanical cameras you can work quite fast with them. The lenses made by Zeiss are quite cheap (like 35mm/1.4; 50mm/1.4; 80mm/1.4; 135mm/2.8) has high optical quality, and all metal construction. I think Contax S2 is the best choice for anyone looking for a good mechanical camera.

Denis Rudolph , February 24, 2003; 01:04 P.M.

Please do not confuse this camera with the Yashica. There are a number of very good points made by other people who have submitted comments, Richard Wazniaks in particular. I use two RTS III's for my pro work, but always take the S2 on my "journeys" (backpacking, snowshoeing, biking, etc.) Light weight, no battery worries, dependable in every way. No bells and whistles to worry about. I have loved working with Zeiss lenses for nearly two decades. I love my Leica M3, but when it came down to moving on to an SLR, I parted ways with Leica and went to Contax. The Contax lenses I use, all primes, are superb. I really don't believe there is anything sharper in 35 mm than my 35/1.4, 85/1.4 and 60/2.8 macro. The 50/1.4 and 180/2.8 are also spectacular. I have enlarged photos up to 16x20 taken with the S2 and these lenses with wonderful results. If you are looking for an all mechanical camera and not venture into the rangefinder arena, look for a used S2 or S2b. Good cameras, outstanding optics. Good luck.

Jason Stephens , September 10, 2003; 08:14 P.M.

.

Peter Rivard , July 02, 2004; 10:11 A.M.

I don't see much here that couldn't be addressed by an RTS II. While the RTS II has an electronic shutter, it can be used without batteries--an emergency 1/50 mechanical speed that ensures you can get the picture if the long-lived battery dies on you and you don't have a spare, and a mechanical cable release socket that lets you take bulb exposures without a battery or without draining the battery. For night shots (esp. in cold weather) I don't even turn the camera on. It's got mirror lock-up, eyepiece blind, DOF preview, MUCH more solid construction than the original RTS (this thing is a tank), full manual control and a reliable meter, aperture priority AE (with AE lock). I love the feel of the machine and the vibe of working with it. (note; if you can't find the right battery, you can get the meter and full range of shutter speeds running again with four cheap LR44 batteries and 2-3 mm ball of aluminum foil)

Vincent DiPietro , December 02, 2004; 01:43 P.M.

I've owned this beautiful camera for almost a year and am utterly delighted with it. I take it with me every time I go out to photograph along with my Aria or RX. It slows me down since I have to think more about what I want to do. I also feel that it will last as long as I do. The S2 exudes quality. Even though it is a completely manual SLR it has a plushness to it -- it is, as far as I am concerned, the RR Silver Cloud of cameras.

ben conover , March 15, 2006; 05:17 P.M.

Interesting, I prefer the Pentax LX, EV-6 to 21........$400 mint.

Cheers.

andrew brown , July 04, 2009; 06:25 P.M.

Hi, I owned one of these, after my lovely OM-3 was stolen, but I found it an awful camera, badly balanced, and worst of all very badly sealed against the world's dirt.It failed on holiday after a month's ownership, cost a lot to get 'repaired' and came back almost as bad as it had been before i sent it away. I thought contax's customer service total rubbish and I was glad to get shot of it. I now use £100 Nikon Fs with some cheap Nikkor lenses ! 40+ years old and still the best film camera in the world, dirt or no dirt.

Andy.


Add a comment



Notify me of comments