Greetings Contax T3 Users,

It seems that the original discussion on the Contax T3 started by John McCormack has run into difficulties (perhaps because of its length). I have cut and pasted below the last of the discussion activity with the hope that the contributions continue. Thanks to John for starting the original discussion @:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004u2K

Regards, Eric --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have a question about the flash synch speed of the T3. Does anyone know what it is? I would also like to see some pictures of the flash bracket and external flash mounted on the T3 so I can see what I would be getting into before laying out that kind of money. I haven't recieved my T3 yet but I must admit I am pretty excited to be able to back up my M6 with such a nice little P&S.

-- Gus Hagberg (grhagberg@snet.net), July 08, 2001.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the T3 flash sync up to 1/500 sec, as T2

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 08, 2001.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a question concerning the flash too. Do the flash goes to slow sync mode when used in aperture priority as the GR1 do it? I found the flash settings of my GR1 to be ideal and i am wondering if the T3 is as logical/simple on this point. Any comment form a former GR1 owner would be great!

-- Fabrice Bodet (beud@hotmail.com), July 08, 2001. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Eric James (eajames@u.washington.edu), July 11, 2001

Answers

Re: "Does the flash goes to slow sync mode when used in aperture priority as the GR1 do it?"

Yes. I believe the T3 operates similar to the GR1 (which I use also) in slow sync with aperture priority. In fact, you can also set the T3 to very long shutter speeds (up to 180 seconds) with the LT setting and also force the flash to fire, or not, as you wish.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 11, 2001.

Does the T3 has manual focus confirmation signal red < and > and focus is right on, a green * ?

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 11, 2001.

Martin,

If I understand your question correctly, yes, manual scale focusing is confirmed (using scale focusing mode where user sets the distance) with a slowly blinking (one time/second) green circle in the viewfinder (The distance is displayed in meters on the top panel.) The slow blinking is a reminder that manual focusing is in use. I don't recall seeing any red warning light on the T3.

Using the AFL (Auto Focus Lock) button the focus distance is also confirmed with a slowly blinking (one time/second) green lighted circle in the viewfinder (The distance is displayed in meters on the top panel.)

Autofocus using regular AF is confirmed with a steady green lighted circle in the viewfinder (The distance is displayed in meters on the top panel.)

If focus cannot be achieved, using AFL or AF, the circle blinks quickly - 4 times/second.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 11, 2001.

Does the lens cover of T3 seem flimsy to you? T2 is perfect other than the shutter lag.

-- shi (shi@cfm.brown.edu), July 11, 2001.

I don't see any problem with the lens cover. The lens is tucked away inside the body very well, and the cover seems to do its job as a dust and scratch proof covering. The T2 is a top notch camera, but the T3 has a few more improvements besides just the lag decrease. The faster shutter / lack of vignetting at all speeds and apertures / slightly better optics / closer focus / and noticeably more compact size.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 13, 2001.

John, thanks for the reply, it seems that T3 retains one of the unique feature of T2-- manual rangefinder-- not available on Minilux nor Nikon Ti.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 14, 2001.

I just got my first 2 rolls back from the T3 and I am quite suprised with the results. The detail is phenominal and the color rendition is just beautiful. After the first 1/2 roll I felt like I've been shooting with it for years. I lose no detail close focusing wide open. Straight into the sun, no problem. This is my first high end P&S. I looked at the Minilux but I hated the veiwfinder. The T3 finder is 100% better. I also get a much higher shutter speed than the Minilux. I use an M6 TTL and bought this to back it up but I'm not so sure the M6 wont be backing up this camera now. I want to thank everyone on this thread for their input because it definitely helped me make my decision to buy the T3. I will keep reading this thread to pick up any other info or can be of any help to anyone. Thanks again!

-- Gus Hagberg (grhagberg@snet.net), July 15, 2001.

Has anyone used the flash bracket and additional flash with their T3? Impressions? Are you solely limited to the TLA200 (which might be more powerful, but does little to move the flash off the axis of the lens to reduce redeye), or can you use one of the larger Contax flashes which have bounce capability? Do you still get TTL with those flashes or is the bracket connection solely for the TLA200? Thanks in advance.

-- Eliott Frank (efrank@yahoo.com), July 17, 2001.

According to one Contax rep. I spoke with, you can only use the TLA-200 flash with the SA-2 dedicated bracket for TTL flash metering.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 17, 2001.

I recently acquired the T3 and was perhaps slightly disappointed by the 'snap shooting' results. I have a T4, Nikon 35Ti and Contax G1 system and Pentax system. Nikon 35Ti seems sharper and exhibits stronger contrast and colours from same film batch and from the same processors taken of the same environment.

Characteristics of lens seem quite similar to the T4 but T4 is less sharp in the majority of cases, though it can be pin sharp in others. I found the focusing metering a bit odd, sometimes the T3 would display a distance of 10 m when clearly the subject is at infinity or it would display 3m when the subject is clearly more at about 6m. I found that the focusing area is unusually wide and 'averages' the focus, which is fine for 'newbies' who might shoot between peoples heads, but going for precise focus is difficult as really what keen photographers want is spot focus on a particular point? 35ti and T4 system works fine for me. And this is probably why 35ti appears sharper in the majority of shoots?

For Flash usage the Flash is relatively weak and light fall off is very apparent more than T4 and 35Ti, Flash sync seems quite high as it cuts off the ambient light into darkness whereas the 35Ti exposes more for the surrounding enviroment. However the T3 does have a night flash mode where it does open the shutter long enough for the background while firing the flash for the main subject. My feelings on the flash is it could have been stronger (for a camera of this price) and is bettered by many cheaper cameras. ISO 100 film only covers 2 metres! Infact with non flash photos there is also light fall off at the corners of the frame, something I was not expecting as I read it didn't happen. T4 and 35Ti exhibit it at small apertures particularly in bright conditions and with blue skys. T3 exhibits at large apertures, but need to do more shooting to confirm. G1 and Pentax systems do not exhibit light fall off in the corners of the frame.

Camera is very quiet compared to 35Ti and noticably less bulky and lighter, though T4 appears even lighter!

Overall the 35Ti is a better overall camera, more control, more feedback e.g. precise shutter speeds given in viewfinder, auto adjusting parallex marks, better flash performance, flash aperture priority mode etc. (but you can't buy it anymore!)

So T3 is the best compact camera you can buy if only I can verify if it is better than the Leica Minilux which I don't own!

Happy shooting...

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 19, 2001.

..oppss sorry T3 has flash aperture priority too...

-- Kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 19, 2001.

Re: "...T3 is the best compact camera you can buy if only I can verify if it is better than the Leica Minilux which I don't own!"

The lens on the Minilux is excellent (arguably as good as the T3's), but I sold my Minilux to buy the T3 because the T3 is smaller, has a better viewfinder, has a nice set of custom functions, operates quieter, has flash default setting not found on the Minilux, accepts filters and a lens hood, has a faster high shutter speed (max 1/1200 vs. 1/400), longer programmed exposure mode, and focuses much closer. YMMV.

New T3 images added to my T3 folder at: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=122840

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 19, 2001.

So far I've found that the T3 although it can focus to .35m it's not very good at it (on large apertures) - Due to it's wide (averaging) auto focus area (when focusing is critical at close quarters with shallow depth of field). Camera generally focuses on the wrong point if the subject /s is not flat. Lens also does not appear to perform it's best at very close range, not as good as 35ti subjectively. Though the design of the Sonnar lens seems to be uncompromised as the length of the barrel is unusually long. -It appears the optical designers haven't compressed the length for the sake of compactness. When focusing at infinity of course there are no targeting problems and the camera returns VERY sharp results even at f2.8

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 19, 2001.

Pricing wise in Hong Kong the Contax is the most expensive (Even T2 was). Cheapest Hong Kong price for T3 is 624 USD, Minilux is 429 USD, my Nikon 35Ti was 519 USD. The price I paid for my T3 was 662 USD as this store was giving away a free databack because Beijing won the right to host the 2008 Olympic games. Not a bad price (I think).

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 19, 2001.

Kwen. It sounds to me like you may have gotten a camera with some problems. Mine does not exhibit any of the fall off or focusing errors you were describing, and the lens is in another league compared to the one on the T4 I used heavily for 6 years. I have gotten 24 out of 24 in focus well exposed shots with no edge fall off on all the rolls I've exposed with mine so far. My flash exposures have been just fine as well, both indoors and outside for fill.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 20, 2001.

John,

Nice pics. The extremely sharp close-up of the flower belies claims that the T3 does not focus properly on close-ups. I have one flash shot close-up of my friend's face that is "scientific" sharp showing details of every pore, blemish and sprouting whisker. Yuk! In that case it was too sharp! But its nice to know that such close-up capability is available for shots just like your flower shot.

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), July 21, 2001.

I think I probably do have a slightly suspect specimen if everyone else has sharp pictures at close up and evenly illuminated pictures across the frame for flash shots...

One thing I did notice (on my T3) is that the autofocus area is approximately 5 ovals wide (if you take the autofocus 'oval' and lay them out 5 times) and it prevents my T3 from focusing through a gap in the door which is half open -if I sit stand about 2 metres back from it. (by the way, are the U.S. T3 distance scales in feet?). If I take a vertical shot the autofocus area doesn't clip the edges of the door and focuses through into the distance.

The above is the source of the problems I have with close up focusing at wide apertures. Having analysed the 'duff shots' one photo is of my son at the table with a basket from which he is eating. The shot is vertical and instead of the focus on his face, my T3 has turned it's attention on the basket. Although I positioned the autofocus target on his face the width of the autofocus area when the camera was vertical must have clipped the basket in front of him and rendered that sharply instead...hmmm. Of course if it was an outdoor shot with plenty of sun the camera would have gone to a smaller aperture and depth of focus wouldn't have been so critical.

So it's probably 'operator error' more than anything, and stems from the fact that Contax did not represent accurately the width of the autofocus area in the viewfinder. Some other brands physically show the width of their multipoint autofocus.

Flash wise, 2 metres is not a very far with ISO 100 film and nor is 3 metres with ISO 200 which is about spitting distance! I am surprised that most people achieve even illumination across the frame.

Anyway...if it really bugs me I'll try for a warranty claim, though I always dislike people opening up things to have a look, especially if they were precision made in Japan.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 22, 2001.

The popular photography tests said that although the flash was not the most powerful they'd seen in a P&S, it was actually capable of further distances than listed in the manual. They shot out to 20 feet with ISO 400 speed and still had good exposures. I am surprised how well mine works in fill flash mode, even in bright sunlight I get some fill on the faces even when I'm 7 to 10 feet away. I usually use Fuji 400 speed color neg in most any P&S camera. The very slight increase in grain is more than offset by the ability to shoot further with flash and in lower light situations.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 22, 2001.

Just shot 18 rolls of print film, (NPH, NPC, Reala, NPS and Portra VC 400,) while on vacation in SE Pennsylvania and the Jersey shore. Processed the film at A&I, Pro Lab in Los Angeles. I mainly used the T3. A few shots were also taken with a Leica Minilux Zoom, the Yashica T5 and the Canon 50mm F/1.4.

I have never gotten better/sharper/eye popping color photographs.

Mainly due to the ability to comfortably carry the T3 everywhere and it's quick "point and shoot" operation, I was able to capture many more natural shots of my five nephews (4-12) and my boy (2.8) playing and interacting under a wider variety of situations, (beach, boardwalk, backyard), than I would have with an SLR.

Moreover the great T3 optics enabled me to capture extremely high photos of fast moving kids' under every imagineable lighting conditions.

My relatives, includintg a few photo buffs, can't beleive the great, "best ever" photo quality.

In short, the T3 delivered superbly.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), July 25, 2001.

Sorry Ladies and Gents,

Should read..."Capture extremely high quality photos.."

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), July 25, 2001.

How does the manual focus on the T3 work ? By dial or by a litte button ? Please detail the procedure.

Thank you very much

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), July 27, 2001.

There are two ways to set manual focusing on the T3:

Manual Focusing by Scale Press Mode button four times until "AF" is displayed. Then rotate +/- dial until desired focus range is shown (.4 meters to Infinity). You can return to AF mode quickly by pressing the AFL button.

Focusing by AFL Button Point camera at subject and press the AFL buttton to lock focus at that distance (Distance is displayed on the top LCD.).

The AFL function can be customized for focus lock only or focus lock and AE (exposure) lock. Also, the focus lock hold time using the AFL button can be set for one frame only or until camera is turned off.

Manual focus hold time can be customized to remain set until camera is turned off or until the setting is cancelled.

See more discussion of T3 functions in this older thread: http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004u2K

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 27, 2001.

I've been following the discussion of the T3 ever since the camera first came out, and I find myself inching towards upgrading from my T2. However, I have also read of another high end P&S from Fuji, which is supposed to be available "soon." It is called the Klasse. Does anyone have any information on it? Also, is it likely that Leica will be introducing an update of the Minilux?

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), July 27, 2001.

As to the minilux being updated, I cannot say, but there is a rumor going around that it's to be discontinued. Someone in the minilux club discussion group reported he'd heard it from 2 local camera dealers. Of course, they may have been trying to move the item by urging him to "get one while you can". Whether it's true and whether it implies a replacement/update are things I'd very much like to know. I've seen pictures of the Klasse with a list of features; possibly they were linked on John's site?

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), July 27, 2001.

I just looked up the site which features a picture of the Fuji Klasse, with (some) specs:

photozone.de/range.htm

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), July 27, 2001.

t3 users, please forgive these multiple postings, somewhat off-topic, but just to follow through on answering the Klasse question, I'll add that I found a very brief review on the popphoto.com site:

38mm 2.6 (one-upmanship) tessar-type with an aspherical element added 1/1000, but with the same limitation as t3 - slower speeds only w. wider apertures; 1/300 max. if wide open. P/AP systems Like so many of these cameras, looks like a gleaming, silvery theft candidate. List approx. $620, but Japan only for now, apparently. That was about it. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), July 27, 2001.

A major drawback to the Fuji mentioned above is that it is a Fuji. They have to win an award for the poorest support in the camera world. It they stick to their standard procedure, three years from now when it is discontinued, they will have no more parts available for it.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 27, 2001.

The Fuji doesn't have Carl either. Carl Zeiss that is! It would be very interesting if Leica tried to outdo the T3 with a Minilux II.

Leica just teamed up with Panasonic to make a Digital Still Camera (DSC) aimed at the Cybershot, Canon G-1 and Coolpix 995. They all need to improve a few more evolutions to catch up to film quality, no less the quality of the T3.

Meanwhile, I'll be taking some of the best shots ever with my T3 thanks! Is my raving about this camera becoming embarassing?!?!

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), July 27, 2001.

Re: Fuji KLASSEE

According to the press I've read, the Fuji KLASSE will only be available in the home (Japanese) market. This may change with demand, of course.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 28, 2001.

To balance out my gushing of the attributes of the T3, I thought this email exchange between Marc (T4 owner) and I, could provide some material for review and also some criticism of the T3.

Hi Phil,

You wrote on the bulletin board recently: "Meanwhile, I'll be taking some of the best shots ever with my T3 thanks! Is my raving about this camera becoming embarassing?!?! " I thought I'd write to you privately and say that, yes, it is becoming a bit much to hear the predictable raves from you about the T3. As Charles Stewart mentioned in an earlier post on Part 1 of the board, one has to wonder if some of the posters aren't simply shills for Contax I posted. (on Part 1) a message asking for more substantial reviews about the T3, especially comparisons to the Yashica T4. In that post, I asked you specifically to describe how prints from the T3 are superior to the T4 (which you say you also own). Andrew Shank was kind enough make pointed comparisons between the two cameras. I heard nothing from you. If you care to be useful to those considering the purchase of a T3, how about loading the same film type in each camera, shoot a variety of images with both cameras sequentially, process the two rolls of film at the same place, and provide detailed, objective, honest appraisals of the resulting prints. That would be very helpful to the photo community. The going price of the T3 is more than four times what I paid for my T4. Features alone hardly can justify that to me; consistent, superior picture results might.

-Marc Ditz --------------------- Phil’s 1st Reply to Marc:

Marc,

I use the T4/T5 for beach, fishing and bad weather shooting and am completely satisfied with the snapshots that it renders. Of course only you can be the judge whether the feature set/flexibility of the T4 is adequate. Only under a 4x loupe do I notice a small degree of superiority of sharpness of the T3 images over the T4 images of subjects, (shot with the same film under the same conditions and processed identically).

Others have provided much more technical/scientific reviews which can tend to exaggerate the differences between lenses. In my subjective view after using the T3, Minilux Zoom and the Canon 50 f/1.4, the T3 is about the same degree sharper over the over the Minilux zoom as it is over the T5. Which is to say, an insignificant degree sharper, when viewing the amazingly sharp prints that these fine cameras can render.

Since, even under the loupe and in 8x10 enlargements the T3 has been delivering results comparable in sharpness to my Canon 50mm f/1.4, (one of the very sharpest lens' made), I feel confident using the T3 interchangeably with the 50 mm f/1.4 in all serious shooting that can accommodate the T3's 35 mm lens. Since the T3 is much more convenient to carry/use than the SLR and I can bring it anywhere and quickly "point and shoot" many more shots with equal quality as my sharpest SLR lens, theT3 has provided me with more photographic mobility/freedom.

Since I also have the TL 200 flash for the T3, which when mounted using the SA-2 bracket, is far less cumbersome than the canon EX 550 and even the Leica CF flash for the Minilux zoom, the T3 remains extremely portable/handy for most of my flash shooting. The main exception is some flash shooting in which I want to apply bounce flash.

The T4/T5 does similarly fine daylight fill flash as the T3 and it's flash is comparable to the T3's built-in flash which is limited to mostly head and shoulders portraits. _____________ Marc’s Reply Hi Phil,

Thanks for your quick reply.

Let's leave aside the SLR comparison. As you say that as regards your Yashica T4 you are "completely satisfied with the snapshots that it renders," I continue to wonder what exactly you prefer about the T3 over the T4.

Let's leave aside flash shooting for which you might want the flash attachment capability of the T4. Why would you choose to take along the T3 over the T4? In your view, the optics of the two cameras are essentially of the same quality. So that leaves things like shutterlag of the T4, the aperture priority of the T3 (thought that's limited to 1/500 sec or slower shutter speed), programability and focusing reliability, etc.

From what I've read, the autofocus of the T3 may be much more predictable than that of the T4. To my mind, that's a significant plus. The shutterspeed info in the viewfinder is nice, but as Pop Photo said, having the focusing distance also in the viewfinder would have much better than having to look on top of the camera for that info. And you're saying that the built-in flash of the T3 is really no better than that in the T4.

I guess I was simply trying to pin down exactly what you preferred about the T3 over the T4 that might justify a price difference of $550.

Thanks, Marc ________ Phil’s Last Reply to Marc:

Hi Marc, The quality of the T3 is comparable to the 50 mm f/1.4. The T4 is not up to that standard and is not interchangeable with the 50 mm in my view. For example, if I come across a scene that can be shot with the T4 or the T3, or, the 50 mm, I now prefer the T3 over the SLR for it’s convenience, knowing I would not be losing any image quality in the captured picture. However, I would not choose the T4 over my SLR with the Canon 50 mm 1.4 lens.

This is not saying that I am not completely satisfied with the snapshots that the T4 and Minilux Zoom produce and I use my T4 for the beach and fishing and bad weather. The Minilux zoom is a great people shooter. But I would not use the T4 in safe/dry conditions and choose it if the T3 or the Canon SLR with the 50 mm f /1.4 were available.

Alone, the fact that the T3 is interchangeable with my SLR equipped with one of the sharpest lens available, makes the T3 a bargain. As I said I can now go anywhere with the ability to “point and shoot” top quality photos that I could not or would not due to the inconvenience of the bulk of the SLR.

No the optics are not the same quality between the T4 and the T3 as you seem intent on contriving to make your point, (i.e; that the T3 is not worth the extra money that one could spend for a T4/T5). The T4 optics are very fine while the T3 is the finest.

In addition to dismissing the T3’s superior optics, to further contrive your case, you also say, “Let’s leave out the capability of added flash, more accurate and quicker AF-assist focus, aperture priority shooting, no shutter lag, CF function programming and manual focus ability.”

Then, unbelievably, you still ask, “So after leaving all these features out, what is it about the T3 that justifies the price difference of $500 over the T4/T5.” Well Marc I see to match your logic we’ll have to look at things backwards.

For instance, if one were to strip all of the T3 ‘s features and superior optics mentioned above that the T4/T5 does not have, the T3 would probably still cost more than the T4/T5. That is because you would still have rock solid titanium construction, smaller, better portability, better viewfinder and the strong/reliable Contax reputation. Also the T4/T5 was an incredible value but will not be available anymore and I doubt you could get anything near the quality of it’s lens for less than $300.00.

With the T3 you get it all. But unfortunately we usually must also pay for what we want to get. If you do not want to pay extra to get the extra features and superior optics of the T3 (rated sharpest ever P&S) – if those features and quality are not worth it for you - then stay with your T4 and be happy.

However, just because you cannot find an adequate basis on which to make your argument that th eT3 us not worth it, does not make me a shill for Contax because I expressed my satisfaction with a very good product. I've been photgraphing for about 35 years with some of the finest equipment available and the T3 has proven itself to be tops.

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), July 28, 2001.

Adding to the T3/T4 debate, as owner of both too, the upgrade depends ultimately on the size of your resources.

The T4 optically exhibits very similar traits to the T3, (for me subjectively anyway, the same sort of colour, depth, delicacy of detail which it renders beautifully - compared to say my 35Ti which renders the detail more 'aggressively' 'stamping' out the details with more 'authority', but less sharply. T4 is afterall a CZ.

However the T4 has more distortion than T3 in the corners, is less sharp than the T3 in the corners, and is less uniformly illuminated across the frame. Darker corners are more apparent with T4 than T3 e.g. at small apertures on a blue sky.

Wide open the T4 is sharp but the T3 is even sharper. (my subjective comments are based on different batches of photos and not a 'scientific' side by side comparison so are somewhat limited in value, and the keyword here is 'subjective') T3 appears to have more resolving power too.

