CONTAX RTS - The story of the Top Secret Project 13 by Carl Zeiss and its collaborators

[@eyeguy777]

After using many of these cameras over the years, it is great to see the family lineage of these cameras . I purchased my first SLR in 1979 (Yashica FR1) after university, followed a short time later 1-2 years by the RTS. I still have both of these original bodies and have added a few extra bodies and family members as I continue to shoot film regularly, and my son also has 2 copies of the RTS.

[@TechHeritage]

Its good to hear that the new generation also appreciates these cameras. Here, we have been trying to get a Yashica FR to complete the family line, but it seems hard to get one in a good condition.

[@enonurb]

Thanks for this very interesting video. I bought this camera in the early 80s after starting to think that my Canon AT1 was too limited. I had the opportunity to shot a couple of weddings with the RTS allowing me to amortise the cost of the equipment. Then, it was my partner for 3 years in the Saudi desert and never gave me problems. At the end of the 80s I left it in a drawer and resumed it about 3 years ago. I changed the battery, replaced the seals and now I'm using it again. It is a real joy to continue taking photos with this camera even today.

[@TechHeritage]

It surprises me that the Camera community has not given this camera its rightful place. Many inferior products with one or two little innovations are endlessly praised despite obvious flaws. I guess this is due to the prevailing group-think in each generation.

[@andrewwilkin1923]

Thanks for a very interesting video.

[@TechHeritage]

Your are welcome Andrew. Please recommend to your friends.

[@Nerdzombiedisco]

Just received mine. Love it. Worthy of standing alongside the Nikon F, Canon F-1 and Leica M4-P.

[@TechHeritage]

Good choice! Thanks for sharing your experience. Those Carl Zeiss T * lens prices for C/Y mount are steadily going up. Better pick up a few before it is too late.

[@Nerdzombiedisco]

@@TechHeritage Will do!

[@jbtubman]

Thanks for making this video. I was about 13 years old when the RTS came out; I read all about it in "Popular Photography" but never had the chance to touch one. What a beautiful machine!

[@TechHeritage]

May be its time to buy one now and enjoy, while they are criminally cheap.

[@throtol]

Growing up as a kid I had always wanted the Contax RTS. Many years later I finally got one. I have owned Zeiss lenses for a while, so I only had to procure the actual camera. Decades later using the camera felt as good as the time when I tried one as a pre-teen. My hope is Kyocera will consider a 50th anniversary re-issue.

[@TechHeritage]

Thanks for sharing this interesting background. I am curious how you collected a lot of good Zeiss lenses before procuring the actual camera. Today, some of the Zeiss lenses are more expensive than the camera body. Unfortunately I am not very optimistic that there will be a 50th anniversary RTS. It may be more likely to have a Contax G3. We are lucky to have a wide range of Contax cameras, Contax 1, 2a, 3a, RTS, 139 Quartz, 167MT, G1, G2. Once you have a range like this, you see a lot of influences on the other cameras, particularly if you look at the release times. We make that comparison in some up-coming videos.

[@throtol]

@@TechHeritage I got back into photography with a Fujifilm XT-2 . I purchased the lens a few years ago before the prices went up. I have several Zeiss Jena lenses that cost next to nothing. I prefer vintage lenses to automatic new ones. I just bought a Contax N Zeiss 70-200mm for my Fujifilm with an adapter. The colors are magnificent. Over time, I got back into film and then came across the Contax RTS II at a good price and already owned several CY Zeiss lenses which I also use with my Leicas with adapters.

[@TechHeritage]

Ah, yes, those glorius colours you get with the Zeiss lenses. They are unmatched.

[@ianolafsenn]

Love how detailed you got with this. Would love to see more about contax cameras especially the later models

[@TechHeritage]

The video on Contax 139 Quartz is coming soon.

[@ionluv]

Fantastic video.

[@TechHeritage]

Glad you enjoyed it. Please consider watching our videos on the Nikon F professional series. It will be a good comparison.

[@colnagocowboy]

L have been using Contax cameras for years I love them.

[@TechHeritage]

I would like to hear which one is your favorite.

