Talk:Contax

message: "With the emergence of the Japanese camera industry, Zeiss discovered that it was essential to form an alliance with a Japanese maker. Asahi, maker of the Pentax, was engaged first; and it went as far as Zeiss's designing a common lens mount, which became the Pentax K-mount after the two firms parted company. Then, an alliance was formed with Yashica, and a new line of Contax single-lens reflex cameras was born, starting from the RTS of 1975. Numerous models followed, which also included compacts, medium-format reflex cameras, and digital cameras."
This paragraph is misleading to me.  If only an alliance was formed, Kyocera would not have had control to shut down Zeiss production.  More accurately, whether at first or later, either Yashica or Kyocera wholly purchased Contax.Drhamad (talk) 16:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Alliance with Yashica

message: Just a note on the RX - AX thing... focus confirmation is a common feature on almost every AF slr out there. It's not neccessary to point this out as a feature on the AX... as an AF SLR, it's expected to have it. It's a unique feature on a completely manual focus SLR, tho, which is why the RX was singled out for having it.
Will edit to correct formatting in around an hour.
The T* discussion is way overkill. It's very, very good multicoating, but at the end of the day, it's just multicoating. More in-depth discussion should be taken up on the Zeiss page, or even the Schott Glass page. Trimming it to size.
IMO this article reads like a press release.
Ericd 20:04, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: RX-AF

message: Can someone give me a serious explanation about that "3D Effect". Marketing hype ? Ericd 19:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 3D Effect

message: This sentence :
"After the bankruptcy of Zeiss-Ikon AG, Carl Zeiss AG found itself without a small format camera-maker to sell its lenses to."
Was replaced with :
"After the bankruptcy of Zeiss-Ikon AG, Carl Zeiss AG found itself in need of a company with electronic camera expertise."
by an anonymous contributor.
I don't think electronic expertise was essential. As it is difficult to debate with an anonymous contributor, I need your advice. Ericd 15:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need your advice

message: I have created a separate Contax I article from material gathered over this page. This allows for illustrations, more notes, developments, etc.
Maybe the page can be tuned accordingly to avoid duplication. Rama (talk) 13:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contax I 

message: It's a bit of a shock to see an unknown compact digital camera as the main image of one of the most iconic cameras of all time.  I've added images of the Contax II and Contax S at the top, but haven't removed them from where they were.  I've also removed references to East Germany on the image of the Contax S.  Firstly, that page refers to a regime that didn't exist when the Contax S was introduced, and secondly it doesn't have any bearing on the camera.  Groogle (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: I actually owned contax 159 a few years back, which was an MM camera.  I used a T* 50mm AE lens with it quite happily.  
The point of the more expensive (at that time) MM lenses was supposed to be that you could use shutter priority or program and the camera would set the lens aperture.  The reality was that the MM lens only sported a feature to lock the aperture at minimum (beyond f16, say) and had a small protusion that pushed a lever on the camera to communicate the fact it was an MM lens on the mount.  
I know it's original research, but the use of AE lenses on MM cameras was common place as all you needed to do was set the aperture to minimum manually, and jam the camera's lens mount lever with a small piece of plastic.  
What I don't know is if this trick was universal across the range of cameras and lenses, or just something on the ones I encountered.  Referencing it could be tricky as well, I know longer own a contax so I can't even prove it!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.6.88.249 (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  AE MM lens interoperability 

message: I've just deleted the claim that "The high-end professional and prosumer models were mostly exclusive to Contax, but the cheaper amateur models were in most cases identical with the cameras of Contax' partner Yashica; e.g. the Contax 139 Quartz was identical to the Yashica FX-D quartz." This is incorrect as it stands - there are obvious, major differences between the two models mentioned, and I'm not aware of any other 'identical' models. However, the FX-D and 139 also have clear similarities, and presumably do share a fair number of components, which may be worthy of note. Both cameras could use the 139 autowinder, and the limited (non-TTL) dedicated flash system of the FX-D was also available when used with Contax flashguns.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdwperl (talk • contribs) 01:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities between Contax and Yashica models 

message: The article seems to make a lot of unsourced claims about this, that, and the other aspect of the early models being superior to the contemporaneous Leicas.  (For example, "It can be said that with a few exceptions, Contax lenses were superior to equivalent contemporary Leica lenses for more than two decades.")  Not sayin' they were, and not sayin' they weren't, but shouldn't such assertions be thoroughly sourced?  Otherwise, the article starts to sound a bit "boosterish." Drhoehl (talk) 00:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV/sourcing issues?