T4 Flash is also more powerful than the T3's providing better illumination.

Focus on the T4 is active, while on the T3 it is passive. T4 focuses in the dark better and if you are doing candid night shots, it's black body and discretness win the day. T3 gives the game away with a flashing focus aid! Active focus appears to have a problem with focusing at infinity, so the T4 has a focus lock for distant objects but I have never found it to be a problem. I actually have more focusing problems on the T3 due to it's wider autofocus area than the 'point' focus area of the T4 (which I prefer). U.S. version of T4 I think has multibeam AF. i.e. has a waist finder. My T4 doesn't.

T4 is ligher than T3 (despite deliberate attempts to make the camera lighter) but T3 remains the smaller camera.

T4 is noiser in operation, on activation, and on shooting. T3 is velvet in operation. Functionality wise of course the T3 has more features on board which are available on promotional literature, but unfortunately not on the contaxcameras.com site (July).

My T3 (which may be a slightly compromised production model) gives more wrong exposures than the T4 (in point and shoot mode), the flash failing to fire in backlight situations. It also occasinally focuses on the wrong point even given the chance twice! as detailed in the above thread.

As to comparisons with SLR's or with Contax's own G system the compacts T4 and T3 don't have a even illumination across the frame (with the samples I possess) at small apertures probably in the region of f8 - f16 (no aperture info). There is a darkening in the corners of the frame particulary noticable with clear skys, though with the T3 the effect is much less pronounced.

I've posted some casual 'point and shoot' snapshots (not photographic art!) of photos taken with the T3 and scanned to CDROM via a commercial film scanner at: http://webxone.com/t3 on shot aIMG0030.jpg there is a slight darkening of the frame in the lefhand and righthand corners in the sky. T4 would be worse, as would 35Ti, T3 is relatively subdued in comparison.

Price wise the T3 is not a 4x better camera than the T4 but the increment is worth it for some e.g. me and others on this thread. (but in my case I was not looking for a camera to replace my T4 it was to replace the Nikon 35Ti). If you already have the T4 and are perhaps not completely convinced that the T3 is the better camera or that the gains are minimal, the Contax G1 and 45mm f2 lens is just a little more than the T3 (well in HK anyway). This would probably be the better purchase over the T3 as it give you more control, more features, more expansion and a better lens. Although not a compact is reasonably small compared to an SLR, and your T4 would be there for situations where the G1 is 'too big'.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 28, 2001.

If you are happy with the results with the T4, by all means save your money and keep using it. I was not 100% happy with the response time of mine, or the corner darkening in many outside shots, but mostly because I had no control over exposures and no idea where the camera had focused. The T3 addressed these issues and added a faster, sharper lens with no distortion and an amazing resistance to all types of flare. I use mine mostly for nature outings, and am enjoying the high performance of the lens at f2.8 for natural light pictures in the woods (without flash of course)and late in the day. I will try to post some shots soon. I lOVE that I can set defaults where I want them so I am not having to push a bunch of buttons before every exposure to get the camera to do what I want. I can get 8X12's of superb quality with even edge sharpness right up there with the best 35mm lenses out there in a camera that is the size of an APS camera.

If a person's use were mostly to take images of family and friends, many taken inside with a flash, then the T4 would probably be a better choice. The T3 is not going to deliver 4X better images than the T3,(the cost ratio) but that is the case with any high end optics. The $2000 Leica M lenses are not 8 times better then the Nikkor primes either. Unfortunately, I have become cursed with an eye for the slight difference these days. I was probably better off before I shot a few rolls with that damn Leica Summicron a few years back! Spoiled me for life.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 29, 2001.

Just got my T3 and love it. I had a T2 for 5 years, and find the T3 better in all respects (but I do have to agree the styling is a bit better in the T2). I have found only 2 minor things I would change:

1) the "dial" for setting EV compenstation and defaults I find hard a bit hard to turn quickly and accurately (this will probably get better with time)

2) I wish there was an electronic way to set a default f-stop, and have that be the default when the camera turns on. I find that I am using the camera a lot of outdoor activities, and many times I want to set an f-stop and just use that every time I turn the camera on.

Take care, Paul

-- Paul Beiser (pbeiser1@home.com), July 30, 2001.

More questions about the various focusing possibilities.

A) Focusing with the AFL button: 1) if you custom the camera so that focus is locked until turning off (CF6), how do you return to standard AF mode ? 2) does the lens extend as soon as you push the AFL button, or do you have to half-press the shutter button once ?

B) Focusing manually by pre-selecting a distance: 1) once you have selected the distance using the Mode button and the +/- dial, how do you change the distance between each frame ? by the Mode button and the dial, or the dial only ? (assuming that you use the custom function CF7 to keep manual focus mode until reset) 2) does the lens extend as soon as you have selected a distance, or do you have to half-press the shutter button once ? 3) how many distance steps are available ?

Thank you very much for all these interesting comments.

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), July 31, 2001.

If I understand your questions correctly:

A) 1) Turn off the camera and switch it back on A) 2) pressing the AFL button does not lock the lens as it retracts once you have released the shutter button. When you fire the shutter the lens extends to focus position.

B) 1) Mode button and the dial, B 2) lens extends when manual focus is set B 3) 0.4m, 0.5m, 0.6m, 0.7m, 0.8m, 0.9m, 1m, 1.1m, 1.3m, 1.5m, 2m, 3m, 5m, 10m and infinity

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@webxone.com), July 31, 2001.

Paul,

"1) the "dial" for setting EV compenstation and defaults I find hard a bit hard to turn quickly and accurately (this will probably get better with time)" - it's not too difficult as it is at first level on the mode menu, but cycling around for the other functions is a slight chore.

2) I wish there was an electronic way to set a default f-stop, and have that be the default when the camera turns on. I find that I am using the camera a lot of outdoor activities, and many times I want to set an f-stop and just use that every time I turn the camera on. - yeah, agree. On the 35ti as a comparison a camera from the 'last century' sets the f stop and stays there when switched on, plus I miss having the half stops, 35ti has half stops all the way to f22.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), July 31, 2001.

1) It was mentioned that in low light, the T3 throws out a red baem. Is this very noticeable? Would it cause problems when I an trying to get informal peple shots in indoor low light. Is there a noise associated with the red beam (I read this somewhere.) 2) How is the metering for informal peple shots in indoor low light. Is it too wide for very varied lighting, for example, a well illuminated face with dark surroundings. I am usually using high speed black and white film in these circumstances. 3) Can anyone compare shrpness for the T3 with the Contax T. I always found the T sharper than the T2. Since the lenses were supposed to be the same, I assumed it was due to the difference in roundness of the aperature ring. Aperature priority on the T2 is a phony (only good up to 1/125 of a second shutter speed) and I usually used program. In this mode the T2 ignores the aperature ring and uses the shutter blades to form the aperatue, just as in all of the cheapy P&S's. Thus not a very round aperature.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), July 31, 2001.

Apologies for the horrible spelling in my message.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), July 31, 2001.

Kwen,

For my question A2, do you mean that even if in AFLock mode you custom the camera to keep focus until turning off (CF6), the lens is retracted after each frame ? It would be a bit odd, I think.

I am wondering why you bother about keeping the same f-stop after turning off and on: you could then just stay in aperture priority mode, with your favorite f-stop, don't you ?

Thank you again

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), July 31, 2001.

>>1) It was mentioned that in low light, the T3 throws out a red >>beam. Is this very noticeable?

No, it's not noticeable, just a quick red flash; no "beam" like a laser pointer or something.

>>Would it cause problems when I an trying to get informal peple >>shots in indoor low light. Is there a noise associated with the red beam (I read this somewhere.)

No and No.

2) How is the metering for informal people shots in indoor low light. Is it too wide for very varied lighting, for example, a well illuminated face with dark surroundings?

In my experience, metering is fine in low light, but I haven't shot many pictures with drastic backlighting.

Check out this image, which had strong daytime backlighting http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=260289

and this image, shot in low light w/ auto flash setting. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=290420

>I am usually using high speed black and white film in these >circumstances. 3) Can anyone compare sharpness for the T3 with the >Contax T.

Can't help here, but I can't imagine the older T lens is any sharper.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 31, 2001.

>For my question A2, do you mean that even if in AFLock mode you >custom the camera to keep focus until turning off (CF6), the lens is >retracted after each frame ? It would be a bit odd, I think.

The lens does not fully retract; it only returns to the "resting" position - a small move of the lens but not the whole lens barrel.

>I am wondering why you bother about keeping the same f-stop after >turning off and on: you could then just stay in aperture priority >mode, with your favorite f-stop, don't you?

I'm not sure I understand your question clearly but here's how the T3 main switch works: Moving the main switch from OFF one click and your in Program (P) mode. You must press down the button over the power switch to move to Aperture priority f/ stops (unlike the T2 the f/ stop setting are not on the lens barrel. Thus you cannot turn the camera OFF without passing through the f/ stop setting(s) through P mode to OFF.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), July 31, 2001.

I've got just a couple of things to note, then I'll butt out of this group, at least until I make up my mind to buy a T3 and can discuss it on the basis of experience:

1. There was a question about the old Contax T. That was a 38mm sonnar I think and, as far as I know, identical to that on the T2. I rejected a good buy on a used one, because I couldn't manually focus (no autofocus) conveniently: the finder was bright and clear, but the camera had that damned trap door for collapsing the lens that the TVS III has now. Too hard for a smaller person to get thumb and forefinger around the obstacle to work the focus ring. Also there was some other limitation I didn't like: no exposure compensation, I think. I believe it was aperture priority only, but you could find all that out somewhere on the web, I'm sure.

2. In replying to a question about possible minilux upgrades, I reported a rumor I'd heard that the ML non-zoom was being discontinued. Since then I've read that it's the date back that's being discontinued and that both miniluxes are still in production. Still nothing about upgrades, apparently. One shouldn't repeat rumors, in general. Sorry about that.

3. Have enjoyed this discussion, and the T3 users have convinced me that the camera is the nearest thing to nirvana currently available in compact cameras. Oh, if they'd only (a.) offer a black one - I can't live with the silver for a couple of reasons of my own, and don't think I could black-tape the lens-front ring safely - and/or (b.) offer a little longer single focal length - 38-45, which I find more useful. Then I'd take the plunge and replace my trusty T4. Thanks for all the good information and interesting observations, folks. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), July 31, 2001.

Jerome,

in addition to John's response, and for clarifcation "For my question A2, do you mean that even if in AFLock mode you custom the camera to keep focus until turning off (CF6), the lens is retracted after each frame ? It would be a bit odd, I think. "

Even though the AFL function is set, the lens does not stay in it's extended focus position, it retracts to it's parked position (not totally into the body). The focus position is memorised by the AFL but it's not until you fire the shutter button does the lens extend back out to the pre locked focussed position. (so there will be a slight delay)

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 01, 2001.

Jay,

If you do very low light shots like I do, e.g. night market, dimly lit restaurant, street shots illuminated by street lighting or signs then the flashing focus aid does attract people's attention. The more dim the environment, the more noticable the focus aid is.

Although I have not yet shot such scenes with my T3 I have extensively with my Contax G1 which uses the same focus aid. I had to tape it up, and use manual focus, and occasionally self timer (so it doesn't look like you are taking a photo as your finger is not on the shutter!). T5 would be handy as it has a waist level finder.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 01, 2001.

I wil try and post a few recent nature shots taken with the T3. Lets see if these prompts work, otherwise I'll just paste the url's. I love taking this camera with me on hikes on my belt in its case-you don't even know its there.

T3 photo1

T3 photo2

T3 photo3

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 01, 2001.

Charles,

They do DO a black T3 see this link: http://www.kyocera.co.jp/news/2001/0104/0402-e.asp

The link was originally posted by Mike Johnston on the http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_i d=004u2K thread.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 01, 2001.

I would think you lose some of the scratch proofness of the Titanium by putting some sort of black coating on it. What do people have against small silver cameras? I actually like that an untrained eye will likely see the T3 as a $100 APS snap shot camera. I haven't pulled out the T3 yet where it has gotten any attention at all.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 01, 2001.

Now, thanks to you all, I understand there are three lens positions on the T3: (A) the lens is stored inside (B) the lens is "parked" a bit outside (C) the lens is focused.

In standard AF mode and also with the AFL function, according to what you say, the lens goes from (B) to (C) to (B) when firing, correct ?

Then, again on Manual Focus operation: does the lens really stays at position (C) (fully focused, as I understand from some of your comments), or does it also go from (B) to (C) and (C) to (B) ?

I would love to see one sample, but they still don't have it where I live in France. I was used to Minox 35 GT (I sold it because there was no AE and/or exposure correction, not convenient for slides), and I liked very much the very quick manual focusing with the Minox.

There is a black version of the T3 on the japan web site. I have asked if it would be available from online shops in Germany, I am waiting the answer. Black or silver, it is a matter of taste, and I understand that for this price one would like to choose the color !

Have a nice day

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), August 01, 2001.

Jerome,

(A) the lens is stored inside - that is a given factor, on switching on the camera, the lens moves out to the parked position (B) and the lens when focused extends to the focus position (C) when the shutter is fired. - after firing, the lens moves back to position (B). The lens only moves to position (A) when the camera is switched off.

In Manual focus mode, the lens does really stay at position (C). Sequence is (A) (B) (C) where it stays primed ready and focused for the shot.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@webxone.com), August 01, 2001.

Well now I think I have understood everything about focusing possibilities ;-)

What about meter accuracy ? Has anyone shooted slides with bright sunshine ? This is a good test to see whether the shutter goes as fast as it is written. For example: - with 100 ISO slide film and a lot of sun, you need f/8 @ 1/500 (f/16 rule). In A mode, choose f/8 and see what happens.

J.

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), August 01, 2001.

Interested in the program mode shutter speeds on the T3. Does it try to use faster shutter speeds? If I remember correctly, the T2 would use 1/250 or above in program mode until the aperture opened to f5.6 or so. Thanks

-- John Erro (JErro62408@aol.com), August 04, 2001.

John Erro

T3 program hangs onto something like 180th sec up to EV 16.5 at full bore f2.8, it's not until then, that the program allows a smaller aperture. Program's weighted slightly more to stopping down more rapidly than increasing the speed of the shutter once the 180th speed as been reached.

For my own personal liking, program maintains too high a shutter speed at lower EV values, I would prefer it to open up the aperture a stop to f4 at 30th or 60th sec. These lower shutter speeds are fine for me for the program to start stopping down.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 06, 2001.

Has anyone stopped the T3 down to f11 or f16..I get pretty horrible results regarding light fall off on the edges of the frame, very noticable 'shadows' though perhaps not as noticable as in T4 or 35Ti..usual clear sky brings it out more.

Good job it has a high shutter speed, think I will keep it tagged to f5.6 if possible

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 06, 2001.

The higher speeds are not available until f8, in both aperture preferred and Program modes. Can't say I've noticed much corner fall off at the smaller f stops. Haven't had occasion to use f16 though, but have used f11, and with negative film did not see any light loss on the edges. The Pop photo review didn't find a corner illumination problem either.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 08, 2001.

Went to the link, so thoughtfully provided, showing the black T3. Very nice, indeed. To answer Andrew's question as to what on earth is wrong with a silver camera, it's just a matter of what kind of shooting you do and what you prefer, I guess. Those good-looking nature shots he provided would not pose any problem in this regard. I tend to shoot out in public and on public streets, and I just don't like a camera that draws attention to itself. It's not so much that I'm taking "sneak" photos of people, though I do that occasionally. I also run into the problem of people wanting to ask about my cameras or discuss photo equipment when I'm trying to do my photography. And the other issue, of course, is the one about tempting theft by flashing something eye-catching that is obviously of considerable value and very snatchable and concealable for the thief. Most of it is just a matter of what you're at ease with. I even black-tape all the yashica advertising on the black t4 super, and would do the same with the contax legend on the black T3. Yes, I know: it does sound obsessive, but that's my preference. Anyway, the link provided says the black version is "soon to be released", so there must be others with this quirk of mine. I also don't like corporate logos and advertising things without being compensated for it, but this is just another personal quirk. It sounds like a great camera and I'm looking forward to the release of the black T3. Chas.

-- charles stewart (fido16@juno.com), August 08, 2001.

I stumbled across this web page: http://www.dentontaylor.com/tests/t3.htm with shots taken with the T3 and the samples 'seem' to exhibit an uneven illumination across the frame with a vague (discreet) 'hot spot' around the centre of the frame. All four corners of the frame are slightly darker, similar to my T3 around f8. This is not too noticable to the average eye, but f11 (on mine) it gets noticable.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 12, 2001.

Regarding the black T3s. These have been available in Japan for at least the last 4 months, commanding an only slight premium over the silver model.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), August 12, 2001.

The brighter "hot spots" in the photos @ http://www.dentontaylor.com/tests/t3.htm, definetely appear to be either fill flash, or, a shaft of natural light, in the flower shots and naturally uneven, heavily shadowed areas of illumination int the others.

I shoot aperture priority/max stop down all the time and have never noticed any of the vignetting/corner frame light fall off that is sometimes noticeable in images rendered by my T5. The Pop Photography and John McCormack test shots did not display this.

BTW @ http://www.photographyreview.com/reviews/PointNShoot_cameras/product_6 517.asp

A 4 year Minilux user rated the T3 images superb and superior to the Minilux and quality on-par with his G-2.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 12, 2001.

Re: Light 'hot spots' and Denton Taylor's T3 pictures.

Denton Taylor is a regular on the Contax list (http://www.escribe.com/art/contax/index.html?by=Date) and a long time user of the Contax T2. He indicated that his T3 had a metering problem w/ slides in bright light.

His comment on the list (Mon, 23 Apr 2001) was, "Got my first roll of slides back today and looks like my camera has a problem akin to the dreaded Aria bright light syndrome that was argued about before. All the pix shot in shade are fine, in fact nice and bright. Most of the shots done in bright sunlight are overexposed by a stop or so."

I know he sent his T3 in for repair, but haven't heard whether he has conducted any further tests. I think if his T3 had a continuing metering problem, Denton would have mentioned it on the Conax list or posted images demonstrating the problem. I agree with Phil that the images in Denton's gallery are probably not caused by the lens itself.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), August 13, 2001.

Just checked the eScribe Contax list and Denton posted that he got his camera back and it is working fine;

http://www.escribe.com/art/contax/m41685.html

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 13, 2001.

Just as I was about to contact Contax to make a warranty claim on the uneven illumination across the frame on certain small aperture shots on my sample of T3, (the majority on this thread do not experience this problem!) I get a totally flat result on a recent batch. As a test, I had shot the same scene at f4 and f16 and illumination was virtually the same?!

The only plausible explanations is perhaps the film pressure on the backing plate was not even for certain rolls of film? or it somehow occurred in processing as it is on the neg? Don't have a clue! Though it continues to be a problem on the 35ti and T4 on small apertures.

Though light fall off with the small flash bugs me, so will be purchasing the SA-2 flash adaptor and TLA 200 flash gun which I can also use on my G1 making full use of economies of scale. Just wonder how successful the double flash set up is...report later..

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@webxone.com), August 20, 2001.

From what I understand, when using the SA-2 flash bracket and TLA200, only the TLA200 fires. The bracket has contacts for the camera, enabling TTL and shutting off the on-board flash. My only nit is that the TLA200/SA-2 setup doesnt really move the flash off axis enough--redeye is probably still going to be a big problem. Too bad the TLA200 wasnt engineered to have bounce capability. Off topic: Anyone have any idea when the black version is coming to the US?

-- Eliott Frank (efrank@yahoo.com), August 20, 2001.

Only the TL-200 fires when the image is out of range of the built-in flash. When out of range the built-in unit provides the red eye pre- flash and the TL-200 the lights the scene. The TL-200 and SA-2 bracket fit the miniscule T3 nicely with good overall balance. I have not found them to be cumbersome to carry and to use and have gotten nicley exposed, high depth, aperture priority flash shots.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 20, 2001.

An economic possibility to enhance flash photography with the T3 would be to use a flash in slave mode, such as the small Metz 34 CS2. I sometimes use this flash together with a Stylus Epic P&S with nice results.

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), August 21, 2001.

This may be a mistake in Eliott's post, but does the T3 switch to TTL flash when using the TLA 200? In my opinion, the so-called flashmatic system (where flash exposure is determined based on focus distance and film speed, and not measured through the lens) is a superior system for a P&S camera.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), August 21, 2001.

There isn't anything in the camera body that could read TTL flash as far as I know. The camera does not even read TTL for ambient light, but has an external center weighted sensor.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 21, 2001.

Ah, yes, error on my part. Thanks.

-- Eliott Frank (efrank@yahoo.com), August 21, 2001.

hmm..sales assistant says the SA-2 does provide TTL with TLA200 unlike the (non TTL) SA-1 adaptor . (perhaps he was confused) But having a leaf shutter in the way means (if it does support TTL) it is kinda off the film plane sort when the shot is being taken and the blades are out the way. Though the initial preliminary exposure data must be taken from the external meter on the front of the body as otherwise the T3 won't know to engage flash mode or not in autoflash setting. I think I will try Jerome's method with the slave flash first before getting the SA-2 as at least the main flash can be bounced with the T3 flash as fill.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 22, 2001.

According to the manual when in aperture priority mode the falsh output changes according to the subject-camera distance. When in program mode the camera uses the "flashmatic" system of adjusting the aperture according to subject camera distance.

The SA-2 and the TL-200 are pocketable. When attached to the T3 the entire rig is still compact and operates as a quick P&S auto shooter but with the added range of a full size camera.

An addition of a small pocketable slave would be interesting. However, since the T3 is not taking film plane readings to turn off the flash upon reaching the point of illumination to produce proper film exposure, it seems the added slave flash could be prone to causing over exposures.

It would take some experimentation before I could rely on it like I can the TL-200/SA-2 for getting correctly exposed, quick draw P&S flash shots of distant subjects, or, high depth of field, max aperture shots of close-by subjects.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 22, 2001.

Does anybody know how to load partially exposed (eg 18frames) film back to contax t3? Camera does have custom function to leave film leader outside the film cartridge after rewinding... very useful if you cant put film back to camera... If you have any method to do that I'll be pleased

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), August 22, 2001.