[@colnagocowboy]

@@TechHeritage I'm especially fond of the 139q and the S2b my favorite lenses are the 45mm f/2.8 and the 85mm fl1.8

[@saschamilenkovic4320]

Great look at the RTS, thanks for this. Completely agree. There are hidden gems out there for affordable prices. But everyone always wants Leica and Nikon.... 🤔 Nice pictures at the end too.

[@TechHeritage]

Right on

[@stanisawwysocki850]

Thank you for very interesting clip. I'm watching many different videos about Contax cameras, still didn't make my mind which one to choose, RTS is on my list of course same as RX, 159mm or Aria. Your video made my mind to go around this matter again :)) Regards

[@TechHeritage]

In my opinion, combine the unmatched functionality and beauty, with the heritage of star designer, F. A. Porsche and the choice is easy: RTS. It is like choosing Leica M3 over R3.

[@stanisawwysocki850]

@@TechHeritage so I did it :))) just minutes ago I've found the beauty beast 🙈😂 it will arrive in 7 days, great RTS...my Zeiss lenses can't wait for that moment. Regards

[@TechHeritage]

Enjoy!

[@bingo19871]

Good info thanks 👍

[@TechHeritage]

Glad it was helpful!

[@john_murch]

Thanks for the wonderful history. I've owned several Yashica/Contax bodies and many lenses since 1980. My current favourite is the 139Q. How about the RTSII? That seems a very popular camera with the Contax aficionados. How does it compare to the RTSI?

[@TechHeritage]

Dear John, I have used an RTS since 1975 and 139 Quartz since 1980. More recently I bought and RTS III and it was a dud. I had to return it to KEH, where I bought it. The viewfinder was impossible to read. That was not a condition of the camera. In my opinion it was a design fault. Unfortunately I have never tested RTS II. But one day I will. For now RTS remains my favorite SLR film camera of all time (considering that here at TechHeritate I have 300 cameras to play with).

[@michaelwhiles5282]

Just about to purchase my first SLR - a Pentax MX (which was lovely) when I handled the RTS which was superb, the RTS 2 even better. Almost purchased a 139 but went Nikon FE instead. I have a Yashic FR 1 - does that count ?

[@TechHeritage]

Actually I have been looking to buy the FR-1 in mint condition without success. It is very hard to get them in a good condition. Many of them have the frame counter stuck for some reason. FR-1 is featured and highly recommended in the original Contax RTS TV commercial, which I partially showed in this video. So, yes, it definitely counts as part of the family.

[@viktorpantazis4441]

Fantastic video, deep insight and artistic value. I considered getting a Contax camera as well as the MInolta XD, but I ended up with a Pentax LX when I found one in mint condition for about 180 euros. I thought that finding and buying more affordable Pentax lenses would be a wiser choice since I just now start my journey in film photography. I personally consider the Contax Aria and the XD as the most beautiful SLRs (with the Olympus OM-3/4 and Leica R5/6 close behind). The RTS looks beautiful and old school to me, like a Porsche 964 no less!

[@TechHeritage]

I usually add "heritage" to "aesthetics" when I look at cameras. Some have only one and some have both. Contax has the incredible Zeiss heritage and the lenses. In your line of thinking and adding "heritage" to the mix I prefer Olympus OM-1 and Leica R6.2. Similarly, Canon AE-1 or A1. A working Minolta XE is great as it is the basis of the design of Leica R3 to R6. Enjoy your excellent Pentax LX. Here is someone who endorses your choice: casualphotophile.com/2017/02/19/pentax-lx-camera-review-the-best-professional-35mm-slr-around/#google_vignette

[@viktorpantazis4441]

@@TechHeritage Thanks, I have to agree on the heritage part regarding the OM-1, AE-1 and R6.2! Thanks for the link, it was actually this very post that got me into buying the LX, he definitely did a good job selling it haha. I am slowly realising though that the Pentax forums' reviews are a bit kind to their lenses and while there are opportunities to be found, the good ones are pricey (albeit not Leica or Zeiss expensive).

[@AspectRatioPolice]

at 1:45 you show the Contax IIa from 1956

[@TechHeritage]

Well spotted. Thank you for pointing out. I actually own the Contax IIa and will one day do a review.