1) Of course the slave flash method with a P&S works for subjects that are out of reach of the body flash, otherwise you may overexpose. It is possible to put a bit of paper on the body flash to reduce the distance.

2) If the meter is external, you might wind a film until the point you want by fooling the meter with a lot of light, while keeping a lens cap not to expose the film. It's a bit tricky, I know...

I have ordered a T3 and I am waiting for it...

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), August 22, 2001.

Kwen Wan said: "One thing I did notice (on my T3) is that the autofocus area is approximately 5 ovals wide (if you take the autofocus 'oval' and lay them out 5 times) and it prevents my T3 from focusing through a gap in the door which is half open -if I sit stand about 2 metres back from it. (by the way, are the U.S. T3 distance scales in feet?). If I take a vertical shot the autofocus area doesn't clip the edges of the door and focuses through into the distance."

I did find out that contax T3 have 2 different focusing methods! when you use AFL lock button to focus, the focusing area is EXACTLY the Oval you see in the viewfinder and when you use halfpress, focusing area is somewhat 5 ovals wide! sorry about my english, thats not my strongest skil:)

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), August 24, 2001.

On August 24, 2001, Heikki Nurkkala wrote: "I did find out that contax T3 have 2 different focusing methods! when you use AFL lock button to focus, the focusing area is EXACTLY the Oval you see in the viewfinder and when you use halfpress, focusing area is somewhat 5 ovals wide!"

Thanks for the information. If this is true, then the AFL button is using "spot focus." I'll have to test this out with some "macro" shots at wide apertures.

To those who have complained about mis-focusing of the T3, this is not uncommon with any camera that has a fast lens of f/2.8 or more. I shot some portraits with an Elan 7 and 50mm f/1.4 lens (set at f/3.5) recently and the Elan 7 missed the focus with AF in 3 out of 4 shots. There are times when manual focus is a better alternative.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), August 24, 2001.

Heikki what a find! You are right in what you say, the T3 has a 'hidden' spot autofocus function. Though the AFL button for me is slightly tricky to use, (shame 'spot focus' is not a custom function). Shame also the distance display is not in the viewfinder, verification would be easier. (Contax G cameras have the readout in the viewfinder). Due to manufacturing tolerances in the G cameras the actual autofocus area may be slightly 'out' in comparison with the printed focus area in the viewfinder. e.g. on my G1 the actual focus area is slightly to the left, not sure if it is the case with the T3 the target on my T3 is pretty central.

Since having knowledge of the T3's default wider focus area which does not correspond to the printed autofocus oval, hardly any of my pictures are out of focus. The added 'feature' of 'spot focus' for tricky situations is a bonus. Thanks Heikki for that discovery.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), August 24, 2001.

Hello,

Has anyone developed or know of a quick, small, summary of the modes and custom functions? I'd like to be able to put this on the bottom of my T3 for quick reference; if no one has one, I guess I'll just fire up Word and get with it :-).

Thanks!

-- Paul Beiser (pbeiser1@home.com), August 26, 2001.

Paul,

I have Word and Excel files with a list of the T3 Custom Functions, but not the Modes. I carry it in my wallet for reference; it's not quite small enough for the back of the T3. Email me if you want the file(s). Let me know if you want it in Word or Excel or both.

John McCormack jpmccormac@aol.com

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), August 27, 2001.

I have my T3 since two days. I had no time to shoot pictures yet, but I am very happy with the specifications.

I confirm the spot AF with the AFL button, it is specified in the documentation. And it is very easy to check by yourself, looking at the distance scale.

Three negative points: 1) The AFL button could also extend the lens, however it does not. 2) I miss a separate exposure locking button. Half-pressing the shutter does the job, but it is not so convenient. 3) Flash in slow-synchronizing mode activates the red-eye system: it is a bit odd ! Sometimes I need night mode without red-eye reduction !

Otherwise I think from the point of view of ergonomics, it is the best high-end P&S camera that exists !

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), August 30, 2001.

John,

You seem to have a lot of experience with both GR1(s) and T3. I'm trying to decide between the two. My primary kit is Canon EOS, but I want to have smallish wide-angle PS always handy. I presently use Olympus mju-II which is fine, but lacks control severely. The lower price of GR1s is very attractive, but I'm worried about its reportedly high noise level (in comparison with T3) and some people quote some tests where its lens shows results poorer than my mju-2! Could you please outline the pros and cons of both and which you think is better. Any other comments welcome. Thanks a lot. Rgds, Sergei Kantere

-- Sergei Kantere (skantere@compuserve.com), August 30, 2001.

Gentlemen... a quick question... directed primarily towards John Mccormack, Paul Bonner etc. who have actually been using this camera... Judging from my screen and the uploaded pictures... I see some vignetting ( dark corners) on the shots with the bright blue sky. I am considering purchasing this and one of my biggest concerns is vignetting... can someone please comment?

-- Ravi Nagpal (nagpal@mindspring.com), August 30, 2001.

My T3 has not shown any vignetting in any photos that I have taken with it. This elimination of the vignetting may be explained in the August '01 Shutterbug Magazine review of the T3 by George Schaub. He states that the the placement of the shutter between the lens eliminates the possibility of vignetting.

I do not know about the flash sync but have had no trouble using the TL-200 with SA-2 bracket when shooting narrow aperture (f/11) high depth in aperture priority mode. The TL-200, is good to about 20-25 feet at f/2.8 program mode.

The built-in flash is weak. Using 100 ASA film, it's good to about 7 feet in program mode at f/2.8; only about 3 feet in aperture priority at f/8.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 30, 2001.

Paul... mmm.. I guess light-off is a better word to use... John McCormacks test images show it in the blue sky.. a lot. So do Marc Fogel's to a lesser degree...

-- Ravi Nagpal (nagpal@mindspring.com), August 30, 2001.

I know what you mean about vignetting - light fall off in the corners. I have this with my Yashica T-5 but so far nothing noticeable with my T-3.

Every source that I've read states that the T-2 had this problem and this was subsequently fixed by the redesign of the lens for the T-3.

I would ask John and Mark if they would confirm the vignetting in the originals or if it was just naturally fading light.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), August 31, 2001.

On the use of SA-2, which does not come cheap, I was wondering whether a slave flash could be used to complement the built-in flash of T3? If the slave flash can offer its own metering/light control, would that be a viable alternative to SA-2? Grateful for views/advice.

-- Henry Lau (monarch_50@yahoo.com), September 01, 2001.

Henry,

Please refer to discussion of flash and suggestions for use of slave units, August 21 and 22, above. I believe a pocketable slave would be fun to use for "light painting" and creating effects in the background.

However, I beleive the use of a slave would require much experimentatgion and practice to match the quick P&S shooting ease and the reliability of the T3 combined with the SA-2 and TL-200.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), September 02, 2001.

I just purchased a Contax T3, discovered this listing and would appreciate any information on just how to subscribe. Your help will be appreciated

73's, Karl

-- Karl Siegmund (karlhs@pipeline.com), September 03, 2001.

Hi Karl,

This discussion is not a "list" or discussion group, per se, but rather a thread in the Photo.net equipment discussion section. Just come back to this URL for updates.

If anyone would like to start and moderate a discussion group/club on the T3, it would be welcome. Personally, I like the format of the Photography clubs on http://www.topica.com/

Also, you view an earlier thread on the T3 here:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004u2K

-- John P. McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), September 04, 2001.

My T3 seems to be occasionally scratching the film, usually around negative number 25, and usually on one to two frames only. It happens on about one out of every three rolls I shoot. It is a very small perfecly straight horizontal scratch. The scratch aligns perfectly with one end of the shiny chrome tensioner bar (the little gizmo that looks like a miniature bar-bell) which holds the film against the take- up reel. I cannot feel any roughness or irregularity anywhere inside the camera, including on this bar. I really hate to send the camera back for an intermittent problem. Any ideas? Thanks.

-- Virgil Finley (virgil@pobox.com), September 04, 2001.

If anyone cares, the black version of the Contax T3 has been available at B&H since a few days ago:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class? FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___234132___COT3B___REG___CatID =376___SID=E9019B913D0

-- Jon Lee (jwlee56@hotmail.com), September 06, 2001.

Yesterday when attempting to load new film the spooler would not take up the leader. It made a clicking sound of the sprocket/nub spinning and on each revolution partially engaging the sprocket hole in the film leader. However, it would not fully grab the file and begin winding it on the spool. I tried two different unexposed rolls of film and experimented adjusting the film leaders to various lenghts but all attempts met with failure.

Just get about six clicks (revolutions) then it stops with the LED inidicating double blinking zeroes and the lens will not extend which I imagine is a safety measure to prevent inadvertantly shooting w/o film properly loaded.

So off to Contax it goes.

Anyone else have problems like this?

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), September 08, 2001.

Having read all the good things about the T3 I was about to order one, but one feauire held me back - the flash. I currently use a Rollei Prego for point and shoot times, and while the Schneider zoom lens is great, of course the camera lacks all the user set features which make the T3 so attractive. However, the Rollei does have a very efficient flash, with more than twice the ramge of the T3. I find I frequently use fill flash, usually for shots with two to six people in them and with its limited power the built in T3 flash would seem to be marginal in those circumstances, even with ASA400 film. Can anyone comment on their experience in this regard?. Thanks.

-- Ivor Quaggin (iquaggin@home.com), September 08, 2001.

Phil, your T3's 'refusal' to take up the film problem, I haven't experienced with my T3, but have done with my T4 and to some extent my 35Ti. Generally as you say, no matter how far you pull out the leader the camera does not take up the film. With my T4 I found it was a matter of try and try again. If it was persistant at failing to load up, it would finally do so perhaps after 6-8 attempts, usually with the film leader extended well beyond the internal marking, also the film needed to be wound tight manually by hand (by twisting the reel) so there is no slack in the canister before inserting into the camera. It may or may not help your cause.

As you are an experienced photographer I assume you have taken all feasible steps and (unfortunately) it could be a problem with the camera.

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), September 08, 2001.

I had a similar problem soon after I got my T2. I also had to send it back to Contax for repair. That was at least 5 or 6 years ago and the problem never recurred. (And I want to thank everyone who has conributed to this excellent discussion; I hope to buy a T3 in the near future.)

-- J.Martin (martinj1@sympatico.ca), September 08, 2001.

Sent my T3 off for warranty repair of it's failure to take up the film leader and begin a new roll of film. Luckily it occurred when I was just reloading after shooting and did not need the camera for anymore shots.

I tried everything. To eliminate the possibility that the film was the culprit I tried to load still another fresh roll of film but the T3 still failed to take up the leader of the 2nd fresh roll.

Since I've never heard of anyone else with this problem it appears to be an isolated problem.

In fact I've noticed in the past that sometimes when starting a new roll the T3 would "click" (the sound of the revolving sprocket missing the sprocket hole of the film), a few times before engaging.

I noticed that the sprocket or nub protruding from the spool that is supposed to snag the film appeared too slight to get a good grab/hold.

We'll see how it comes back...

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), September 09, 2001.

Some more T3 shots, a few where I was able to take advantage of the high shutter speed. Also, The detail in the close up of the masks on the negs is unbelievable--looks like my micro Nikkor.The more I use this camera, the more comfortable I am taking it along instead of a heavy bag of equipment.

T3 at the street fare

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), September 10, 2001.

Andrew,

The street fair shots are excellent; thanks for posting them.

Agfa Optima 400 seems to work well in the T3. Anyone tried the new Agfa Vista 400 or 200 in the T3? I've heard good reports on it from several users.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), September 11, 2001.

Just got some prints back from A&I. The last roll that I had taken before the film leader take-up problem. Some shots of my boy standing above and over me on top of a sliding board, silouetted against a blue sky background filling the frame - with absolutely no, (not even a whisper), vignetting/light fall off at the corners. Beautifull contrasty shot, fill flash, using Portra 400 VC.

BTW I on Sept 8, I sent it to Irwindale for repair and they had to forward it to Contax, NJ. It's promised by this Thursday the 27th.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), September 24, 2001.

Hi, I have a question for T3 owners:

One thing that has bothered me about most P&S cameras that I've handled is the startup time, i.e. the delay from turning the camera on to the lens extending fully. Right now I have an old Pentax clamshell-type camera whose startup is essentially instantaneous... slide it open and it is ready. Can somebody comment on how the T3 behaves in this regard? I think any delay more than say, 0.5-1 sec would bug me...

-- Jonas Yip (j@underexposure.com), September 25, 2001.

The T3 "on" switch pops out/uncovers the lens instantaneously. If you have the custom function focus setting selected to focus at 1/2 shutter depression, the T3 focus locks on to your subject as quick as any auto focus SLR that I have used. It's very quick from the pouch, turn it on-take the exposure-return to pouch: Nearly one fluid motion.

BTW today I got mine back with the film take up spool replaced as a warranty repair.

-- Phil Bonner (plpb@earthlink.net), September 26, 2001.

FILTER/HOOD ADAPTOR FINALLY ARRIVES.

I finally received the (back ordered) adaptor ring for mounting filters and the lens hood on my T3. The ring works nicely on the T3 and allows you to mount the hood and/or filters to the camera even when the camera is off. I picked up a couple of 30.5mm filters at a camera swap last week and will try to post some comparison images as time permits.

I agree with Phil's comments on start up time for the T3. Though not instanteous, the T3 is fast starting (comparable to the GR1) - I'd estimate about 1 to 1.5 seconds. The best thing about the T3 in this regard is that it doesn't have the pesky "auto off" feature, which I like.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), September 28, 2001.

John, Would you elaborate a little on your statement that you can shut off the camera and leave the lens hood on. Does it retract into the camera or does it stick out

-- Jay Goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), September 29, 2001.

Jay,

When the lens hood is mounted and the T3 is shut off, the lens retracts into the body normally but the lens hood sticks out from the body. This is possible because the adaptor ring fits onto the front of the lens barrel, which when the camera is off remains, remains in front of the lens' protective cover.

If you look at the front of the T3 lens (the black portion), you will notice a sort of "L" shaped indentation at the top and at the bottom of the lens barrel. These bayonet inserts accept the adaptor but do not interfere with the lens cover because they are in front of it even when the camera is off. Pretty nice design, don't you think?

By the way, the lens hood is pretty small and not deeply inset but should provide good protection from flare (though I don't think the lens is prone to flare.)

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), September 29, 2001.

I have tried to make the lens flare by shooting right into the sun on several occasions, but it still did not flare. I think losing the ability to holster the camera in the belt pouch rules out my being interested in the hood, which is a great design, but not needed on this superbly coated lens from what I can tell.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), September 30, 2001.

I am sure this question must have come up before but I haven't found an answer that sounds more trouble than it is worth. I know that one of the functions on the T3 is to rewind with leader in or out. Not doing my own processing, I use this feature (on other cameras like the G2) for changing film mid-roll where I would simply advance the shutter with the lens cap on past the last exposed frame. However, with the T3, this isn't possible. I have thought of using a changing bag but that is not as convienient to carry as a small lens cap and convenience is the whole idea of having the T3 in the first place. What other purpose could there be for leaving the leader out.

-- Meryl Arbing (marbing@sympatico.ca), October 02, 2001.

You can use a lens cap for the T3. It fits over the metal lens hood that mounts on the filter adaptor. I have never tried it to see whether or not the rig leaks light but I imagine it would not.

-- Phil (plpb@earthlink.net), October 02, 2001.

I have been using that custom function lot for a film changing purpose in mid roll... When I want to put that partially exposed roll pack to camera I use litlle flashlight (which I always carry) to confuse T3´s exposure meter to use fastest possible time and smallest aperture.I try to find twilight or shade where i change my film, I think that direct sunlight isn´t good choice. .. Also I hold some black object(eg film container cap) upon lens. I haven´t noticed any fogging or flare done by my film changin procedure... It is good to put focus to MF before changin film so the lens doesn´t move when you hold somethin upon lens.

Have anybody bought filter adaptor from Europe? I have been looking for some time but haven't found any. I live in Finland and Finnish Contax importer doesn't have any on their stock... They havent even heard about it! If somebody have bought adaptor from europe please tell!

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), October 03, 2001.

Re: Mid Roll Film Change

The technique described by - Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), October 03, 2001, above sounds like a good one.

Question. When you re-load the film, do you leave a blank frame between the first and second load, that is, skip a frame? Thanks.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 04, 2001.

Yes, I leave one blank frame... I haven´t tested what hapens if I don´t leave blank frame... is it exact? I think that if you load film always same way( pull film leader allways to same exact point) , you dont have to leave any blank frames? If somebody knows better, please tell!

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), October 05, 2001.

Anybody know whether 30.5mm filters widely available for other purposes such as camcorders will work in the T3 adapter? I am looking for a yellow/orange filter. Thanks.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), October 09, 2001.

Hello!

I am wondering if there is a table in the T3 manual which state the hyperfocal distance for a particular aperture stop at a particular manual focus.

Something similar to the table at this website which is for the MINILUX: http://members.tripod.com/photolosopher/review/minilux/rev_minilux.htm

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), October 09, 2001.

BTW, I would like to know this:

Lets say you are in a dimly lit church. I do not want to use flash. So I just set the aperture at f8. Now, the camera will then determine the shutter speed right? In auto mode, it will be up to 16s exposure (depending on the light condition). What if it is too poorly lit that it has to be more than 16s? Will the camera 'reccommend' the user to use the LT? And how do we determine the correct LT level to use?

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), October 09, 2001.

Yes, aperture priority at f8 will set shutter speed as slow as 16s.

Based on the manual, page 9, I don't believe that there is any visual indication of underexposure if 16s is not enough. So, no, the camera will not "recommend" use of LT. (f8, 16s, iso100 --- EV2... pretty low light)

LT exposures are unmetered by this camera.

In the situation you describe, one could bracket exposures with LT mode.

-- Skyler Timmons (skint39@hotmail.com), October 09, 2001.

Any tripods to reccomend for contax T3? Is the hole at the base of Contax T3 camera compatible with the tripods in the market?

-- Tony Halim (Tonyhalim@www.com), October 09, 2001.

DOF Table:

See page 46 of the T3 manual for a depth of field table (in meters.) There are other tables on the net for this also. Try: http://tangentsoft.net/fcalc/ or http://fox.nstn.ca/~hmmerk/HMbook14.html or http://www.outsight.com/hyperfocal.html

The tripod mount is standard (1/4"-20?), so most any tripod will work. The mount is not centered directly under the lens, which would be ideal, but it's not too far off center. I carry a small Ultrapod II table top tripod, which also has a Velcro strap for attaching the tripod to a tree limb/post/chair leg/you-name-it. Works fine. I rarely use, though, except for night shooting in LT mode. For that I use a 15 yr. old el-cheapo Slik (800G FL). Also works fine for night shooting.

As for LT mode, check a basic photography book for a range of times and aperture settings. Most good books will have a general guide for shooting at night under various conditions with different ISOs. Bracket around these times, especially if using slide film. Try here also:

http://www.rosengren.net/photo/night.htm

http://www.thenocturnes.com/faq.htm

http://www.photo.net/learn/

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 09, 2001.

Well, if regards to changing film mid roll, i am thinking that using the contax lens cover(accessory) will be very useful.

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), October 10, 2001.

I am considering to get the lens protector (P). But I wonder will it affect the performance of the lens? or it has to be remove when the camera is being used?

Also, with regards to my previous posting on using the Lens cover to aid in using film midroll. It will be very easy. there is no need to set the aperture to f16 nor shine a torch to increase the shutter speed or to put it in manual focus. Just put on the lens cover, and just snap till the desired frame which is blank!

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), October 12, 2001.

GOOD NEWS:

I have started a forum at delphi.com which is a more effective way to communicate. I will spend the next few days sorting the posting in this forum and place it in the new forum. Hopefully new users and experience user will find it useful!

Here:

http://www.delphi.com/contaxcamera/messages

Just sign up if you want to post messages.Its free!

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), October 12, 2001.

Tony, Thanks for trying to make the Contax T3 discussions more organized. However, I have an iMac. At your site, the screen has two parts and to read the messages on the right hand side, I have to scroll horizontally. Is there any way to limit the width of the lines? If I reduce the font size any more, I won't be able to read the screen. At the current setting, I really can't use the site, which I would like to do.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), October 13, 2001.

I appreciate the effort to put together a better forum for the T3, but why do they want so much personal information in order to sign up at Delphi? Why on earth would they need to know all that stuff unless to eventually sell the list or names to some annoying marketing people? I already get enough spam as it is!

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 13, 2001.

Andrew:

I understand your point of view on spamming. Hence to all who do not want to fill in the registration form, just login in as a member that I have created.

Username: contaxt3 Password: ilovet3

If you just wish to read and not post messages, you can login as GUEST by clicking on the "Login as Guest" button.

-- Tony (Tonyhalim@www.com), October 14, 2001.

Tried the name and password above, but it didn't work for me.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 14, 2001.

OK, I got in.Thanks.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 14, 2001.

Tony; I know you have tried to improve the discussion, but I find your site too complicated. On this site, which I have bookmarked, I just click, scroll and read the latest messages. On your site, I have to type, go through 2 or 3 screens and then search for the latest. It just isn't set up for quick checking.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), October 14, 2001.

I have a question about the ISO range of the T3. Often I use another film speed than indicated on the film (and set by the camera via DX code). Is there any way to over-rule this automatic DX setting ? If possible I do NOT want to use the over/under exposure feature for that but want to set the speed munually.

Thanks, Armand

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), October 15, 2001.

Here is the address of thread, re; changing (scratching out/taping over) DX codes. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg? msg_id=000caI

Here is the address of a chart showing the codes: http://members.aol.com/dalphotopr/dx.htm

Try going to: http://www.photo.net/ and searching on "DX" and there are a couple dozen threads mentioning the codes.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), October 15, 2001.

In case anyone hasn't heard: Contax will be having a national "Contax Day[s]" the weekend of Nov. 9th. For my own personal edification: is the discount limited to 10%, or is a greater discount available anywhere reputable? Thanks.

-- Eliott Frank (efrank@yahoo.com), October 17, 2001.

Hi All!,

Got my first roll print back! Very pleased with the result. I already posted some of the images on the net.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=156914

However, this photos shows very obvious flare and makes me wonder whats the point of using the lens shade. No difference at all. I shoot directly at the sun. This one is taken with shade and uv filter: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=402520

This is without the shade and uv filter: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=402523

I like this photo but the foreground is too dark Can anyone advise me what settings for my xposure to use? http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=402526

Thanks!

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 20, 2001.

Hi Tony,

You sure got a nice view from your balcony :-) Regarding metering: where did you point at and what did you decide to underexpose with EV -1/3 ? If you meter the darker part AND the lighter part, you can start with something in the middle and then do some more exposures, +/- EV 1/3, +/- EV 2/3. How does your nagative look, did you scan from negative or from a photo ?

Armand

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), October 20, 2001.

A hood will never be of any use at all if the sun is actually in the picture. Hoods only shade the elemeents if the sun is out of the image off to the side. Shooting into the sun requires at least 3 stops of + compensation if you want any detail anywhere but the sky. That is a very small amount of flare for shooting into the sun, by the way. Try doing that with a zoom lens.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 20, 2001.

Tony, Look very carefully at your negatives. The printer may have printed dark, even if the exposure is much better.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), October 20, 2001.

Thanks guys!

I need to clarify that the scanner is not so good and cannot capture the full glory of the photo.

I tried using -1/3 exposure without any meter. I am inexperience in this exposure compensation stuffs. My reasoning is that, most of the background looks dark because the sky is getting very dark. Hence, i decide to underexpose it because i think that the camera itself will tend to overexpose due to the dark foreground thus making the sky overexpose.

I should have tried bracketing. but again, in 1 mins time, the sky will look very different.

I already put on a new roll of film and this time i will do bracketing.

My scanner tends to make the scan picture looks darker, also, due to the compression to jpeg format, most details are gone too. hence look quite grainy.

Tony

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 21, 2001.

I just found out that German filtermaker Heliopan has a huge assortment of filters, stepping rings and hoods that might fit the T3 and can be an alternative to the original accessories. Heliopan has collapsible rubber hoods in 24 and 25.5mm and also stepping rings FROM 24 - 25.5 - 27 - 28 TO 30.5mm. They also have filters and lens caps (!) in these small sizes.

Does anyone know the diameter of the original thread on the T3, so BEFORE the adapter ring ? I suppose it's one of the 'standard' sizes........

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), October 21, 2001.

But is heliopan filter of good quality? Its like i have a pair of extremely good eye but when i put on a lousy sunglass, whatever i see will be suck too.

Hoya is value for money but they do not have 30.5mm polarizer which is multicoated(they only have single coated).

The next best will be B+W filters, though it is very expensive.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 22, 2001.

I bought the kinetronics 'staticWisk' , an anti-static brush, to clean my lens.

I have search most of the camera shops here and it is very difficult to find a polarizer filter which is:

1. 30.5mm and, 2. Multi-coated and, 3. Good quality(like b+w, hoya)

I give up.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 22, 2001.

Tony,

If you have real good eyes (that 's why you buy a Contax isn't it :-) ) stick to B+W or Heliopan for filters. Both are equal in quality. Value for money is a marketing term and has nothing to do with absolute quality. Even the T3 is no value for money but that's not the reason we buy these things... The glass for the Heliopan filters comes from Schott, the same glass manufacturer as Carl Zeiss uses. Heliopan has filters smaller than 30.5 mm so you do not need the adapter. Use your good eyes and measure it for me please :-o

best regards, Armand

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), October 22, 2001.

Re: >My T3 seems to be occasionally scratching the film, usually around >negative number 25, and usually on one to two frames only. It happens >on about one out of every three rolls I shoot.

I'm having the same problem. Just got a roll of Supra 400 back and frames 35 and 36 have horizontal scratches on the negatives. This image shows a crop of the frame 35: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=406780

I suspect the rollers on the platen cause this. Anyone else having this probelm? Some folks who use the Ricoh GR1 have also noted this problem and think it may be caused by film with a thick base/emulsion (Supra is one, I think.)

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 23, 2001.

Hi Tony

on your T3 pics http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=402550

the top left and right hand side of the picture has a slight darkening, is that the T3 lens or something in the way? e.g. window frame

-- Kwen Wan (kwen@btinternet.com), October 23, 2001.

Of all the daylight scenic pictures with sky shown only the one has darkening in the corners. Therefore this could very well be natural light clouding.

-- Phil (plpb@earthlink.net), October 23, 2001.

I read earlier someone had used their Metz 34CS2 in slave mode with their Contax T3 as the T3's flash performance is less than stellar. Any more technical info i.e.,what settings for the T3? P mode? Apertures based on the GN of the Metz flash etc. etc. Thanks.

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), October 23, 2001.

I'm interested in the black T3, but I'd like some information about the finish. Is it painted and likely to chip or some sort of anodized metal?

Rob

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), October 26, 2001.

Rob,

I have the black one. It's not painted black (and will not chip). It's titanium nitride? I'm not sure what it is, but the titanium has undergone some chemical process to make it black and even harder-- don't worry about scratching the black off--I don't think that will happen unless you take a grinder to it!

I'm interested in the black T3, but I'd like some information about the finish. Is it painted and likely to chip or some sort of anodized metal? Rob

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), October 26, 2001.

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), October 27, 2001.

Kwen: I think it is some metal bars which is out of focus.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 28, 2001.

Hi all!

I just realized how sharp the T3 zeiss lens is! Look at this folder photos which is a sunset shot. The first one is with the exposure on the scanner adjusted, and u can see the trees at the fore ground! The one on right is the scan with auto exposure by the scanner and is the same printout that I have, u can see the foreground is very dark. These 2 photos are the same shot in a dark evening!

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=158925

I love my T3!

Tony

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 28, 2001.

Hi Tony,

Your comparsion shots with the scanner adjustment reminded me of a neat trick for blending two images (shot at different exposures) when the exposure range of different parts of the image exceed 7 or 8 stops. This works best when shooting slide film. Go to:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/blended_exposures.htm

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 29, 2001.

Hello everyody,,, The past couple months I've been looking to replace my second stylus epic. Went to the store looking for the Yashica T4 by recommendation when I saw the T3--needless to say I fell in love but the price was high enough I decided to wait...since Ive been researching cameras of this type to get the most for my money..I believe I've narrowed my choice down to the T3 or the Leica minilux zoom---can anyone with experience comment on the differences between these two machines--I realize the Leica has a zoom lens but wonder if the quality is really markedly inferior...from the the raving reviews I've read of the Leica it seems to be on par with the T3--your comments are greatly appreciated, thanks...AH

-- AH (adam_hoyt@hotmail.com), October 29, 2001.

Minilux or T3?

Adam, I don't know if it's true or not, but I've heard the Minilux is actually made by Minolta not Leica! My source is a person who has been in the camera retailing business for 7+ years. Finally, I own a black T3 and I have to say its incredible...the build quality, the images it produces, it's portability, durability (I could go on and on).Good luck with whatever you choose.

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), October 30, 2001.

Re: T3 or Minilux Zoom

I don't think it matters who makes the camera as long as the quality is there. The Minilux Zoom has a fine lens, perhaps on a par with the T3, I don't know. The lens is slower (35 - 70mm f 3.5/6.5 Leica Vario Elmar) but it's a relatively fast zoom for a point and shoot camera fairly fast at the wide end but a little too slow at the long end.

The maximum shutter speed of 1/250s is slow by current standards - and much slower than the T3 or fixed lens Minilux (f/2.4). I owned a Minilux but sold it for the T3 because the size of the T3 is more to my liking and the custom functions are great. The fixed lens Minilux has a better flash and a bit faster lens than the T3. The Minilux does take accept a cable release; I wish the T3 did.

Make sure you can live with the viewfinder on the Minilux; it's quite small and some find it very frustrating.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 30, 2001.

I have bought the HOYA circular polarizer for the T3. Its fits well to the adapter(screw). The only problem is that it doesn't have the white marking , which larger sizes Hoya polarizer has which is to be pointed to ther direction of the sun in order to get max polarization.

hence have to look thru it by eye then adjust accordingly when attach to the T3.

What is the usual filter factor for a polarizer with the max polarization? i was told that it is 2 full stop.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 31, 2001.

I have got back my second roll print. Interesting, in extreme situations, there is vignetting. With the lens shade, there is also vignetting though it does not neccessarily reduce the amount of vignetting. Hence I think it is not a neccessary to get the lens shade.

Also, the use of the uv filter reduce the amount of 'blueness' in the sky, slightly but noticable.

Will scan the photos tomorrow.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 31, 2001.

Tony et al -

Which type polarizer (linear or circular) is required for the T3?

BTW, I have the SA-2 bracket & the TLA-200 flash, which when attached still looks compact. One can attach the bracket and flash leisurely in 1 minute. After a few test shots, my photos indicated that the recommended range of the built-in flash (in the user manual) is on the conservative side. With 200 speed film, at 7ft (or the far end of the built-in flash's range) my subject's face was unpleasantly washed- out. Maybe another 2-3 foot would give it a more balanced color. The TLA-200 is sufficient w/100 film and quite capable w/400 film. With either flash, there was NO hint of red-eye. :~)

Niki

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), October 31, 2001.

Hi Tony,

In a Swiss (online) review of the T3 I read that you can use OR a (UV) filter OR the hood (in combination with the adapter), but that using both the hood AND filter causes vignetting (according to that review). I really do not see why this should be true (I am not technically enough) but it might be an explanation for your vignetting. The review can be found here: http://www.fotoline.ch/FOTOintern/01-06/Contax-t3.htm The remark about the vignetting can be found at the end of the review, in the first line of the specs (accessories): "Adapterring T3: Zum Anschluss von Filtern oder Gegenlichtblende (nicht beides gleichzeitig: Vignettierung)" If someone knows WHY vignetting can occur when using a filter and hood together...I am interested to hear....

Regards, Armand (Tony, can we see some of those pictures online ??)

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), October 31, 2001.

The lens hood (w/filter) blocks out the lens' view at the corners and therefore causes vignetting.

The manual states the same warning... not to use BOTH a filter and lens hood simultaneously because vignetting will result from such combination. However, I read in part 1 of this thread that someone used an "ultra-thin" Heliopan filter in conjunction with a lens hood successfully without vignetting. "Ultra-thin" equates "double the price". Contax filters are quite thick. :~{

Niki

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), October 31, 2001.

Re: Vignetting and Filters/Hood

I just shot a roll of film using the hood and filter (Contax 81B) together and did not get any vignetting. The size of the filter(s) may have some effect on vignetting.

A linear polarizing filter is appropriate for the T3 as their is no AF through the lens like an SLR. Note that polarizers have a significant effect on sky and water and overdoing it may be detrimental, i.e., produce a "black sky" effect.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), October 31, 2001.

My wife has the Leica Minilux zoom which also delivers beautiful pictures; particularly people shots. The zoom makes it easy and neat work to frame individuals and small groups at a gathering or in a roomfull of people. I could be mistaken but the Leica lens seems to lend a cetain luminescence to flesh tones. On the other hand the T3 is faster to deploy and to shoot; especially with the lens focusing set to activate at half shutter release. Although I like the Leica's bigger heft and fit/feel in my hands, I prefer the T3 for it's truly pocket-size compactness, speed (ease of use) and wide flexability.

The crisp sharpness of the T3's images is simply terrific to behold and iut's images compare favorably to any images that I have taken including the Leica and any SLR prime lenses I have ever used.

John described comparing Lieca Minilux and T3 images as being like comparing two kinds of gourmet ice cream. Both are equally pleasing and have their own subtle unique quality.

Given the choice I reach for the T3 more often due to it's larger, brighter and more comfortable viewfinder, plus, speed and ease of deployment and shooting. I can get from Point "A," camera in the pouch, to point "B," image captured, twice as fast with the T3 as with the Leica Minilux zoom.

In fact since it's compactness facilitates always carrying it with me, it had quickly became second nature to reach for the T3 on my belt, capture the image and stow it in nearly one seamless motion.

In sum, by becoming second nature to carry and to use, and by delivering 1st class images, IMHO the T3 most successfully fulfills the role of a point and shoot camera.

The flash bracket is suprisingly small. My intention is to have it for use in photo sessions where I'll be taking multiple shots - like of my 2 year old scooting around or at gatherings where I need more range and better fill. We'll see how it delivers versus the Leica with it's separate flash which does nicely.

(Actually I may have subconsciously gotten the separate T3 flash and bracket to just to see how it would measure up against the Leica Minilux with separate flash).

The above text appeared June 14, 2001, in the original T3 thread with the link referenced above. My impressions remain the same.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), October 31, 2001.

John: I agree with you that linear is more appropriate. But they do not have the stock now. So I just get the circular polarizer since it is compatible for all types of camera. am I correct?

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 31, 2001.

I have uploaded the scan photos. Note that I scan from negatives and the photos are side by side for easy comparison.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=159525

Note: Poor picture quality displayed is solely due to scanner, the print is fantastic!

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), October 31, 2001.

Re: Polarizer

Tony, the circular polarizer should work fine. I just hope it's thin enough to avoid vignetting.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 01, 2001.

T3 back from the hospital.

Just received my T3 back from the Contax service dept. in New Jersey. They replaced the film compartment door. Hopefully, the scratching of negatives (intermittent problem) is now fixed. Total time away was only six days. :)

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 01, 2001.

Tony,

Just looked at your pics. Those dark/nearly black corners in your pics appear to be more of a lens obstruction than vignetting which would be indicated by a more gradual light fall off at the corners.

Niki was right. The manual plainly states that mounting both the filter and the hood will cause vignetting. I've had both mounted for awhile but have not noticed any vignetting.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 01, 2001.

I just bought a Yashica T4/T5. The lens is excellent and I find the color balance to be superior to my Nikon SLR equip. However, the shutter response time on the T4/T5 is way to slow and I wish I had more manual control. I know with the T3 I get more manual control, but is shutter response time better? I will shell out the $ for a T3 if it is faster. Also, can anyone compare the T3 to other high end P & S for shutter response times? I shoot mostly kids so shutter response is really important. I would get an M6 but I want something SMALL! Thanks - grant-

-- Grant Young (g_e_young@yanoo.com), November 06, 2001.

The column by Bill Pierce in the November issue of the Digital Journalist (web magazine) seems to imply that he is using the T3.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), November 06, 2001.

Grant; If you set the T3 to mechanical prefocus mode, that by holding the shutter release down halfway you lock in the focus. Then when you decide to take the picture it is almost instantaneous.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), November 06, 2001.

Grant,

I agree with Jay. The shutter response of the T3 is excellent, much better than the T4/T5. In fact, I don't use custom function 2 (extend lens during AF) any longer; for me response time is fast enough without having the lens extended prior to releasing the shutter.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 07, 2001.

Thanks! On my T5, pre-focus only stores the focal distance, but does not actually move the lens. Then after depressing the shutter release button there is at least a .5 second lag. This drives me nuts when photographing people.

Any comment about the durability of the black finish on the T3? Black looks better but I would guess also shows wear more easily. Any thoughts on this? Thx in advance!

-- Grant Young (g_e_young@yanoo.com), November 07, 2001.

Grant,

I asked the same question recently,and the answer was provided by Nikki Recob on October 27. Check his posting above. The black model is somewhat more expensive than the silver one. Contax is having a "National Event" in the USA on November 9-12, where everything is discounted 10%, so it might be worth checking out.

Rob

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), November 07, 2001.

? I just purchased a black t3 after some equivocation. Is the rhythmic whirling sort of noise when you turn the camera on and off normal (as the lens extends and retracts)? And when you depress the shutter button, is the whirling sort of sound, esp. at the end normal? It's hard to explain-- it is not loud or bothersome, it just sounds a bit unnatural to me. When you depress the shutter, there is a sort of aural aftertaste so to speak. I didn't hear it at all in the shop with the demo version, but that could be because the sounds were masked by ambient noise. I just want to make sure I did not get anything defective by chance. thanks.

-- k (awildstreak@aol.com), November 10, 2001.

Yes, the sound you're hearing is natural.

-- Niki (cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 11, 2001.

Has anyone found a good source for 30.5mm filters? B&H is about the only place I've found that lists them, but they seem to be out of stock on nearly everything.

-- Ron Buchanan (ronb@fusive.com), November 14, 2001.

30.5mm filters usually need to be special ordered. B&H has Heliopan linear polarizers and a few B&W filters for black-n-white photography.

A good online source for filters is http://www.2filter.com but you would still need to place a special order.

Hope this helps... Niki

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 14, 2001.

...BTW, does anyone know why Kaesermann filters are so expensive? Aren't they also made from the same Schott glass as B&W and Heliopan?

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 14, 2001.

Quick question. I just purchased a black T3 and am shooting the first roll and more during the next couple days while I'm in Las Vegas for Comdex. I had tried out the SA2 bracket and TLA200 setup on a demo at the store. I liked the way it felt, but I was wondering who has this combo and how do they feel about the way it works? Thanks in advance.

-- ming (saiyans@hotmail.com), November 14, 2001.

In general, the Contax flash system doesn't provide as balanced and beautiful flesh tones as Leica's. After a few test-shots I can say that Contax is usually on the hot side (too bright). So you have to play with it a little and figure the best distance to shoot.

The SA-2 bracket and TLA200 flash works nicely with the T3, expanding the flash range to a maximum 7m (23ft) w/100 ASA film and 10m (46ft) w/400 ASA film at wide open aperature (f2.8). The table in the user manual for this on page 59 is on the conservative side. The camera operate the built-in flash and/or the TLA200 depending on the situation...

If the subject is within range for the built-in flash, the camera will NOT use the TLA200. Once outside the built-in flash, the TLA200 will be triggered. In red-eye reduction mode, the built-in flash will preflash and the TLA200 provide the illumination. Recyle time of 3 seconds is quite fast for a Point-n-Shoot.

Overall, I like the SA-2 bracket and the TLA200 Flash. BTW, the SA-2 bracket also has a socket for L-Cable Switch.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 14, 2001.

To all who ask about 30.5mm filter, I am using a Hoya 30.5mm Polarizer filter. As for UV filter, i am using Contax.

Actually, I think Contax is quite dumb by making the Filter and Lens Hood not to be used together as they will cause vignetting. But the lens cap can only fit to the lens hood! If I just use the filter, how am I going to protect the filter? That means I have to attach the hood to it so as to use the metal cap. That means I will have to unscrew the hood every time I need to use in order to prevent vignetting. That, I find, is very dumb of contax.

Not to mention the very poor English of its Japan support.

Other than that, Contax T3 itself is an excellent camera.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 15, 2001.

BTW, on the filter, Hoya 30.5mm is meant for Digital cameras, video. and it is not multicoated too.

Other brand such as heliopan and B+W are non coated too. And it is very expensive. My Hoya cost me only US$18.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 15, 2001.

Tony,

Have you taken pictures with the polarizer? How is the difference? Do you recommend it?

TIA...

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 15, 2001.

Ming, here's what's given me some very good results with the T3 (Black) & SA-2/TLA200 combination: First, I connect the SA2 to the T3 Second, I connect that assembly to a 2d bracket so that the lens is as far from the 2d bracket's shoe as possible; then I connect the Contax G2 off-camera sync cord between the SA2 and the shoe mount of the 2d bracket where I have the TLA200. The TLA200 I shoot with one strip of Rosco diffuser over the flashtube. This setup is especially good for vertical shots and, if you want to shoot horizontals it's OK, but you can always take the TLA200 off the shoe and handhold it above the camera. A lot of jerryrigging, you say? Well, yes and no. I have one of those collapsible L-brackets that fits in my pocket and if I don't feel like the full-tilt assembly I just use the SA2, the G2 off-camera-sync cord, and the diffused TLA200 handheld. The results I've obtained are beautiful. The diffuser really cuts down on the hotness of the flash that another poster commented about without that much light loss and effective range loss, especially in "P mode".

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 15, 2001.

Nope, I have yet to use the Hoya polarizer. It is not easy to use as T3 is not slr, hence, I have to look thru the polarizer with my eye and note the proper position, before fitting to the T3. Hence it is not easy.

Perhaps I will get the light blue filter(81B) from contax.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 15, 2001.

RE 81B filter effect:

I've posted an image here

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=428788

showing the warming effect of the Contax 81B filter. The effect is subtle in this image (or maybe it's just the scanning) that was shot at noon time. Slide film would probably magnify the warmth of the image. Pictures scanned with no effects added except slight unsharp mask.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 15, 2001.

Cosmo,

When you use the diffused off-camera flash do you need to add + compensation. I was thinking that since the TTA 200/T3 combo operate in flashmatic mode (the flash output is automatically adjusted by the focus subject/camera distance, some plus + compensation would be needed for the diffuser.

I love off-camera flash and am very interested in using this technique with the T3. Do your diffused shots tend to be slighly under exposed?

Phil

-- Phil Bonner (plpb@earthlink.net), November 15, 2001.

Phil,

Most of the times I shoot indoors I find that a lot of what I do exposure compensation-wise depends on the surroundings (high ceilings? light or dark walls? color of furniture?). That translates to mean that, depending on those variables, I'll shoot at +.7 to +1.5 with color neg film and with Tri-X because with the diffuser negs can be a little on the thin side when indoor lighting is subdued or non- existent. The TTL feature with the diffused TLA200 on the off-camera sync cord, however, works like a champ and I've been really pleased with the results (the first time I got back color prints I was dazzled). Nevertheless, you'll probably have to experiment a little with your combination. I calculate conservatively that with the Rosco on the flash I'm cutting my distance in half, so I set my aperture with that in mind; I've found that the "P Mode"--as the manual shows-- gives you the greatest range so I stick with that a lot unless I'm trying to isolate my subject a little more. Oh, one thing, make sure your T3 is set on one of the autoflash settings unless you're going for some other-than-normal effect.

I'm telling you, if you want to travel light and can work with a 35mm lens, you can do a whale of a job with the T3 and its gear (for instance, indoors with some ambient light or outside with lights in the background (whatever) try setting the T3's flash on the "night" setting with the TLA200 off-camera zoomed out for the 90mm lens . . . whooa!).

Let me know how all this works out for you.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 15, 2001.