[@AspectRatioPolice]

So do I, great Camera, but the Nikon S2 has the best of Contax and Leica @@TechHeritage

[@Nestorico-m8i]

Hello, it's a pleasure to meet you!!!! I wanted to ask something: I am behind the Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 Distagon for this camera and my mirrorless!!! do you have any references? I know the Zeiss quality backs up it but I would like to read your opinion... is it a good lens or do you recomend another one with the same range of focal length? (35mm maximum) thanks a lot

[@TechHeritage]

I wish I had the 25mm Distagon. I have the 35mm F2.8 Distagon which was used for the pictures at the end of this video. Its sharpness and colour contrast, given the Carl Zeiss T* reputation is spectacular. I have no doubt the 25mm lens will also be exceptional as in all the T* lenses created for the C/Y mount. These are hidden gems and sought after by those shooting Sony mirrorless. I am currently using the Vario Sonar 28 to 85 F3.3-4.0 which replaces a bag full of prime lenses. It came with the Contax S2 anniversary model which is like a Contax RTS with fully mechanical systems and Titanium finish. Again, spectacular and highly recommended.

[@Nestorico-m8i]

@@TechHeritage thanks a lot. You know a lot about the Contax/Zeiss line. Could you advise me also to choose between the Contax RX or the Contax Aria? I am looking for an SRL. I really like the RX but it is a heavy monster and I want it for traveling and prowling. I wish you could advise me with some alternative of the Contax line. thanks

[@Nestorico-m8i]

@@TechHeritage Dear I am undecisive between the Contax Aria, the Contax RX (very heavy monster), and the Contax RTS.... which one I should chose? please give me an orientation!!!!

[@TechHeritage]

I can only say which one I would choose. The RTS in near mint condition, if you can get one.

[@aquamarin6514]

Fantastic Video - regarding the ZEISS -lenses - its worth noticing, that Carl Zeiss created microscopes hundred plus years ago, but Prof. Abbe and Dr. Rudolph created the first famous ZEISS-otpics,as we cherish'em nowadays; Especially the 4 lens TESSAR and later the even more ingeniuous Dr. Bertele from Munich the 6 lens SONNAR lenses - which basically was THE blueprint for ALL japanese optics from CANON, NIKON etc. who could copy those, as the german patents were lifted after WWII, even better as ZEISS Ikon, namely Dr. Smakula, invents the optic T* coating around 1938 - big hush-hush at the time which massively improved contrast etc. of all optics after the 2nd WW;

[@TechHeritage]

As you have followed the history of lens design, what do you think of the lens in Rollei 35 QZ? Do you know about that? Later today a video on 8+9 versions of Rollei 35 will be uploaded. The last one has a unique lens design: S-VarioApogon; 10 elements in 8 groups. Never repeated again. I am researching the origins of that lens design.

[@marcp.1752]

I am shooting Contax/Yashica since 89. Also own the Electro 35 series, GT, GTN, GS & GSN (black & silver), 35 CC/CCN, Contax RTS, RTS II & III (defective DC/DC Board), ST, RX, 159mm, 167mt, 137ma/md, S2b, Yashica FX-3 Super 2000, FX-D, FR-I, TL Electro 35 X (M42)

[@TechHeritage]

Your are obviously a feal fan of Contax. I am jealous of all the models that you have. We have a few and we will be covering all of them in due course. We also have the earlier models such as Contax IIa. But we had to return the RTSIII as its viewfinder was simply unreadable in bright light. I would like to hear your opinion of the later RTS models. One model you did not mention is the AX. Others are asking if we should review the AX. What do you think? Was that the strategic mistake that ended the series?

[@marcp.1752]

The AX was nice, but the issue was also here the same like sadly many Contax gear - it's mirror slip issue, among other things. And it's very bulky, afaik the biggest 35mm SLR ever, due to the camera-in-camera design, hence moving the film plate ca. 10mm back & forth inside, for the "AF" feature. It's prone to failure, nowadays, and best being put into a cabinet, rather then real world usage. The RTS III from 1990 was technically very advanced, even better than Nikon counterparts, but 99.999% suffers from broken display inside the OVF, because some capacitor gone mad, and with the AX, it's similar into other terms. Spare parts are 99% no more being avialable, and Kyocera went out of the (camera) business by the end of April 2005...it felt like a death into the family, back then. I remember these days *very* well. Merry X-mas to you.@@TechHeritage

[@carlosoruna7174]

And you dont have what was one of the best yashicas.. The 124g..