John:

I noticed that when you use the 81B filter and Hood, there is no sign of vignetting! How come mine is so obvious? Nearly all of the photo that I took with the UV filter and Hood cause vignetting.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 15, 2001.

Cosmo,

Thank you for your tips. I have the TL-200 and SA-2 and will get the G2 off camera cord. Even regular, off-center, off-camera portraits appear to me to be much more dramatic/interesting than straight in the face flash shots. It also eliminates glare when shooting through glass at museum displays and when shooting document or painting copy work.

I use off camera flash with my SLR but never realized I could do it with the more portable/handier T3/TL-200/SA-2. Thanks a lot.

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 15, 2001.

Phil,

Try an off-camera, slaved flash with autosensor like the Vivitar 283 or 285 with the T3 to get even more freedom of movement, albeit at the sacrifice of the TTL feature . . . .

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 16, 2001.

Cosmo,

Your suggestion of using the Vivitar 283 with it's own sensor as a slave is a great idea. I beleive I owned one of the first 283's over 20 years. They are still highly regarded.

As you are probably aware, the TTL feature of the TL-200 does not work in true TTL mode with the T3. There is no sensor inside the lens to cut off the flash when sufficient lighting has been achieved like true TTL metering coupled with the cut-off (thyristor?) circuitry.

According to the manual, when in aperture priority mose, the T3 adjusts flash output according to subject/camera distance. In program mode it adjusts the aperture according to subject/camera distance. This is defined as "flashmatic" mode.

Your solutions to utilizing the T3 with off camera flash are the best so far. Why didn't I think of that?

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 16, 2001.

Phil,

You're right, I should be more careful with my terms. (I was using TTL as a shorthand for "Flashmatic" when I meant to say "TTL" (in quotes)). It's precisely because of the "Flashmatic" as oppposed to true TTL that the autosensored, slaved flash will work OK.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 16, 2001.

Re: >I noticed that when you use the 81B filter and Hood, there is no sign >of vignetting! How come mine is so obvious? Nearly all of the photo >that I took with the UV filter and Hood cause vignetting. > -- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 15, 2001.

Hmm? I have no idea why it's so obvious on your camera, unless it's the *size* (thickness) of your filters. I use Contax branded filters. Are yours Contax filters or some other brand? This *might* make a difference.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 16, 2001.

Cosmo,

I was hoping to be corrected and that I was missing the TTL feature! But you have the great idea of using the self-sensored flash as a slave which would sure take a lot of guess work out of "light painting" with a slave.

Also a few people who wanted more flash but did not want to go the route of the SA-2/TTL-299 were interested in using small slaves instead. The self-sensored flash fits the bill perfectly. I wonder if there are any very small, pocketable self-sensor falsh units.

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 16, 2001.

John and Tony,

I have been using the Contax brand UV filter with the hood w/o any noticeable vignetting. Tony's pics scared me into taking the filter off and just using the hood for everyday shooting. I wonder if anyone has tried the thin heliopan filters with the hood on the T3?

Phil

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 16, 2001.

Phil,

After your last post, I went rummaging through a lot of stored gear and came up with an old Rollei "Beta 2" flash that measures 53mm (W) x 90mm (H) x 34mm (D), has an automatic sensor from 0.9 to 4.3 meters (3 to 14 feet), runs on 2 AAs and has a snap-on diffuser (I think it came with my Rollei 35SE); the actual flashtube is approximately 38mm long. Talk about portable! I plan to try it out this weekend.

Vivitar also used to make a very small, autosensored flash, something like the "2500" or "3700". Someone around here has to have a bead on flashes of this ilk.

Ciao.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 17, 2001.

Phil and Cosmo

There is also a compact slave-computer flash unit made by Metz, the 34 CS2 model. It has three automatic positions (f/2, f/4 and f/8 at 100 ISO) and can be used in slave mode with a P&S in aperture priority mode.

I use it mainly with my FM2, obtaining nice results, but I have also tried it with my T3 and it worked fine.

See: http://www.metz.de/1_metz_2000/m_pages_english/4_mecablitz/m_mb_produkte/m_fs__34_CS-2.html

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), November 19, 2001.

Is it possible to use the SA2 bracket with the semi-hard case attached to the camera?

-- Ming (saiyans@hotmail.com), November 20, 2001.

Sorry, another question I have. I'm used to using Kodak Royal Gold 100 and 400 iso (kodak no longer making the royal 100 only 200). What other films have you guys tried and what would be the difference compared to the Royal Gold. Any suggestions on other films that work better with the T3. Thanks!

-- Ming (saiyans@hotmail.com), November 20, 2001.

John, Phil: I use the original contax filter(UV) and contax hood too. I am also quite shock with the effect.

Ming: I am using Fujifilm Superia Reala 100, and Fujifilm NPH 400. Will be trying the Kodak 400VC soon.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), November 20, 2001.

Ming,

I also use Fuji Reala 100 and Fuji NPH 400 in my T3. Another very good slow print film is Fuji NPC 160 (see some examples of it in my gallery at: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=122840 For low light situations, some of the new ISO 800 emulsions are very good, particularly Fuji NPZ (replaces Fuji NHG II professional), Supra 800 and Fuji Superia XTRA 800. Even the much maligned Kodak MAX 800 is quite good IF you make sure you get emulsion #5, the newest base.

I don't care much for Kodak Royal film. Kodak Gold 100, however, is quite good.

Check out these Photonet discussion threads on film:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-one-category?topic_id=23&category=

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 20, 2001.

Jerome--

Thanks for the lead on the Metz Mecablitz 34 CS-2; it looks to be a sweet little unit, especially with the built-in slave and a Guide Number of 111. I find that the TLA200 with the TLA100 sync cord gives me really good results both handheld and on the SA-2. Handholding it (or using an auxiliary, slaved flash like the CS-2) allows me to get it high above the camera, to the left or right of the lens, and at a multitude of angles in any of those positions. The resultant negatives are usually well-exposed with good contrast, just the way I like them (I tend to overexpose both black and white and color because I want to have enough information there--on the neg--so I can decide how to translate it into a print; there's a lot more room to manipulate with a properly- to overexposed neg).

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), November 20, 2001.

Hello all -- I'm shooting my first roll with a new T3. In following this thread about external flash units, I assume that one must have the bracket in order to use any type of external flash. Can anyone tell me whether the L series cable is a special type or is this simply a PC cable.

-- Jim Frimmel (jimfrimmel@earthlink.net), November 21, 2001.

The L Cable Switch is not a PC cable. It can be used with the SA-2 Bracket, which is for mounting the TLA200 flash.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 21, 2001.

Hi Jerome -

Thanks for the tip. According to your post, can the Metz-34-CS2 take other film speed besides 100.

Thanks, Niki

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Phil and Cosmo

There is also a compact slave-computer flash unit made by Metz, the 34 CS2 model. It has three automatic positions (f/2, f/4 and f/8 at 100 ISO) and can be used in slave mode with a P&S in aperture priority mode. I use it mainly with my FM2, obtaining nice results, but I have also tried it with my T3 and it worked fine.

http://www.metz.de/1_metz_2000/m_pages_english/4_mecablitz/m_mb_produk te/m_fs__34_CS-2.html

Jerome

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 21, 2001.

Niki

As for the 34 CS2, you can not choose aperture and sensitivity independently, contrary to high-end flash units that are full of electronics. There are only three automatic modes:

- mode 1: f/2 @ 100 ISO, or f/2.8 @ 200 ISO or f/4 @ 400 ISO etc. - mode 2: f/4 @ 100 ISO, or f/5.6 @ 200 ISO or f/8 @ 400 ISO etc. - mode 3: f/8 @ 100 ISO, or f/11 @ 200 ISO or f/16 @ 400 ISO etc.

If you want to use, for example, f/2.8 (for shallow DOF) with 400 ISO film, then it is not possible. You have to stop down at f/4.

I am not aware of any very compact flash unit with more flexibility in choosing aperture and sensitivity (although, in principle, it is feasible with more electronics). The Nikon SB22s has four automatic modes but it is significantly bigger. The Nikon SB28 and Metz 54 MZ3 can be set to whatever aperture and ISO you want, but they are MUCH bigger and more expensive.

Another thing with the Metz 34 CS2: the built-in sensor takes into account a quite narrow solid angle, somehow equivalent to the field of a 105 mm lens. Thus, to avoid overexposure with a 50 or 35mm lens and with a subject that takes only 1/3 or 1/2 of the picture, you better underexpose the flash by setting, for example, f/2 on the flash and f/2.8 on the camera (with 100 ISO film).

For night street photography (special events), I use the 34 CS2 on my FM2 mainly with 50mm and 28mm lenses, 200 ISO slide film, mode 1 on the flash (f/2.8 @ 200 ISO) and f/4 on the lens.

I rarely use this additional flash with my T3, because on long distance subjects I usually have my SLR, while for short distance the built-in flash is OK.

Finally, there is a silly thing on the T3 (Contax, do you hear me?): to my knowledge, you can not select slow synchronization WITHOUT red-eye reduction. This is a pity because in some cases you may need such a setting. And with an additional flash in slave mode, you can NOT use red-eye reduction because the slave flash will fire with the first burst of the built-in flash ! In conclusion, with the T3, you can not have slow synchronization (speed below 1/60) with an additional slave flash.

In any case, I think that for good flash photography, SLR+ external flash is much better than any high-end P&S. And with the T3, thanks to the weight and the absence of a mirror, you can use very slow speed (no flash) without altering the image quality: try it !

Regards

Jerome

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), November 22, 2001.

Sorry

In my previous message, read "film speed" instead of the french-looking "sensitivity" !

;-)

-- Jerome (kalymereau@yahoo.fr), November 22, 2001.

Thanks Jerome for the detailed description...

For those using the T3 with TLA200 flash:

I found an interesting technique of decreasing flash output on the Contax G Pages. This is a G2 owner using the 35-70mm zoom and TLA200 flash, so this may or may not apply to our T3. But I don't think Contax would use different flash programming (software) for the G2 and T3 with the TLA200.

In any event, one simply adjusts the TLA200's zoom selector one step wider than the camera's lens. For example, if the lens is set at 45mm, the flash zoom selector is set at 35mm. So on the T3's 35mm lens, set the TLA200 to 28mm. This widens the angle of the burst and supposedly weakens output, thus renders a more balance exposure.

I don't have the webpage address now, so I will post the actual text of the instructions later.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 22, 2001.

Here's the text from the Contax G Pages...

Despite most of the negative comments I had heard, I bought the TLA 200 in June of this year. Here is what I've found.

1. It gives very good exposure when set to the lens your using. 2. For fill flash portraits, it gives a "velvia" type of exposure when set to one lens wider than your using (if using the 35 lens, set it to 28). Perfect exposure every time. No glare. 3. For fill flash landscapes, set it properly and it gives great results. 4. Using the 35/70 zoom is great with this flash. You want to highlight something, zoom to 35 & set flash high (up to 90). You want a diffuse light for portraits, set flash to 28 for the 35 zoom length, and 45 for the 75 zoom length. 5. Still concerned, try a female nylon stocking bootie over the head- wow. 6. In over 100 rolls of film I've shot with the 200 (I use it a lot during the day), I have only a few red-eye pictures. Almost as a rule, these occur where I am shooting at an angle to the eyes, not directly into them. I'm not sure this makes sense, but that's what I see.

I have not tried the 140, I liked the idea of the zoom head and compact size of the 200. Just my $.02. Savvas Savopoulos

-- Niki (cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 22, 2001.

More excellent "hand's on" information to get the most range out of the TL-200. Thank you both Cosmo and Niki.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 23, 2001.

Hello, I just got my brandnew T3 and I am in love with it. The user manual did not give much difficulties but I was wondering about one thing. Is it possible to load a partly used film and begin that film at for example number 15? With my old camera's wich are manuals I always set the fastest speed and smallest diafragma and then with the hood on just go on till I reach the desired place on the film. Is there a way for the T3 also? Thank you Leo

-- Leo Jonkers (ljjonkers@chello.nl), November 24, 2001.

Leo,

Search this thread for a tip submitted on October 03, 2001 by Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com)where he describes how to reload the T3 with a partially exposed roll. Be sure to set custom function #1 to 'b' when removing the roll from the camera.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), November 25, 2001.

Niki,

I was wondering if its possible to use the sa2 bracket with the semi hard case on? Or do you have to take it off when using the bracket? Thanks.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@Hotmail.com), November 25, 2001.

Hi Ming -

I don't have the case in question, but have seen pics of it. From the look of it, I don't think it was designed to accommodate the bracket. Nice case though... allows you to carry the T3 around your neck and has enough space for lens filter/hood and cap.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 26, 2001.

Ming,

The everyready case does not provide for attachment of the SA-2 bracket. The SA-2 has several small spring loaded pin contacts for the flash circuit and also a slightly larger mating pin that fit into the bottom of the T3.

BTW the case is of very supple leather and does not increase the overall size of the T3 to a significant degree. It remains small and is nearly as unnoticable around my neck or slung under one arm as is the T3 in the pouch on my belt.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), November 26, 2001.

Thanks alot of your answers. I'll be getting the bracket and flash by the end of the week. I'll probably get the filter adapter and uv protector for now for it. Thanks again.

-- Ming (saiyans@hotmail.com), November 27, 2001.

Over the weekend I shot 3 rolls of Fuji Superia 400 with the SA-2 Bracket and TLA200 Flash. All photos were people portraits at a wedding, all indoors. Using the method described 8&9 posts previous - setting the TLA200 zoom selector to 28 instead of 35 - the pictures came out much more balanced. I'm quite happy with the result. I made a few shots using only the built-in flash with the same film and the results were consistenly on the hot side again. Next time I will underexposure by -0.5 to -1.0 and see if that will balance out the hotness a bit.

Slowing approaching Leica flash characteristics... ;-}

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), November 27, 2001.

John or whoever can answer, What's the main difference between Fuji NPC and NPS 160? I take it it also explains Kodak Portra NC and VC 400? Thanks alot.

-- Ming (saiyans@Hotmail.com), December 01, 2001.

Ming,

NPC is higher contrast. I believe the "C" in NPC stands for "contrast." BTW both are great films.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), December 03, 2001.

Ming, Kodak 400 NC is very nice for portraits and skin tones. It tends to be less contrasty than other consumer ISO 400 films. I like it a lot and have a roll in my T3 right now. I'll post some images when I finish the roll. Here's the official word from Kodak:

PORTRA 400NC: Subtle color and natural flesh tones in low light or situations with on-camera flash

PORTRA 400VC: Enhanced color in low light

See more here:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/portra/port raIndex.jhtml

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 03, 2001.

Thanks John and Phil for your responses. I actually have a roll of 400 NC in my T3 right now as well. Would love to see some scans of the pictures you take with it, John. Thanks. I know this is off topic, but have any of you had any experience with a 20 mm lens? I just got a 20mm /2.8 for my Nikon. Any tips on taking pictures with this lens, etc. Thanks!

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 03, 2001.

Oh, have you ever had any experience with Contax Reps? The local camera store had a camera expo and there were reps from all these different companies. I stood in front of the Contax table, because I was curious to hear what he was saying about the T3, G2, and some of their slrs. He saw me looking at him, but he wouldn't even venture to ask , "how may I help you"... he kept helping other ppl who came after me. Maybe he thought I was just a kid or something. That leads to my next question. Do any of you own a contax slr or rangefinder? Is the additional premium on the Zeiss lenses worth it or would lenses from Nikon be sufficient for an amateur photographer who just wants clear, sharp pictures? Thanks again.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 03, 2001.

Ming -

IMO, Contax SLRs are on the expensive side but the G1/G2 rangefinders and G lenses' prices are within, if not cheaper, than professional series Nikon and Canon's prices. Some say Contax is clearing their inventory and won't release a much hoped-for G3. I got rid of my Canon EOS gear once I start shooting with Zeiss glass.

If you choose to go with the G rangefinders, I'd suggest you do some research before hand. They are a bit different to use and Contax doesn't have as extensive a line of lenses as Leica.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 03, 2001.

-- aaa (aaa@aaa.com), December 03, 2001.

-- aaa (aaa@aaa.com), December 03, 2001.

Re: Ming's question on the Contax G system.

The G lenses are probably some of the best in the world. I've looked at the G1 and G2 bodies many times but just can't warm up to their quirky AF, weird flash system and noise level. I wish I knew someone who owned the system so I could borrow it and try it out for a while, but no luck (and stores don't rent the Gs where I live.) If you can live with a one-lens camera, I think the Konica Hexar AF (35mm f/2) is just as good - and much quieter. Here are some sites you might want to visit to learn more about the Contax Gs:

http://www.novia.net/~jlw/contax/advice.html#top http://www.contaxg.com/ http://www.bsag.ch/~fs/camera/g2.html

John McCormack

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 04, 2001.

John is right. The AF system on the Contax G is quirky. Unlike the manual Leica M6, you don't have visual confirmation of your image. But you can check the distance (in the view-finder and the read-out on top). The lens cranks to focus when the shutter release button is pressed 1/2 way down, and cranks back to infinity when your finger is off the shutter button. Each time it does that, it makes noise. Something SLR users don't like.

But if you can handle the T3's AF, then the G's AF shouldn't be a problem. It just makes more noise.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 04, 2001.

Niki,

What do you mean you don't get a visual confirmation? I just looked at the G2 at the store today. The image does focus on the viewfinder when the shutter button is pressed halfway... at least it does on the G2 that is. The sales guy thinks though, at least for me, perhaps I should just stick with my Nikon system, at least for now, until I can really afford it, the cost of all the zeiss lenses! (I think I'm the youngest on this thread). Thanks for the input.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 04, 2001.

"John is right. The AF system on the Contax G is quirky."

John is not right. The autofocus system on the Contax G2 is extremely fast and accurate. There is a learning curve involved, but once the process is mastered (about 2 rolls of film), it is as natural as any other. Focus confirmation is indeed provided in the viewfinder via an LCD at the bottom of the screen. This is no less reliable than superimposed images; in both cases, you have to trust in the calibration of the rangefinder and its linkage to the camera lens. The only weakness of the G focusing system may be encountered on rare occasions when you are trying to focus on one of two adjacent objects and the G will not indicate which one has been locked on. In truth, I have experienced only a handful of poorly focused images in the thousands that I have shot with this camera. It is a genuine pleasure to use and has provided far better results than my N90s.

-- Robert Goldstein (robgo2@earthlink.net), December 04, 2001.

"John is not right. The autofocus system on the Contax G2 is extremely fast and accurate."

Robert is RIGHT too, provided one spends time to learn the G system. Like you said, there is a learning curve with the G system. Both the G1/G2 have a read-out at the bottom of the viewfinder, displaying the distance of your subject. However, it is a distance read-out, not a visual change of your image. In other words, the image in the G1/G2 viewfinder is ALWAYS in focus no matter what the reading is... just like a P&S camera.

If the calibration of a G rangefinder is within factory specs, it should give perfectly focused pics, provided the user knows how to deal with its "quirkiness".

It has everything to do with "quirky", and nothing to with "wrong".

Anyone else like to be "right"??? ;-}

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 05, 2001.

Hey, hey . . . "Contax T3-User Comments, Discussion (PART 2)". Where'd you G1 & G2 people come from? . . . Contax T3.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), December 05, 2001.

Sorry about that. I kinda started the last run of the G talk. It's because of the T3 that I begun to consider getting other Contax cameras. :) Sorry again.

Ming

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 05, 2001.

Has anyone shot any Fuji 100 Acros or NPZ 800 thru their T3? I'd like to know what people think of these 2 new films (such as the NPZ 800 should be shot at 640 etc). Thanks. Happy Holidays!!(Bin Laden excluded).

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 05, 2001.

I just purchased a roll of NPZ 800 last week. Hope to take pictures of Christmas lights in the next week or so. Will post them as soon as I take them. Suggestions about using 800 film with the T3 is also appreciated.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 05, 2001.

Scott Eaton rated both those films very highly. He called NPZ the best 800 speed film available today. He recommended shooting it at 640. He also liked Acros better than any other 100 speed B&W film. He recommends shooting it at 80. See his Acros thread under Film in the Moderated Forum.

I just got a black T3 yesterday. Wow, does Contax know how to make a point and shoot or what! For those of you who thought the T3 styling was ugly, take a look at the Black T3. A point and shoot doesn't come any slicker than that. Very nice. Even my wife loved it, which is rare. I thought she would say "$650 for that!" Instead she said, "wow, cool, can I get one too?"

I did an extensive lens test on slide film to test focus accuracy wide open and to test sharpness/contrast/flare at all apertures. I'll post my results along with my impression of the camera in a few weeks. So far, I think it's a wonderful camera.

-- Ray Negus (raynegus@pcez.com), December 05, 2001.

hi guys!

recently i tried the kodak 400vc. i just got the print yesterday. what i can say is, kodak sucks. Fujifilm rules.

There are some phenomenal i dont understand, i will post the picture soon.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), December 05, 2001.

Tony,

I used the 400VC in my T5 to photograph my fair skinned, red haired, nephews in bright sunlight on the beach. I was worried because I had read that the film was best suited for cloudy overcast conditions. However, the results were absolutely spectacular.

What subjects and conditions were you using it for?

This film has generated many love/hate reports on Photnet. The film Dept. Manager at Samy's in LA recommended it to me as her personal favorite for fair skinned subjects so I took a chance and got a 5 roll pack.

-- Phil (plpb@earthlink.net), December 06, 2001.

Phil, are you from LA? I just got back from Samy's earlier. My it's a madhouse over there with their weekend sale... Unfortunately only one sales guy there is nice to me. The rest only see $$$ , which makes sense but rarely give me the time of day to explain their products... saw the contax rep that I'm not too thrilled with again. They still didn't have the SA2 bracket in. (longer than 2 weeks already). Supposedly tommorrow. The rep said he was going to give me a tshirt or shirt from Contax, but that never materialized.. they went back to selling their merchandise... go figure!@

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 06, 2001.

Phil:

I use it for my friends wedding. Outdoor photo was fine, but indoor is absolute a disgrace. i was so embarras to show the photo to my friend. The 400vc is too sensitive to underexposure. Even though i was using the forced flash indoor, the photo is too grainy due to underexposure.

I dont understand why it will be underexposed, i thought the T3 will give a proper exposure when in AE mode. I was using f11 and the shutter speed is always between 1/30-1/125 range when indoor. And I was using the force flash.

Now, i am in a dilema as to which film to choose for my trip to UK. i wanted a film that will give a quality print like fuji superia reala 100, but 100 is too slow, i think, to be used in uk due to the overcast. 100 maybe fine when use it outdoor, but indoor(like in the church), it maybe to slow(if i want to use f8-f16 because i want to have deep DOF).

Any advice?

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), December 07, 2001.

Tony,

Although I've not tried all the Kodak films out there, I don't care to use Kodak for people photography. For light Caucasian and European skin tones, it's fine. On darker skins like Asian, certain South Americans and Mediterranean, it performs poorly... too yellow and pale. Fuji Reala and Superia are better, imo. Just recently I shot 3 rolls of Superia 400 using the TLA200 flash at 28mm. I shot using P, aperatures f2.8 to f11, all indoors. Excellent results. Of course, pro Fuji film will be even better.

fyi, if you're going to the UK, they may have Agfa films (Vista, Optima II). They're excellent as well.

BTW, have you tried out your polarizer yet??? Just curious.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 07, 2001.

Niki:

i have yet to try the polarizer, will try it this weekend.

is the normal fuji superia 400 good? i think it is marketed with the 'x-tra' layer right? i do see comments that the 'x-tra' layer makes the skin tone not natural. is it as good as the reala 100? in terms of contrast, grains? i really love the reala 100. i have tried the NPH, well it is indeed good for portrait. but it is not suitable for landscape as it will make the print looks dull and dead. the reala 100 brings out the colour well.

-- Tony (tonyhalim@www.com), December 07, 2001.

Tony,

I may be wrong - please correct me if so - but you may have over- ridden the flash AE/Program by using aperture priority and force fill flash. If so f/11 is closed down pretty good and would probably have resulted in under exposure.

Niki is correct the Fuji's are really where it is at! Fuji pro NPS and NPC (asa 160) deliver beautiful portrait shots of olive and darker skinned subject. My wife is kind of dark skinned SE Asian and my son has olive skin. Check out John's close-up portrait of his daughter using NPC. The exposure is perfect and the color is rich. That photo has inspired me to use the T3 and NPC to get in close.

NPH (Fuji 400 asa) is also another great portrait film that you should consider. I've heard that the new Superia 400 with the 4 layer emulsion is a good film too.

IMO Reala is the best all around film for both scenics and people.

Lastly, try taking your Kodak NPC 400 negs to a pro lab. I use A & I Labs, one of the best in the U.S. And even they sometimes print too warm/yellowish. At A&I, they'll gladly reprint to your specs.

Does anyone know whether the irradiation of the mail to kill anthrax will damage unexposed or exposed film?. I buy and process my film by mail.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), December 07, 2001.

This from Kodak at Kodak.com from today, dated quite a while ago. I haven't found any updated information, although there's probably someone around here who has. . .

"US Mail to be sterilized: Implications for Kodak and the photo industry 11/15/01 To protect public health and ensure confidence in the US Mail system, the United States Postal Service (USPS) is installing new equipment to sanitize certain items sent through the mail. While various sanitizing technologies can damage film and other sensitive materials, the USPS has issued the following statement:

"The USPS is working with the mailing industry to develop procedures to ensure that sanitization of the mail will not damage sensitive items in the mail. Sanitization technology is currently being tested on a wide range of film products, digital and magnetic storage devices, laboratory samples, food and plant products, and "smart" credit cards with embedded chips to ensure that all business mail can be safely processed through the postal system."

Therefore, based upon this statement and upon other information from USPS shared with Kodak and the photo industry, it appears that current photographic commerce in all its forms will be unaffected.

Kodak will issue further statements as new information becomes available.

Eastman Kodak Company"

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.co), December 07, 2001.

Tony -

I would rank Fuji Superia 400 a step below Reala, but not a big one. Not pro stuff but certainly much better than Kodak films of similar price range. Good contrast, grains. Colors are lively. It does have the 4th layer emulsion, but only for 400 and faster speed.

I've not used Superia 400 for the outdoors, so I don't know how it would behave. You may want to give it a try before you take off for the UK. But hey, if you're comfortable with Reala, I would pack it along. UK at this time of year is damp and dreary.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 07, 2001.

Tony, if you set the aperture at f/11 the flash range will only be a few feet at best! Use it on P mode when using flash, as the manual recommends. It uses flashomatic mode in P, and variable power in aperture-priority mode. See page 29 of the manual.

Don't bash the film or the camera until you're sure you've used them correctly.

-- Ray Negus (raynegus@pcez.com), December 07, 2001.

Is there a good 400 speed film for taking landscapes?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 07, 2001.

A correction to my last post - should read Kodak Portra 400 VC ("vivid color") and not Kodak NPC. NPC is a Fuji film.

Again, I've heard that the newest Fuji Superia 400 with the 4 layer emulsion is giving very good all around results for the 400 speed films. I've used Fuji NPH 400 outdoors with decent results. Also used the Kodak Supra 400 and got very nice, high color/contrast, outdoor results.

Every review that I've seen on the Kodak Supra 800 states that it is one of the best - if not the best - 800 films with very low graininess comparable to the best 400 films.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), December 07, 2001.

I finally got my TLA 200/ SA2 flash bracket today. But then a G2 w/45mm lens seem to have followed with my purchase. :p I tried the Supra 800 with my Nikon and it came back pretty grainy...? Not sure why... I'm looking forward to developing my roll of NPH that I"m shooting with the T3. Anybody have a suggestion for a slide film to use? I've never shot slide film before... Thanks!

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 08, 2001.

FYI: New point-and-shoot/compact-cameras group

Kurt Weisk has started a group on yahoo! for compact camera users and spontaneous, spur-of-the-moment photography.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/compact-cameras

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 08, 2001.

Thanks for all the feedback on the film.

Well, i just would like to confirm, when i am in LT mode and AE mode (f16), the exposure compensation is not applicable? Because from my understanding, in LT mode, i will specify the shutter speed(e.g. 45sec), and f16. Hence even if i set the exposure compensation to +1, the shutter speed will still be 45sec? or 90 sec?

-- Tony (Tonyhalim@www.com), December 08, 2001.

Does anyone know of a good way of cleaning "multi-coated" filters? I've read a few bad reviews where folks damaged the coating or couldn't removed a simple finger print.

Tony, I tested the LT at 2 seconds and then 2 seconds and +2.0 compensation... there's not time lapse difference.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 08, 2001.

CORRECTION: "there's not time lapse difference."

I meant to say: "There's no time lapse difference between the two exposure configurations."

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 08, 2001.

I'm having problems getting the Contax UV filter clean as well. The sales guy told me to use a lens cloth, but it sometimes works but still sometimes there is the streak that is left. Any ideas?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@Hotmail.com), December 09, 2001.

Niki: i use a good lens cloth to clean the contax filter. get a good one, mine is the rodenstock cloth.

i also have a brush(StaticWisk-anti-static brush) by Kinetronics. Mine is the small size (#SW-020).

-- tony (tonyhalim@www.com), December 09, 2001.

Niki, The contax guy was able to get the smear mark off my skylight filter. He rubbed pretty hard with the soft cloth. I guess I was just hesitant thinking it might scratch the glass.

Tony, Where did you get the Rodenstock cloth?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 09, 2001.

Ming: U can get the cloth from most camera shops. It is just a piece of microfiber cloth, but since it is from Rodenstock, its quality should be better. maybe u can get for US$4. I got it in singapore for s$6.

-- tony (tonyhalim@www.com), December 10, 2001.

Tony, Thanks.

What brand filters is everyone using? Is the Contax better or is filters from other companies like B+W better? Thanks.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 10, 2001.

Thanks Tony for the tips.

Ming - Both the German B&W and Heliopan brands are good quality, made from Schott glass. I would go with multi-coated filters, as they compliment the Zeiss lens. If you looked at the Contax UV filter directly, I can't see the glass... just the lens.

Hoya also makes multi-coated filters. Their top-end stuff isn't cheap.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 10, 2001.

The B+W and Heliopan filters have no equal--of course they're not cheap (you get what you pay for!)

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 10, 2001.

I forgot to mention in my previous post: I recently shot some Fuji Acros 100 and some Fuji NPZ 800. The Acros is nice, the NPZ 800 is exceptional! (I shot it at 640)

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 10, 2001.

The 400 print films mentioned above (Kodak Portra and Fuji NPC) are portrait films designed to be lower contrast and would not make the best landscape film.

-- Kelvin Leung (kleung@alumni.calpoly.edu), December 11, 2001.

I live on Nantucket Island off the Massachusetts coast and am becoming frustrated with the lack of quality in the film processing/printing available here. Would appreciate any thoughts on quality labs that deal with "mail order". Am just a happy amateur trying to coax everything I can from my T3 .....

-- Bruce Harrison (rbh1@mediaone.net), December 11, 2001.

Bruce,

One of the best processors in the mail order business is A&I, but they are located in LA - a long mailing distance from Nantucket. Check them out at http://www.aandi.com/ Also, B&H sells their mailers

Closer and cheaper is Mystic Color Lab in Mystic, CT. I've never used them but some folks like their work. They are on the web at: http://www.mysticcolorlab.com/index.html

I have used Dale Labs in Florida and was very pleased with their work. They can be found at: http://www.dalelbs.com/ Dales' Picture CDs are excellent, by the way.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

I was looking at a T3 at my local dealer this weekend, and I noticed a small red light being emitted from the front of the camera. I assume this is for the focus. My question is whether or not this is seen by the subject of the shot. If so it might be very distracting, and prevent truly candid photography.

Also, any comments on accuracy of focus in general and low light situations would be appreciated. Thanks!

-- Nick Hillyer (nhillyer@fhcrc.org), December 12, 2001.

The below post about focus appears above. Kwen Wen did somne interesting experiemnts focusing on objects ... very helpful.

Kwen Wan said: "One thing I did notice (on my T3) is that the autofocus area is approximately 5 ovals wide (if you take the autofocus 'oval' and lay them out 5 times) and it prevents my T3 from focusing through a gap in the door which is half open -if I sit stand about 2 metres back from it. (by the way, are the U.S. T3 distance scales in feet?). If I take a vertical shot the autofocus area doesn't clip the edges of the door and focuses through into the distance." I did find out that contax T3 have 2 different focusing methods! when you use AFL lock button to focus, the focusing area is EXACTLY the Oval you see in the viewfinder and when you use halfpress, focusing area is somewhat 5 ovals wide! sorry about my english, thats not my strongest skil:)

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), August 24, 2001

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), December 13, 2001.

Is it possible to set the ISO on the T3? I can't seem to find any instructions in the manual or does the camera just set it to whatever speed the DX code says? Thanks.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 13, 2001.

Is it possible to set the ISO on the T3? I can't seem to find any instructions in the manual or does the camera just set it to whatever speed the DX code says? Thanks.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 13, 2001. Not directly-Indirectly you have two choices: 1)using the exposure compensation +2 to -2 stops in either 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments (you can set this) 2: use DX coded cassettes for the ISO/ASA you want or (as I have done) alter the DX code on cassettes (I've recently shot some Maco IR 820C with a B+W 092 IR filter--I needed ISO/ASA 6 so I fashioned a reloadable cassette with a DX code of 25 and then used the exposure compensation controls on the camera (mentioned above) at -2 stops (which gave me the ISO/ASA 6 I needed). It was kind of a pain, but the results were worth it.

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 13, 2001.

Four alternatives to setting EI: (1) the T3's +2 to -2 exposure compensation dial, (2) "Cripps DX Recoders" (non-reusable), (3) making your own recoders with aluminum foil and ordinary "Avery Labels" (reusable), and (4) scratch and block according to the "DX Code Exposed!" table found at http://members.aol.com/dalphotopr/dx.htm

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), December 13, 2001.

See also, www.shooter.net/dxcodes.gif

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), December 13, 2001.

I am trying to decide between purchasing a T3 or an old, original Contax T. This is a great source for information on the T3 but I can't seem to find much on the T. Does anyone have any thoughts on comparing these two cameras? The more details the better. Thanks. Cordially, Greg Jesson

-- Greg Jesson (greg-jesson@uiowa.edu), December 13, 2001.

Try Here,

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003Fj5

and here,

http://www.photographyreview.com/Point+and+Shoot/Contax+T/PRD_84796_31 08crx.aspx

I owned one of these (in black) when they first came out. I loved that camera, but it is a little hefty. The beauty of it is that it's a true, focusable rangefinder (although some have problems, I've heard, with alignment; I never had that problem even at f/2.8). The other nice thing about the Contax T* is that it has a 38mm lens which I personally prefer over the 35mm. The downside to the T* compared with the T3 is that the T* doesn't take filters, is subject to flare (at times), and is considerably heavier, especially when you have the flash attached. That's another thing: the flash is separate and screws into the left side of the T* (like the Olympus XA-series flashes) and makes the camera a little unwieldy. And, if you have large hands it can be a little difficult to grasp the focusing ring on the lens because of the fold-down door/lens cover (a la Minox 35 models). Nevertheless, it took great pictures with superb contrast-- I'd still be using mine today if I hadn't dropped it in the Aegean Sea while on vacation one year.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), December 13, 2001.

I just got the print using fuji superia 400 X-tra. hmmm, definitely does not have the sharpness of reala. But performs well at night, not as sensitive as kodak 400VC.

will be trying the Supra 800.

-- Tony Halim (tonyhalim@www.com), December 14, 2001.

Tony,

Can you post some pics using Superia 400? Btw, are you using the TLA200 flash at night or just the built-in?

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 14, 2001.

Has anyone heard any rumours if Contax is working on any changes for their present lineup including any tweeking on the T3? Thanks.

-- Greg Jesson (greg-jesson@uiowa.edu), December 19, 2001.

Contax just release a new digital camera based on the N1 with 6.xx Megapixels. As for the T3, I think the ball is now in Leica's court. Maybe even Rollei's. :-)

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 19, 2001.

Well Fuji Klasse/ Rollei AFM 35 (same camera I think) is the current offering by Rollei. It is a 38mm/2.6 center weighted p&s that weighs slighly more than the T3. It has auto-bracketing and the flash is stronger than the T3 (GN 11 vs. 6.4). The viewfinder displays more info. more info.. http://www.photozone.de/range.htm

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 19, 2001.

Rollei is a great company. There're songs peppered with "Rolleiflex" in them, but Rollei should stop hopping around and stick with one partner just as Contax with Kyocera. Rollei's been bought, sold and shared so many times, I've lost count. First Samsung now Fuji. Years ago Rollei was even owned by a major German department store "Hertie" and then photographic retailer "Hansa Photo". I can't imagine Contax or Leica owned my Nordstrom. And this has resulted in very inconsistent and often poor customer support... or sold I've heard.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 20, 2001.

sold = so

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 20, 2001.

I have a question for T3 owners. How firm is the sutter release button on your camera? My T3 has it wiggle simmilar to a keyboard key. Is it normal?

Also, when I got the camera, I apparently was taken by one of the NY finest and they sold me a grey market camera, does it mean that I can't service it in the USA under warranty?

Thank you in advance and Happy Holidays to all.

-- Alex Y. (alex@wiretalk.com), December 21, 2001.

that little bit of play is normal (or, at least I have it too). never been a problem

-- ron (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), December 21, 2001.

I think the grey one only comes with a 1 year international warranty... I don't see why you can't get it serviced in the US under warranty during that one year?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 21, 2001.

RE: Kodak Portra 400 NC.

I've used 400 NC before but this is the first time in the T3. I was pleased with the results. This film has neutral contrast and is aimed mostly at portrait/wedding shooters as it handles skin tones very well. It as a smooth appearance and little grain - sort of like Fuji Reala in ISO 400. It works best outdoors in bright lighting where it won't blow out highlights. It works less well on dreary days or indoors w/o flash. See the last four images posted at the bottom of this page:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=122840

A less expensive film with punchier colors is Agfa Vista 400. I may try it out and post a comparison.

John McCormack

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 21, 2001.

Alex Y:

The shutter button should have some play. Sorry you got ripped off. I've heard (I don't know for a fact) that Contax USA Service will not work on grey market items. Finally, try B&H Photo/Video New York (420 Ninth Ave)--I've ALWAYS (every single time for years)had perfect transactions with them (for the skeptics, NO, I don't work for B&H).

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 22, 2001.

There are gray market anniversary T3's showing up in Japan (Contax 70 years). Does anyone have any information if there will be any of these in America? I don't want to go through the gray market problems with such a high performance camera. Thanks for any clues. Cordially

-- Greg Jesson (greg-jesson@uiowa.edu), December 26, 2001.

Awhile back I asked if anyone knew of a good source for 30.5mm filters. At the time they were special order items from B&H, but they seem to be stocking them now (at least the standard B&W ones).

-- ronb (ronb@fusive.com), December 27, 2001.

I have a question and didn't know how to ask it, sorry. I had a T2 for years and, sadly, recently lost it on a vacation. I am now faced with the decision of replacing it with a T3 or a TVS or TVS-II (I don't like the idea of an elecronic zoom on the TVS-III). So... any comments or suggestions on which I should do would be appreciated. I've enjoyed reading this thread of comments. Thanks to all who have contributed. art

-- Art Katsapis (azaraka@hotmail.com), December 28, 2001.

Re: TVS II or T3

Tough choice, Art. I agree that the TVS II (if you can find one) is a better choice than the TVS III. Both the TVS II and T3 are great - with advantages in both camps:

28mm is nice on the TVS II and the manual focusing is easier. Camera is larger overall, of course.

The lens is slower on the II but not hateful.

Custom functions on the T3 are a big plus, IMO. The faster lens is great and does focus pretty close. Zoom with your feet.

If you liked the T2 I think you'll like the T3, esp. the size.

Hope this helps.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), December 28, 2001.

Art,

If you're considering a "fixed" lens, T3 all the way. Must say I still admire the aesthetics on the T2 better, but the pocket-size and features of the T3 and its lens are best in its league, imo.

If a zoom lens is what you're after, I would also consider the Leica Minilux Zoom. Although with fewer features than the TVS2, the Leica lens is a better performer. Leica flash is also better too.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 28, 2001.

My wife and I have both the Leica Minilux Zoom and the T3. Both deliver superb results. The T3 shots may have a slight edge of crispness/sharpness while the Minilux Zoom shots, particulalry in skin tones of portrait shots, have a certain glow about them which render them equally appealing. I guess this is the "Leica look." Both cameras have a solid, high quality feel.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), December 29, 2001.

Geessz this thread has grown since I've last visited it! Now I've got broadband I managed to upload some largish scans for non T3 owners (but must have broadband!) to see the qualities of this gorgeous T3 lens.

http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/street.jpg http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/crisps.jpg http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/slide.jpg

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), December 29, 2001.

Quick question all,

What do you use to scan your prints/negatives? I'm looking for a good but not too expensive way to scan? I have a old flatbed scanner. I was looking at hte EPson 2450 flatbed photo scanner as an upgrade. Any other suggestions? Thanks!

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 30, 2001.

my scans above are scanned in at the print lab to CDROM, but I'm thinking of getting a Nikon 4000 ED which is supposedly one of the best film scanners or it's little brother the IV with less resolution...however I haven't seen any sharp scans from these as samples on the web. All seem a bit fuzzy?! Though are perhaps too expensive for most people..however whats the point of taking razor sharp images from the T3 if you digitise them at poor quality ?...well my thinking.

A flatbed scanner is at best a compromise to scan 35mm film, it just doesn't have enough resolution and doesn't have the optics. OK for prints. Something from Agfa or Epson should be OK.

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), December 30, 2001.

Kwen - Let me guess. You're using Fuji Reala, right?

-- Niki (cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 30, 2001.

Niki, half right...Fuji but Fuji Superia neg ISO 200

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), December 30, 2001.

Kwen,

Thanks for the scans: http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/street.jpg http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/crisps.jpg http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/slide.jpg

They are all VERY nice! I for one, wouldn't complain if you submitted more!

Happy Holidays!

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), December 31, 2001.

Once I got used to the T3 focusing, acknowledged the weak flash and found the correct lab capable to process the film the results are outstanding. I would crown it the best lens on an autofocus compact., better than any zoom lens and subjectively anyway, almost embrasses my Contax G lenses! Infact there is not much in it! Dare I say the T3 is a touch sharper?

The price is expensive in relation to other compact cameras but in relationship to exotic lenses it is a positive bargain for almost if not the same performance.

The scans from this particular lab are outstanding too, (not all transfers to CDROM are the same) but to really appreicate the contrast, colour and sharpness you do need to be viewing on a suitable high end monitor or TFT. Preferably a new generation high contrast FD Trinitron flavour. (I have two Diamondtrons and my Plus 91 just kills off the Pro 900U for sharpness and contrast especially with FPM fine picture mode enabled!)

If they could come up with a T3M (manual) that would be the icing on the cake.

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), December 31, 2001.

I really do like the street picture and I agree on my Diamondtron 2040U it is very very nice! I've seen some pretty sharp pictures taken with the T3, but I think my biggest problem is still lighting. I think so far my G2 still takes a lil sharper picture, but it is probably I'm still learning to get enough lighting for the T3.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 31, 2001.

Great pics! Took my laptop 5 minutes to download each, but great stuff.

I've also compared T3 pics against G 45mm/2.0 - the sharpest of the series... it's hard to tell the difference!

-- Niki (cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), December 31, 2001.

Niki,

Get faster internet access!!!!! Hey post some of your pictures. I want to see! I'll try to post my pictures as soon as I get a better scanner. What resolution do you all scan at?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 31, 2001.

For screen viewing is not so much resolution its more pixels, just make sure you have enough pixels for the size you require.

if you want a fairly full frame picture standard 15 inch screen is 640 x 480 pixels and this should fit other screens.

I made mine larger and didn't compress the jpg much to show off the quality of the T3 lens, if you just want to show off the photography it can be smaller so it downloads quicker for 56k users. (the more compression the more fuzzy and less sharp the image will be)

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), December 31, 2001.