[@marcp.1752]

@@carlosoruna7174 Right, because i personally *hate* 6x6. I like 6x4.5, or 8x10, but not square 6x6...it's a personal preference. Making compostions into square sucks for me - i prefer 3:2 or 4:3 format, YMMV. ;-)

[@marcp.1752]

@@TechHeritage I do shoot Contax since 89, exactly. And i am not jealous about anything. For instance - a photography friend does have like 5-7 M series Leicas (35mm & digital) and i don't envy him. For some things, a rangefinder does come in handy - but i prefer (mostly) a big split-prism OVF, and look through the lens directly. With any rangefinder, you see through the rangefinder optics, but not through the lens. I own a few 35mm rangefinders, but not a single Leica - and don't really need it.

[@philmtx3fr]

Interesting video for the history of Zeiss which leads to this model child of a collaboration between yaschica and Zeiss. The force of this Contax line is their lenses (still very appreciated today in video) and it s a pity the video doesn t pass sufficient time on it. The end with this list of bodies which are very different from the RTS are less useful. The posterior bodies to the RtS are interesting too : the RTS2 probably a little superior in any domain to the RTS1, the 159mm the Aria can be found at very cheap prices.. but not the lenses. It s pity Contax miss the virage to autofocus and then digital. The N1 was a good camera but it was the beginning of the end… in this area Leica managed it better by maintaining it s M’line expensive with no autofocus, and entering in the digital world by its alliance with Panasonic a giant of the electronic world.

[@TechHeritage]

Thank you for the comments and suggestions. Our Contax series has a long way to go. There are many other models coming soon, going back as far as Contax I, then Contax IIa, IIIa, Contaflex and all the way to 139 Q and more. We value the position in history, above the feature list. In my opinion, the tragic Contax mistake was the strategy for autofocus through the body (as in AX), to make all of those excellent Zeiss lenses to instantly act as Autofocus. However this strategy was flawed compared to the fast and silent lens-based autofocus strategies, first by Canon and then Nikon. A case of misplaced investment and optimism which was not the first time in the history of Zeiss.

[@sputumtube]

It's a shame that many of these high-end cameras don't have the dioptre adjustment as on the likes of the humble Zorki 4 (etc).

[@TechHeritage]

I have always been puzzled with this issue. I wear glasses. On rangefinder cameras such as our Zorki 4 and many Barnack Leicas I definitely need the diopter adjustment. But on SLRs I don't need it. The science of that eludes me. Am I the only one?

[@sputumtube]

@@TechHeritage Yes.

[@saschamilenkovic4320]

The ST has one

[@aquamarin6514]

Note: only the film cassettes from those swedish HASSELBLADS with their ZEISS middle formnat lenses returned back from the moon to planet earth with its crew onboard Apollo 11 in July 1969 - beat that ! - Note: all those images taken on the moon surface the first time plus those epic pics from the earth from the spacecraft in the sixties were all taken with (Dr. Ludwig Berteles ingenious invention SONNAR and BIOGON WW at the time) west german CARL ZEISS lensens - those taken in space from the Russians with East german ZEISS Lenses mounted on TOPCON SLRs from Dresden & Carl ZEISS East Jena Optics /which used slightly radioactive glasses at the time !

[@TechHeritage]

Thanks for the great observations and details. I get depressed every time I think of what could have or should have been the future of Zeiss in the camera industry. They were the original inventors of countless systems, concepts and great products that others mercilessly copied. There must have been some flaw in strategic marketing or long term vision or damage from the east/west split that saw the gradual demise of Zeiss as a camera maker. It depresses me that Contax cameras and lenses are not better appreciated. BTW, since you seem to have an interest in Photography for the Space Program, you may like to see our video on Nikon F4. Also there is a lot of Zeiss talk in our video on the Rollei 35 family. A new one is being uploaded tomorrow.

[@y2ktube]

Video @ 21:48 "functionality - Very similar" - Not totally correct.- Especially in the shutters, they're very different. The R6.2 has a vertical traveling METAL shutter that has a very quick electronic flash sync of a 100th. The RTS uses a CLOTH horizontal traveling shutter that syncs to a very average 60th. Plus, the RTS is fully electronic; dead battery, dead camera. The R6 unit doesn't care about batteries, they're fully mechanical...

[@TechHeritage]

Your point is well understood and appreciated. If we are not totally correct, are we partically correct? I recommend you also watch our video on Leica R6.2. You may like it. There is some subtlety regarding the meaning of "Functionality" and "Similar" (not identical). In the hand, the two cameras feel similar and the workfolow is not dissimilar. We are talking cameras which were 18 years apart. Leica 6.2 is possibly the best of their R series and a very solid performer, sadly and unfairly neglected like most of the R series. But it does not show 18 years of improvement. If we look as a progression curve, there isn't a lot of innovation happening. Features always improve numerically and incrementally, like the obsession with megapixels today. But these are not very important to our focus on Technology Heritage. Great leaps are noteworthy rather than incremental improvements. We would count the direction of shutter travel as implementation rather than functionality. This implementation was well adopted by other cameras such as Nikon and introduced by Contax as far back as Contax 1, 2, 3, etc. BTW another video on those early Contax models is coming soon and your observations will be greatly appreciated.

[@y2ktube]

@@TechHeritage - "possibly the best of their R series" - As a Leica collector (I own every Leica SLR up to the R9) and camera repair technician, the finest of their fully manual SLR cameras is the Leicaflex SL2 (All R lenses fit on the SL2). Among many other things, the metal utilized in the Leicaflex shutter gearing is so hard that I can't scratch the metal with Swiss tweezers. Plus, the VF & its screen is the most brilliant ever produced; a true WOW factor. - By comparison, the R6 is considered 'Light Duty'...

[@carlosoruna7174]

Was the major photo retailer in Montreal in the 70s and 80s.. Contax was ok but couldnt match nikon or canon.. These contax were a mariage with Kyocera, and yashica which they owned.. Some of the lenses were made by zeiss in germany but most were japanese made. Decent body but no where near the Nikon F2 or 3..

[@TechHeritage]

Thank you for sharing of your direct experience. Contax was more a child of Zeiss and Yashica rather than Yashica and Kyocera. In 1975, Canon's professional camera was still F-1 from 1971. Canon AE-1 with the electronic shutter was not launched yet. There was no Canon A-1. There was no Fanon F1n or New F1. The best Canon close to that date was the old FTB. Nikons best camera in 1975 was still the F2 from 1971. There was no F3 or FM or FE yet. I was in Tokyo when Contax RTS was launched. On that moment it was a very big deal and a huge leap with a fully grown echo-system to go with it. I have not personally seen any of the Contax RTS Carl Zeiss T* lenses stating made in Japan. The separate Yashica CY lenses which also work on Contax cameras, however were made in Japan. The Zeiss versions are highly sought after in the second hand market today.

[@DucNguyen-jy3gi]

I stopped watching at best SLR ever made

[@TechHeritage]

And yet you found the time to post a comment. For that, I thank you.

[@Whywas6scared]

I don't deny the merits of the Contax RTS series, but beautiful?? It has looks that only a mother could love. Definitely not Porsche's finest hour. The original Contax S series was infinity more beautiful.

[@TechHeritage]

I must be the Mother since I think Contax RTS is a most beautiful piece of industrial design and several years ahead of its time. I also have the Contax II and many others from the Contax family such as Contaflex and 10 others from Zeiss Ikon. Most of them are exceptional and beautiful designs. But RTS is on the top shelf here. Porsche design, other than their car designs are distinguished by the use of pure geometry and clean effortless junctions. One can tell a Porsche design even in different product types without seeing the logo. Their other camera design, the Rollei QZ is also exceptional.

[@Whywas6scared]

@TechHeritage Fair enough, and well argued. I was probably a little harsh in how I put it across, but I do stand by my opinion. I will concede though that it was probably a suitable design for the era.

[@saschamilenkovic4320]

I disagree. The Design is great and definitely 'Porsche'.