Hey folks ..... I recently finished a roll with my T3 and it rewound the film as normal. When I powered it off the lens only retracted about 2/3 of the way and it is frozen. The display has all the normal icons that are there when powered on, the film counter is flashing zero as it should when empty, the lens is extended about 1/4" or so and the lens cover is fully open. When I power on/off the display remains constant and the lens doesn't move at all and the camera motor makes three quick noises as if it is attempting to cycle the lens. I bought the camera in late March when it was first released and have only shot 20-25 rolls with it. Have any of you fellow T3 fans heard of this problem?

-- Bruce Harrison (rbh1@mediaone.net), January 02, 2002.

The next time I visit my Silicon-groomed cousin, I'll have him scan a few pics. I'm still lagging behind the time... no cell phone, no pager, no voicemail, no scanner, no fax, just dial-up access...

...but I have my T3. ;-)

Niki =======================================

Niki,

Get faster internet access!!!!! Hey post some of your pictures. I want to see! I'll try to post my pictures as soon as I get a better scanner. What resolution do you all scan at?

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), December 31, 2001.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 02, 2002.

Bruce,

The lens motor maybe dead or malfunctioning. I would call up Contax service and ask what to do.

I'm sure you can remove the film from the chamber since it's rewound.

Good luck,

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 03, 2002.

Bruce,

Try taking the battery out and waiting a second and then reinserting it. If this doesn't clear the problem, you'll need to send it in (I hope you purchased the Contax USA model with the 3 year warranty!). If you did, let us know how your experience went getting it serviced. Good luck with it.

-- Nikki Recob (NickRecob@AOL.COM), January 04, 2002.

I have had a Contax T3 since March 2000.Since then it has taken 60+ rolls of film and travelled extensively through Alps etc with no problems.Photo quality equals and sometimes betters my previous Leica M6 + 35mm Summicron.However film failed to load last week and internal examination of camera film chamber showed that the little sprocket on the film take up spool had broken off.I was naturally very disappointed and have sent the camera back to Contax Agent for repair under warranty.My question is -Has anybody else had this problem?This camera has not had any abuse.I was shocked to see that Contax have only placed ONE sprocket on this drum?All pf the film tension relies on this?If it breaks,which it apparently will,the camera is rendered useless.Even the most basic P+S cameras have several sprockets to catch the film perforations.

-- Tommy Cahill (meldubair@eircom.net), January 13, 2002.

The Contax T3 was only released in 2001? You have the T2?

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), January 13, 2002.

I had the same problem with the take-up spool losing the sprocket and failing to wind film. Contax fixed it under warranty.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 13, 2002.

APOLOGIES-I BOUGHT MY T3 IN MARCH 2001(TYPING ERROR!!!)GLAD TO HEAR I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS HAD THIS PROBLEM WITH THE T3.ALTHOUGH EXTREMELY VERY HAPPY WITH THIS CAMERA, I FEEL THAT CONTAX SHOULD REDESIGN THIS PART OF THE TAKE-UP SPOOL AS POTENTIALLY EVERY T3 CAN AND WILL FAIL IN THIS DEPARTMENT.SURELY A CAMERA THIS EXPENSIVE AND WITH THIS PEDIGREE WOULD HAVE HAD A BETTER SYSTEM THAN ONE PALTRY SPROCKET??

-- TOMMY CAHILL (meldubair@eircom.net), January 14, 2002.

Didn't even notice that till you brought it up. I guess they don't have RECALLS in the camera manufacturing business. ;-)

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 15, 2002.

And I was hoping that my sprocket problem was a one-of-a-kind, one time, problem. Looks like we may have discovered a weak spot.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 15, 2002.

Been experimenting with taking flash photos using the TL 200 wired to the T3 through the off camera cord and SR-2 bracket. Have great results with portraits using normal flash sync speeds aiming the flash offset high and wide of the subject. Also good results obtained in LT (Long Time) mode firing the flash as a fill. With the T3 flash set to no flash, the camera chooses the LT exposure time and the TL 200 will still fire. Results were slightly overexposed. Does anyone know if I can use the exposure compensation adjustment for LT shots?

Pardon me for asking this again. This was asked before but I did not understand whether the answer was a "yes" the exposure comp works in LT mode or a "no" the exposure comp does not work under LT mode.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 15, 2002.

Phil...Tommy I was thinking of buying the T3 this week (my shop/supplier still as 3 T3s after the xmas period - I know him pretty well and he told me that they sold around 20 pieces from november to december). Now, after reading all the great posting I was pretty convinced to go and buy my new T3... but then I've read the problems that both of you had with the film "sprocket" breaking down... So what should I do???? I posses a CONTAX G2 with 28, 45 and 90 mm and I'm really happy with it but I want a "quality" P&S camera to be always with me... Do you think I should wait and see if Contax becomes aware of this problem, or these things never happen? Thanks. - Milan, Italy

-- Fernando Collalti (fernando_collalti@peoplesoft.com), January 16, 2002.

Phil a crude form of compensation for LT shots would be to cover the light sensor with a density filter and calculate the exposure depending what density, density filter you used. 2x 4x etc.

To go the other way, to underexpose you put the density filter over the lens.

But I thought the compensation dial worked for LT?

-- kwen wan (kwen@fucx.co.uk), January 16, 2002.

Fernando, although I have only had the T3 since the end of October i used it extensively in Bolivia, and my advice is to buy the T3 rather than wait for Contax to acknowledge, let alone fix, any problem. Fortunately, I have not had the problem--yet. And hopefully never will. I had a loading problem with my T2 shortly after I bought it and had to send it in to Contax for repairs, never had any problem after it was repaired, and did not hesitate to buy the T3 after reading the glowing reports, many of them by contributors to this posting.

-- J.Martin (sevres-babylone@mexconnect.com), January 16, 2002.

Fernando, I have to concur with J. Martin. I've used my T3 extensively since I bought it in August and have yet to have any problem. If there were any other P&S that came even remotely close to it in terms of features, useability and performance, I might reconsider. But as things stand, there really is no competition.

-- R.E. Buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), January 17, 2002.

I believe that a company with the reputation of Contax will identify the weakness, install redesigned/stronger ones on new T3's and respond to those that go bad by replacing the defective ones with the stronger redesigned one.

I'll send an email to Contax about the recurring reports here which seem to indicate an inherrent weakness. If it is an inherent weakness, I would imagine that it would already be reflected in repair requests.

Anyone have a good email address for Contax?

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 17, 2002.

I sent a message to Contax about the possible take-up spool sprocket weakness and included copies of all the related posts from this board.

I would treat this problem as a "toothing" problem which all new equipment is prone. I believe Contax will design and provide a permanent remedy to the problem for those who have trouble with it.

Overall, the camera has proven to me to be a great photographic tool that fulfills the P&S role better than anything else out there, i.e; it's design lends itself to ease of carry and quick P&S applications. Due to the quality of the photos that it renders I do not feel that I am compromsing image quality by using it instead of my SLR ficed foal lenght lenses.

To the contrary, the T3 lense has given equal contrast/color/resolution performance, and has less flare and vignetting than my Canon 50mm f1.4 - my baseline for quality/sharpness.

I've already reported about the wide latitude that the camera's built- in features and accessories afford the user - virtually most of the exposure control of an slr and dedicatred flash but in a much more handy "point and shootable" package.

I have confidence that the take-up spool problem will be researched and corrected. It should not be considered a major flaw and is not indicative of the overall quality that I have found when constantly using the T3.

BUT, we'll see how Contax handles it.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 17, 2002.

This thread and the content is possibly the most useful Contax T3 resource on the web, however, it getting a bit long! Over 200kb. Somebody suggested an alternative forum but required registration.

I'm a web designer and can knock up a quality forum board just for Contax T3 with zero registration or spam or advertising. Would it be of use?..if so, what categories should be set up?

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), January 17, 2002.

Kwen,

I'm not familiar with web design, what hardware and amount of work it may require. Beside this T3 thread, I also follow the Contax G Pages http://www.contaxg.com/ and Minolta Users' Group http://camerasystems.info/showlist.jsp?forum=4&nocookies=1

It would be awesome if T3 users have a webpage like the Contax G. If not, the format for the Minolta Users' Group is great start. It makes it easier to browse through the various subject-matter. We should encourage people to start posting pictures, which brings them back to learn and share their experiences.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 18, 2002.

Kwen, I think it would be great to have a site such as the Contax G site mentioned by Niki (though that site seems a bit cluttered to my eyes). I'll give some thought to what categories I'd like to see...

-- RE Buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), January 18, 2002.

I have a feeling that this thread will have a limited life. I have learned to get the most from my T3 from the experiences posted by others here.

Also, if problems arise with the T3, the combined voices of everyone in a T3 Group could speak with Contax with far more force of authority than just an individual.

Great idea.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 18, 2002.

Great to see there is a response, otherwise there would not be much point in setting up a board ; )

The beauty of this board is that it isn't moderated (I think its not anyway) yet the personalities on this board all have great integrity. No friction, no bad language, self moderating : )

As there will be no advertising banners : ) the hosting will be funded out of my own pocket.

I will draw up a short list for the categories distilled from the content of this board and your suggestions.

This one will be for the users, not driven by any commerical concern. Need to think of a domain name too... Will it be OK for a .co.uk name? e.g. contax-t.co.uk ? I thought T3 would be too specific e.g. if there is a T5 launch!

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), January 18, 2002.

I'd visit the site! Look forward to it.

-- Ming Ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

I think a Contax "T" user group site is a good idea. The more non- commercial the better. An alternative might one of the Yahoo or Topica groups. I belong to groups on those sites and they are run pretty well - no spam and minimum advertising.

http://groups.yahoo.com/

http://www.topica.com

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), January 19, 2002.

Just shot my first role and the pictures are awesome. My question is regarding the noise of the shutter releasing. My camera seems to "crunch" when I shoot rather than the usual "click and whirl". Since the shutter is in the lens I wonderif tere is less dampening than an average P&S

-- Craigee (craigee@yahoo.com), January 23, 2002.

Craigee, glad that you are pleased with the results of the lens!

Strange, it appears that the T3 has almost too types of build. Some people's T3 is fairly quiet like mine, and others are quite noisy, noisy enough to prompt people to post a question is it that noisy?

Unless some people are more critical than others. T3 is much quieter than my other cameras T4, 35Ti, Contax G1 and Pentax MZ1.

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), January 25, 2002.

My initial impressions of this camera after 10 rolls of film ( this review does not posess the depth of more experienced users since its still in its infancy and I havent taken advantage of all it has to offer )

My first few rolls were black and white. I purchased the B plus W yellow filter and the contax filter adapter. Since, I dont currently use the darkroom I have my Black white contact printed. However, based on my results with color slide film any enlargements are going to be a pleasure.

My Chromes were shot with fuji sensia bought at walmart. The chromes possesed a clarity that only one 35mm lens I have ever used does and thats the 95 dollar made in china plastic af 50mm 1.8 nikkor ( a damn sharp lens that looks like a pheonix or vivitar! )

Most of the time I am using a program mode with this camera. Since I was shooting slides I would often take advantage of the easy to use exposure compensation function that no other point and shoot camera posseses to my knowledge. Experienced photographers will love this feature as it enables tweaking of exposure in third stops.

I'm not thrilled with the the focusing distance option that is in meters and not ft ( americentric I geuss but I always appreciate my primes having distance information on the lens in ft. ) Not a big deal though since its supposed to be a point and shoot right?

I have had a small problem that has neccesitated sending the camera back to kyocera temporarily. There is a small transluscent black band running thru the upper left hand corner of all my horizontal shots. Its not a huge deal as most printing I do would allow for a crop given the sizes I enlarge to. However, having paid half the GNP for the camera I expect perfection. I will update on what experiences I have with Kyocera warranty.

One last comment from my limited use: I dont really see the Zeiss mystique with this lens. Sharp as hell for sure and astounding for a package this small but I still do not see any differences in tonality between this and my sharpest nikkor prime ( my untrained NONZEISS eye perhaps? ). However, the razor shop optics have tweaked my interest in the contax g2 as its a more versatile camera with seemingly affordable lenses of varying focal lenghts.

In conclusion, a real gem. The best part is the beautiful charcoal grey titanium finish !!

-- robert fossum (rob2426@yahoo.com), January 26, 2002.

Robert,

If you're shooting only B&W and using only sharpness as the measuring stick, then Zeiss optics isn't really necessary. Both pro series Nikkor and Canon optics are quite sharp, but if other factors (shadow details, color rendition for color films) are taken into effect, then Zeiss is superior in my opinion...

btw, what B&W do you use?

-- Niki (cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 27, 2002.

Hi niki,

I use tri-x for Black and White and occasionally tmax 400.

I bought the camera mainly because I can take it everywhere with me and its insconspicous.

Still dont see differing color rendition with the zeiss yet. Only 10 rolls total to date. When I bought the camera I wanted something that would equal my 50mm nikon chinese plastic prime. The t3 does this ( perhaps exceeds it but I cant tell from my analysis intially ). Further shooting will give me more information. Not ready to trade in my current MF system for a blad ( not that I could if I wanted to anyways so this is fantasy )

A beautiful little camera if one can afford it.

RF

-- robert fossum (rob2426@yahoo.com), January 28, 2002.

I enjoy using this camera, but find that at times I wish the filter ring was always on my T3. Problem is, I use the case that came with the camera, so I have to remove the ring everytime I stow it. Any opinions on leaving the ring on the camera when putting it in the case? (No filter or shade.) Am I leaving myself open to problems due to pressure exterted by the leather case on the barrel of the lens?

The only reason this is an issue is that I find that I must attach the filter adapter separately before screwing on a filter or the shade. If the adapter is attached to a filter/shade, I cant get the adapter to lock on the lens. I'm only interested in doing this for the sheer convenience of it...if only the case wasn't quite so snug.

Thanks, Eliott

-- E Frank (efrank@yahoo.com), January 29, 2002.

I have the same concern. Contax has the other case for $85 that has a neck strap and allows filter, hood and cap. What is this called... predatory marketing??? ;-)

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), January 29, 2002.

I have the ever ready case. Use both the belt and the ever ready depending on shooting/activity. This weekend was in the mountains. Very cold, snowy weather. Kept the T3 protected inside my jacket hanging around my neck from straps of ever ready case with cover removed. For a walk in the park on a nice day I'll jut use the hip belt case. Nothing is faster and more convenient.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), January 31, 2002.

Still no Contax answer to my query whether the single sprocket film take-up/winding spool is a common/frequently requested T3 warranty repair item. Contax is usually very responsive. Therefore, their non- answers, in lieu of a denial or an acknowledgment of problem, could be viewed as an begrudging admission.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), February 01, 2002.

I read quite some suggestions about films that give good results in the T3. Personally I really like the Kodachrome 64 slide film, but I haven't tried it in the T3 yet. The film is hard to get here.. Has anyone tried it in his/her T3 ?

Thanks, Armand

-- Armand D'Elfant (armand@delfant.com), February 07, 2002.

Can I use a lithium battery in my T3?

-- Marcel Debruge (mdebruge@burr.com), February 12, 2002.

The Contax takes a Lithium battery. See http://www.kyocera.co.jp/news/2001/0102/0001-e.asp

-- (cosmo@rome.com), February 12, 2002.

Just got a T3, and I'm putting it through its paces. Question -- under low to medium light conditions, I can see "ghosted" reflected images of the focus, flash, macro and shutter speed indicators in the viewfinder (when they're lit up), a little to the left of the "real" indicators. I wouldn't be surprised if that was normal, given the camera's size, but... is it normal? Thanks. John

-- John Berman (jab749@aol.com), February 12, 2002.

John, I think the ghosting is caused by not having your eye directly centered in the viewfinder and/or not having your eye close enough to the viewfinder.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), February 13, 2002.

Thanks for your response, Cosmo. That's not it, though. I can see the ghost reflection no matter what the position of my eye. It's definitely in the viewfinder. Not terrible, but definitely noticeable in lower light conditions.

-- John Berman (jab749@aol.com), February 13, 2002.

Hmmmmmm . . .

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), February 14, 2002.

I've only just noticed the faint (very faint) ghosting as in daylight it is almost invisible. It really is very, very faint.

However if you go into a completely dark room, the ghosting is very apparent.

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), February 16, 2002.

No vignetting/ First impressions / How does it work ? Shutter Lag ?

Hello, On Saturday, I cancelled my order of a Minox GT and bought a Contax T3. I'm already the very happy owner of a Contax G1. I shot my first T3 roll on Sunday and got the prints yesterday. On Saturday and Sunday, I played endlessly with the camera, as happy as a child with a new toy, relishing its compactness and beauty, the weird soft noises, the green and red marks in the viewfinder, the manual settings (f8 + 5 m for instance), the various customizations, the speed of the AF (compaired to the G1)... My wife congratulated me for my pictures and for the look of the camera. Please, don't tell her how much my toy costed.

On Sunday, the sky was bright and blue. I hurried outside and took several pictures with large portions of sky, at various apertures, the sun being in different positions, using a 100 ASA negative film. I had seen several T3 pictures on the Internet with ugly corners (vignetting of blue skies and light fall-offs) and was worrying. Actually, no vignetting occurred at all, at least none I could detect (I'm no professional). I wonder why some pictures posted on the Web show vignetting or light fall-off. Bad processing of the film ? Bad film ? Bad scanner ? T3s with flaws ?

So, my first impressions are excellent....despite the viewfinder which is painful for glass wearers (like me) : no eye relief. It's very very hard to see the corners with your eye-glasses on.

A few other negative secondary remarks. a) Some parts of the body are plastic and the metal foil is very thin: the G1 has a nicer and more robust body (but much bigger and heavier). b) There's no indication of speed between 1/30 (or rather 1/20, as the manual says) and 16 sec. With my G1, I often succeed in taking reasonably sharp pictures at 1/4 sec with camera hand held (nearly no shake). I can't try this with the T3 since I can't know whether I'm shooting at 1/10, 1/4, 1 sec, etc. Anyhow, I am not sure the T3 is suitable for this kind of sport (see below my question about shutter lag). c) The shutter release button is a bit tough. I'd rather it be smooth and light as a feather (at least when half depressed), in order to shoot without any risk of shake. I've still to get used to it. (As far as I can estimate from my 13 cm x 19 cm prints, all my test 1/30 (1/20) pictures are sharp - no shake). d) Why do Contax provide a handstrap ? A neckstrap would be more useful. You can't keep the camera dangling at your wrist. So, you insert/withdraw the camera quite often from the soft case, thus increasing the risks of dropping it on the ground. Better keep it around the neck. A neutral remark : you can't really use the mode with lens focused at half depressed button for point and shoot : a) You have to briefly pause with button half depressed before actually taking the picture, which generates a time lag. (If you strongly depress the shutter release button, hoping to focus and release the shutter at the same time, the camera gets mad). b) The noise made by the focusing lens at half depressed button may draw the attention of the person you wished to surprise. For " candid street photography " use MF with hyper focal (no shutter lag) or normal mode (shutter lag while the lens focuses - how long ?).

Well, and that's my question, is there really no shutter lag when MF or when shooting with the lens focused at half depressed button ? How does it really work ? My understanding is that there are two curtains (as on most compact cameras ?): one for the aperture, one for the exposure of the film. On my G1, I turn a ring on the lens (a very pleasant feeling in the fingers !) and the aperture is mechanically shaped by some blades (a great delight: watch them geometrically move trough the depth of the bright glass of the lens !). Then I shoot. Click ! With the T3 nothing at all happens when you select an aperture (or when the program selects one for you - mostly 2.8, as it seems !). The aperture is set only when the button is fully depressed. So, when the button is fully depressed : 1. the first curtain of blades opens so as to shape the selected aperture 2. the second curtain opens to expose the film 3. this exposure curtain closes 4. the aperture curtain closes. This could explain the noises you can hear when you shoot : a pretty long whirl and somewhere in the middle of it, a click. (Then you can hear the advance of the film). Am I right or wrong ? If right, how long do you think it takes to shape the requested aperture (shutter lag) ?

Regards Laurent (Paris, France)

-- Laurent de Lavarene (laurent_de_lavarene@yahoogroups.com), February 19, 2002.

I would like to find out if it is possible to use a nondedicated autoflash directly on the SA-2 bracket with the T3. I was thinking of using a Sunpak 383 with the T3 in aperture priority mode. Thanks!

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 19, 2002.

Vignetting. Laurent, I was looking at a contact sheet from my recent trip to Bolivia as I was reading your post. While I had noticed vignetting on a picture I had scanned, I hadn't thought about it too much until now. But looking at the last 15 pictures on the sheet (the earlier ones are mostly indoors), there is definite vignetting on all of the 13 blue-skyed outdoor pictures. I believe I was using Program on all of them, so I don't know if it matters what the aperture is or not. (I still love my T3 and it was the perfect match for my trip, and I am glad I bought it a few days before I left.)

-- J.Martin (sevres-babylone@mexconnect.com), February 19, 2002.

Vignetting : YES...

I apologize, gentlemen. After readin J.Martin's e-mail, I came back to my pictures and showed them to someone skilled in photography here at the office : there IS a VERY slight vignetting on my blue-skyed pictures.

-- Laurent de Lavarène (laurent_de_lavarene@yahoogroups.com), February 20, 2002.

It's strange, I think it depends on the film on the pressure plate if vignetting occurs? Or the processing? In my initial shots I did get it e.g. in http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/vig.jpg but I did some test shots at f2.8 http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/f28.jpg and f16 http://mailroom.worldonline.co.uk/f16.jpg and no vignetting is apparent on the whole roll.

Weird.

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), February 20, 2002.

I haven't experienced any vignetting at all--prints from both color and black & white negs are superbly uniform corner-to-corner.

-- Cosmo Genovese (cosmo@rome.com), February 20, 2002.

Contax T3 with semi-hard leather eveready case, in mint to new condition for sale U$450. FREE SHIPPING

-- Gavin Tait (gtinctsa@yahoo.com), March 02, 2002.

I wish Contax - or others - made a camera as compact as the T3, with a fully retractable 90 mm / F 2.8 lens... I'm not sure it's technically feasable (a long lens barrel would be needed ? other difficulties ?), but I'd like to have such a camera along with the T3, and even, to carry the two of them at the same time at my belt !

-- Laurent de Lavarene (laurent_de_lavarene@yahoo.com), March 04, 2002.

Laurent, That's a cool idea, I'd love to have such a camera. I would think that it's technically feasible (with some compromises in either size or lens speed). Unfortunately, the market for such a camera would be much too small to make it worthwhile to manufacture. Oh well...

-- Ron Buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), March 05, 2002.

My wife's Leica Minilux Zoom (35-70mm) is a real pleasure to use framing shots in group gatherings, parties and portrait shots due to the 70mm. It renders superb photos. It is also a nice size.

It seems that with all design and materials advances since the release of the MLZ, a 1st class, nice sized 35-90mm could not be made.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 05, 2002.

No doubt a high-quality, high-end 35-90mm zoom P&S could be made and successfully marketed by either Leica or Contax. But a high-speed fixed focal length 90mm P&S similar to the T3 would be the bomb (I believe that's what Laurent had in mind too.)

Speaking of Leica, isn't it about time that they revamp the Minilux line given the juggernaut that is the Contax T3. Anyone heard any interesting rumors?

-- Ron Buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), March 05, 2002.

I misspoke with an errant "Not" above.

In view of all the advances since their release Leica should be able to upgrade both the fixed focal length and the zoom Miniluxes to better compete with Contax in the high-end P&S market.

Maybe Leica is focusing all of it's R&D towards producing a digital still camera in it's joint venture with Panasonic .

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 05, 2002.

Leica have released details on their website of the new range of Leica digital compacts which sadly are again just rebadged cameras of the Panasonic versions. (with some styling changes) The Panasonic versions even sport the same Leica optics. I might get the Leica Digilux 1 (the highest in the range) or it's Panasonic equalvalent in black : )

-- kwen (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), March 06, 2002.

Kwen,

Have you seen the digilux in person yet? The local store here in la won't get it in another month or two.

-- ming ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

Haven't seen it yet, but Leica/Panasonic will be stop gap until Contax release a T series digital : )

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), March 07, 2002.

Here's a link to the first look/review of the Panasonic (Lumix LC5) version of the Leica Digilux 1.

Note: Questions from serious sources are being raised whether the new Leica/Panasonic zoom lens is the same zoom lens as on the Sony DSC 85 and the Canon G2. Specs and Photos of the three appear identical. It may be possible that the Leica has Leica coatings.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/lumix_lc5.html

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 09, 2002.

hmm... a contax t digital would b nice... small and compact... kind of like the Canon 110 or 300 series. That would be nice...

-- ming ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002.

Speaking of zooms. Has anyone tried the Rollei QZ35T? It has a f2.8- 5.6 38-90mm zoom lens. I've been interested in this sucker for a long time for its SLR-like specs but there seems to be 2 camps... one praising it and one cursing it. Any opinions on its performance? Is it on par with Leica Minilux Zoom?

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 11, 2002.

Niki

try this link for some basic info: http://www.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr3/c2350/test/other/Photozone/phot oreview/RolleiQZ35W.htm

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), March 12, 2002.

http://www.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr3/c2350/test /other/Photozone/photoreview/RolleiQZ35W.htm

-- ron buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), March 13, 2002.

Thanks fellas...

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 13, 2002.

I'm looking for a polarizer for both my T3 and Rollei 35S (same size). Just curious... do polarizers for digital cameras work on film format cameras?

TIA,

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

I recently got myself a T3 (Black finish '70 years') and equipped it with a CONTAX adapter and a KENLOCK UV filter/protector. I've used Fuji 200 and Kodak Max 1800 films. Any input as to the best all-around film I could use?

-- Jibby Ang (jibby17@ekno.com), March 16, 2002.

Jibby,

My favorite all-around color films... Fuji Superia 400, Fuji Reala 100, and recently I've tried Agfa 100 & 400.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 16, 2002.

CLARIFICATION: I meant to say Agfa "Vista" 100 & 400. This series is a recent release.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 16, 2002.

Jibby,

Re: Film. I also like Reala 100 for an all-around film in good light. Fuji NPC 160 is also quite nice. I haven't tried the Vista 400 or 800 but have heard many good comments about them. For B&W I prefer the C- 41 emulsion B&W Kodak T-400 CN. See some examples with the films I use at:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=122840

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), March 17, 2002.

Niki,

The polarizer for a digital camera should work with your film cameras; the effect is the same. Since the T3 is a rangefinder and does not use a phase detection AF system like an SLR, you should be able to use a linear (cheaper) filter on the T3. Definitely worth a try.

John McCormack

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), March 17, 2002.

Thanks so much for the film info. What I forgot to mention is the KENLOCK filter/protector that I got for my T3. Is it a good one for value or are there others better than the one I have now? The one from Contax is a bit steep here (HK). Thanks again!

-- jibby ang (jibby17@ekno.com), March 17, 2002.

Popular Photography has listed it's top P&S cameras with a small revierw and a star rating for each camera. The reviews are in .pdf format.

The T3 got the most stars with the Konica Hexar Silver a half a star behind. The reviewers repeated their assessment that the T3 has the best lens of any P&S tested.

http://www.popphoto.com/pdfs/1201/top_cameras/35mm_ps/contax_t3.pdf

I've found Kodak Portra 400VC to be a great film for portraiture, especially in bright, sunny conditions and general outdoors use.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 18, 2002.

Here's the main page for the Popular Photography 2001 camera ratings including the following summary of the T3:

"Finally, conspicuous kudos to the gorgeously finished, supersharp, and pocketable, pricey Contax T3, one of the prettiest new point-and- shoots in years."

http://www.popphoto.com/Camera/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=118

Looks like we got a winner!

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 18, 2002.

Jibby -

I've never heard of Kenlock filters, so I have no idea of the quality. As a guideline, I generally use German brand filters for German lenses and Japanese filters for Japanese lenses. So Contax, Heliopan and B+W filters are probably best for your T3's Zeiss glass.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 18, 2002.

Finally got my T3 back from Contax,with film take up spool replaced under warranty.They still do not acknowledge that they may have a design flaw / weakness with using only one sprocket for film tension.However the camera is operating perfectly so happy days are here again!!This is easily the best compact camera that I have ever had the pleasure of owning!The Contax T3 has just won "Best Compact Camera Of The Year 2001/2" in the UK magazine Amateur Photographer,a highly regarded weekly publication,who test cameras quite extensivly and publish excellent unbiased reports on most photographic equipment.When will Contax bring out a digital version of the T3???

-- Tommy Cahill (meldubair@eircom.net), March 21, 2002.

It's a good feeling to get them back in-hand once again.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 22, 2002.

Re: MOVING THIS DISCUSSION TO ANOTHER LIST SERVER

Some weeks ago there was talk about moving this discussion to a list server. Yahoo! groups and Topica.com are ones I'm familiar with, but I'm sure there are other sites. Is there still interest in doing this? I am willing to set and administer the list but only if there is sufficient interest. Let me know here or by off-list email. Thanks.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), March 27, 2002.

Hi John,

I'd follow it and contribute.

-- Phil Bonner plpb@earthlink.net (plpb@earthlink.net), March 27, 2002.

John,

I too would follow it. Also, I think if we can imitate some of the traits of the Contax G site, i.e. posting photos so to induce more regular visitation. The T3, although a P&S camera, can capture some wonderful images.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), March 27, 2002.

There was another T3 site set up several months ago which had some initial activity. It was here: http://www.delphi.com/n/main.asp? webtag=contaxcamera&nav=messages. (John, I think I recall that you visited that site.) However, that site slowly dwindled away, until now I can't even pull it up anymore. I don't know if a T3 site can be sustained, although I'd like to see one.

-- Chris Crevasse (ccrevasse@millermartin.com), March 27, 2002.

I'd follow and contribute. I was thinking of making one myself. Perhaps we can have one for all T- users? I know contaximages already kind of imcompasses the T line but it would be nice to have a separate forum and a place where we can post pictures and such?

-- ming ting (saiyans@hotmail.com), March 28, 2002.

It would be nice to have a specific forum for T3. (Not a massive file like this) And on my mind there could also be place for photos! I'd follow. Heikki Nurkkala

-- Heikki Nurkkala (heikki.nurkkala@luukku.com), March 28, 2002.

Count me in.

-- Jim Frimmel (jimfrimmel@earthlink.net), March 28, 2002.

sorry guys I was supposed to be knocking up a T3 forum, but been swamped by work. Unfortunately there can't be an area to post photos as that takes up too much bandwidth which I can't fund. (even with advertising) But my intention is to be completely advertising free like this area. Banner ads are out. Though I am thinking maybe not be T3 specific now, maybe more broad pro-sumer emphasis, encompassing Minilux, TC1 etc and pro-sumer digital cameras e.g. like Canon G2.

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), March 28, 2002.

I discovered photo.net's review of the T3: http://www.photo.net/contax/t3

the reviewer didn't think it was so great over the T2. It's focusing problems were highlighted. The focusing on the T3 has to be learnt and is not quite point and shoot as an active system and I found out the hard way that the T3 has an unusually wide focus area which is not depicted by the autofocus target area in the viewfinder. Once mastered however the camera returns in good stunning results.

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), April 01, 2002.

I'd watch (and occasionally particpate in) an T3 newgroup. Between Topica & Yahoo, I'd choose Topica, but either way I'd join.

-- Ron Buchanan (re_buchanan@yahoo.com), April 01, 2002.

Update: MOVING THIS DISCUSSION TO ANOTHER LIST SERVER

I have received a few responses to the idea of starting a T3 User Mailing List. Two people voted in favor of using Topica.com and one suggested using a list like the Contax G mailing list. Another suggested a general one-for-all T user group. Nobody (including myself) was strongly in favor of using Yahoo! groups, as the web listings are full of ads and pop-ups. Topica also has its problems, mainly with unsubscribing people and moving mail slowly for digest readers. In general, Topica.com does a good job but does not permit attachments or image galleries.

Another possibility is the T users group on the BestStuff.com forums. Dante Stella administers the new (3/20/02) T users group and you can view it at:

http://www.beststuff.com/forums/read.php?f=20&i=39&t=38

Beststuff.com is fairly new but the photo groups are supported by the work of Bob Shell of Shutterbug magazine, so they may be around for a while. Beststuff.com does not support image galleries as far as I know.

The Contax G user site also maintains a non-contax G users page at http://not.contaxg.com/

It's a great site and allows image uploading and discussions (via the photography mailing list). Glen Campbell runs the photography mailing list associated with that site. Does anyone subscribe to this list? For more info. go to:

http://broadpool.com/mailman/listinfo/photography

At this time I am leaning toward something like the non-Contax G site or Beststuff.com T forum.

I hope I haven't added to the confusion but I think it's wise to look around before setting up a list that may flounder in the long run.

Let me know what you think.

John McCormack

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), April 03, 2002.

John,

I wonder if Glen would let us have our own T3 list, or perhaps all T- users' list? I'm currently on the G-User list, which has many people but only a handful contribute regularly... those who are quite active with photography. It's a good way to communicate with the group and notifying them to check out the latest photos.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), April 03, 2002.

Well, I found a bit of time, and I knocked up a Contax discussion board. I strongly felt there should be no ads, no pop ups (my pet hate), and no registration even required. Even if you do register only logon name and email is needed (which can be kept private).

Of course the board is totally empty it has literally just come off the press.

Any suggestions which I can accomodate please post to the free chat on that board. (at the moment it's just a discussion board)

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), April 05, 2002.

Well, I found a bit of time, and I knocked up a Contax discussion board. I strongly felt there should be no ads, no pop ups (my pet hate), and no registration even required. Even if you do register only logon name and email is needed (which can be kept private).

Of course the board is totally empty it has literally just come off the press.

Any suggestions which I can accomodate please post to the free chat on that board. (at the moment it's just a discussion board)

ALMOST forgot the URL! http://webxone.com/contax

-- kwen wan (eurojunk@btopenworld.com), April 05, 2002.

Kwen,

Thank you so much for setting up the discussion board! This is much nicer than anything I could ever have accomplished. I have two minor suggestions:

1. You might want to have a Welcome thread where you can state the general aims of the board and take suggestions (I couldn't find the "free chat" are you mentioned.)

2. I suggest placing the T3 thread over/ahead of the T2 thread, as I believe there will be more activity there.

3. May we promote the board/list on user user groups, or have you done this already. I will be glad to do so but not unless you give the go ahead. Let me know by email.

Thanks again.

-- John McCormack (jpmccormac@aol.com), April 05, 2002.

John many thanks for the comments.

I will try to accomodate your suggestions.

I haven't promoted it yet, I really set it up for no commercial reasons really but for the benefit of the people of this board who I feel have great integrity, i.e. no need to moderate this board. This thread was getting rather large in size, and cumbersome as it was just one long thread.

I was unsure about promoting it myself as it is 'blowing my own trumpet' so to speak (a bit cheap), and didn't want to be too 'in yer face' come and visit my site so to speak. If you want to mention it then feel free : ) Obviously the more mentions the better.

-- Kwen Wan (eurojunk@mailroom.worlonline.co.uk), April 05, 2002.

Every now and then my T3 will close and the lens cover shutter blades stick open a bit. I have to gently tap the lens barrel and then they close all the way. This mechanism seems awfully fragile. Does anyone else have any experience with this happening? It happens about every 50 pictures or so. It seems to be improving though. I am debating sending it in since it works so great I am afraid they may screw it up.

Al

-- Al Holecek (ccsial@aol.com), April 07, 2002.

I have noticed several comments on the web about autofocus problems with the T3. I think understanding the T3 autofocus helps. The T3 is passive and evaluates in the vertical plane. This requires two things: 1.some contrast and 2.a vertical component in the scene. I noticed someone who could not focus on a sunset. There are two options here. The slower option is setting manual focus to infinity. I use an easy approach and hold the camera at 90 degrees (get vertical component into scene) and put the focus ring on the horizon. My T3 focuses at infinity every time here. then while holding the shutter half way down I rotate back to 0 degrees, compose and shoot. I find most scenes focus fine after I compose but when I have trouble I look for the vertical edge in the scene. Of course you can always use focus lock and verify the results if you want to be extra sure. I have not taken an out of focus picture with my T3.

-- Al Holecek (ccsial@aol.com), April 09, 2002.

Thank-you Kwen for setting up the new T3 message board. I'll be posting there from now. I wonder if we could (or should) do a group email to all those on this threads, inviting them to join? Any thoughts?

T3 Focus: Al hit it on the nail. T3 needs contrast and vertical lines to perform its focus. If vertical lines are not available, just turn the camera (with the focus plane fixed) to achieve focus, push AF Lock button. I usually just hold down the shutter release button and reframe to shoot.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), April 09, 2002.

I read earlier today about Kwen's discovery on the spot focus. Yep it works that way. I hadn't noticed that. I did all my testing with the AFL button. This is a great peice of info. If I could only have one I'd pic the spot focus but it sure helps to know that the focus area is larger with normal operation.

I got back some slides this morning that were shot on 100 ASA Fuji. I looked at them under 20 power microscope. The results are awesome. Even the corners. My F100 and prime pro lenes do no better. This is the first good compact camera I have ever owned. I'm hooked.

This sure is a helpful forum. Thanks everybdy!

-- Al Holecek (ccsial@aol.com), April 09, 2002.

I just took a look at some pictures of the T3 'Contax 70 years' special edition. The hard-case that comes with it looks very nice... Looks a bit brownish. which goives the whole thing a classic look. Does anyone know if this bottom part is the same thing as comes with the semi-hard case that can be bought seperately? May be I am wrong and the thing is not brown at all...

Thanks, Armand

-- Armand (armand@delfant.com), April 12, 2002.

Niki, I pondered your question if to email people, but decided against it. This way it can be interpreted as spam, and if people want to participate they can visit www.contax.org.uk

I haven't even promoted it myself except in search engines, if the users think it is good, they will pass on the message. (Thanks for John for passing it on)

Once people learn that contax.org.uk is non-commercial, and has no ads, no popups, no spamming, no requirement to register to make or view a post, and only a 2 question sign up, your logon and email for password, (if they do sign up), hopefully they will realise that the site is dedicated in the interests of the users, for the users in the pursuit of sharing Contax knowledge.

-- Kwen Wan (forum@contax.org.uk), April 14, 2002.

Armand,

The "regular" Semi-hard leather case is matte black, not glossy. The lower part, to which the camera is attached via the bottom plate, is designed a bit differently. The cut around the lens is square, not round like the 70th Anniversary edition. The square cut doesn't look as good.

-- Niki (Cadenza_7o@yahoo.com), April 15, 2002.

Hello,

I just took delivery of a T3. Lovely camera - just one problem... after 1/2 roll of film (my first roll), the lens will no longer extend, nor will the camera turn on. I just get 3 little whirs and then nothing. Sigh. I'm about to send it back, but I'm wondering if this has happened to others and/or if there is something I can do about it myself.

Cheers.

-- grepmat (grepmat@yahoo.com), April 19, 2002.

I think the t3 when focusing at its minium distance with the apiture wide open has a tendency to focus a sliver to the right, thus pushing the subject of desire outside the narrow depth of feild. Is this a parelex problem between the lense and the focus window?

-- Todd Frederiksen (noemail@sorry.com), May 07, 2002.

Please comment on

1) Hazards of keeping a T3 in a hot car much of the time (not glovebox). I want to have it available all the time but live in a hot climate most of the year. Does the heat damage the camera at all?

2) Recommended EV settings when shooting available light (800 ASA) at a theater stage. Plus or minus and how many stops?

Thanks

-- Al (also2@yahoo.com), May 13, 2002.

Just how many of the T3 black 70 yrs were made?

-- jibby ang (jibby17@ekno.com), May 14, 2002.

FYI regarding polarizers for the T3. I have the TVS II and found that using a circular polarizer (which is about twice the depth of a standard filter) causes substantial vignetting. I suspect this will be the case with the T3 as well. Stick with a linear filter - if you can find one.

-- Eric Buck (ecbuck@comcast.net), May 15, 2002.

I thought it might interest some of you, that my Contax-Fan-Site went online yesterday, May 19th 2002. You will find there an in- depth review of my Contax T3 (in the Forum).

The name is: www.contaxinfo.com

This site is made for all Contax-users worldwide, whatever system they use as long as it was made after 1974. This includes N-digital, N1, Nx, all manual-focus Contax cameras, G2, G1, Medium Format 645 and the P&S T and TVS.

www.contaxinfo.com gives you pdf-downloads of manuals, Zeiss mtf charts (some are not on the Zeiss-page), brochures and some interesting Zeiss articles about improving performance in lens design.

www.contaxinfo.com offers you all that for free. Additional you can discuss equipment-reviews (I put already some on the site), you can upload pictures and discuss them with others, meet others, look for the best dealers etc. etc. etc.

I understand contaxinfo.com as a one-stop-shop for all your question regarding Contax and Carl Zeiss.

I would be delighted, if you would have a look at contaxinfo.com and support other Contax fans by participating on this site with your photo-experience.

Non Contax-users are also welcome. The more different views meet on this site, the better for everybody.

dirk

-- dirk seffern (dirk.seffern@web.de), May 20, 2002.

Please I need help from Contax T3 users. My T3 has the focusing zone different from which indicated in the manual, the real zone is wider and shifted to the right. I did careful tests during last weekend and I found that the real zone is (assuming like reference and measure unit the central oval of viewfinder) from one oval left to two and a half oval right. In spot AF the zone is a little bit wider than an oval and it's almost half oval shifted to the right. This is with a subjet 10 meters far away, with a subjet at almost 1.5-2 meters the situation is a little bit worse (more to the right). This may be considered a little imperfection, but in Italy this "little jewel" is sold at 1000 €( about !000 $), so I pretend it perfect or, however, exactly corresponding to the description of the handbook. My T3 is still under warranty, but, before calling Contax service and sending it, I would be sure that mine is faulty and that perfect T3s do exist. So I ask T3 users to do same test I did. The test is really really simple: for the ten meters test it needs a lamp-post in front of a uniform sky (without clouds). Moving the camera left-right and focusing (pushing the sutter-release) it's possible to detect exactly the focusing zone, because if the camera doesn't "feel" the lamp-post the green led blinks, when the camera "feels" the lamp-post the green led is fixed. For the 1.5 or 2 meters test you need a black pole (an umbrella) in front of a white wall and do the same. So, please, could someone do this test and answer my question? I need at least 4/5 answers to use like witness for the Contax service. Thanks to the friends who will help me. Paolo

-- Paolo Lombardi (pa.lom@tin.it), July 01, 2002.

I own a Contax T VS III since two years and I am more than unhappy with it. I just used it to shoot my daughter's wedding indoor and most shots are too bright with the flash, especially on 30 mm. My friend uses a simple Minolta and achieved not only sharper pictures, the skin color was better even though I used a Kodal Professsional T- Max 400 Film. Where do you think I can get the best price for my T VS III? Monika Dorman

-- Monika Dorman (dorm@optonline.net), July 28, 2002.

Very interesting thread! I treated myself to a T3 last year after my beloved Rollei35 developed a light leak in bright sunlight. I've put countless rolls through it since I bought it new in 1968 so I can't complain. I love the feel of the T3 and the lens certainly delivers superb results. I have difficulty using the autofocus because I'm not used to it and find myself using manual focus most of the time.

As for flash, I wish it had a either hotshoe (the Rollei 35 does) or a PC contact. I've been using it with a slave unit -- getting the built-in flash to trigger it. It works well, especially for groups.

Problems arise when other people in the room are popping flashes. it triggers mine. I was thinking of getting the flash bracket but I am thinking of going fully digital and selling the T3. (I own other film cameras--Canons -- and may just get the Rollei 35 repaired.)

But the T3 is so beautiful it will be hard to part with. On the other hand, the Rollei does all the things i want.

-- Peter Rehak (prehak8455@aol.com), August 18, 2002.

I noticed that when I take panoramic shots of buildings or shot from a distance in general, the 'vertical lines' of structures at the ends of the frame seem to converge. Any explanation, or is it a 'limitation' of the T3's lens?

-- jibby ang (jibby17@ekno.com), December 27, 2002.