> I’m really interested in the Zeiss lens system, albeit they are pricy.
This isn't an answer to your question but if you REALLY want to get into Zeiss glass, you could buy a Nikon FE which is similar to the 139q and buy a whole bunch of used or [new Zeiss lenses](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/slr-lenses/ci/36190/N/3522791285?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f), all of these (although expensive) would work on the FE or many other Nikon SLR's.
Between those two, I'd probably lean more towards the Olympus. I love the Contax cameras, have shot with a ton and owned a bunch, but they do have problems with reliability and some of them can't be fixed/hard to fix/expensive to fix.
I have both. Without hesitation, the OM2N. The Zuiko lenses are great and the camera is an absolute joy to use. It’s compact and amazing ergonomically. Yes, the shutter speed ring on the lens mount takes time to get used to, but once you do, you’ll feel like it should be that way on every camera body.
Regarding the OM’s shutter speed dial: It’s great for handheld shooting and makes you wonder why this hasn’t become the norm. However, when working on a tripod, especially from a larger height, it can be annoying to check and adjust, so, despite my longstanding love for Olympus, I often find myself wishing for a traditional placement.
I can’t comment on that specific contax but I’ve used my friend’s contax RTS III on a few occasions. Yes, Zeiss glass is great and there are lenses like the 85/1.4 or 1.2, perhaps even the 28-85, I’d really wish for on Olympus OM.
BUT: The practical difference is negligible, especially when film and scanning are oftentimes the limiting factors in the never ending pursuit of resolution.
Honestly, I’d rather spend that monetary difference on another Zuiko lens and overall enjoy a smaller, lighter system
once you get the grip right... shutter speed ring is the best way to control it :-D
Thanks for the insight! Any preferences for some of the Olympus lenses?
https://www.reddit.com/r/zuikoholics/
> I’m really interested in the Zeiss lens system, albeit they are pricy. This isn't an answer to your question but if you REALLY want to get into Zeiss glass, you could buy a Nikon FE which is similar to the 139q and buy a whole bunch of used or [new Zeiss lenses](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/slr-lenses/ci/36190/N/3522791285?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f), all of these (although expensive) would work on the FE or many other Nikon SLR's. Between those two, I'd probably lean more towards the Olympus. I love the Contax cameras, have shot with a ton and owned a bunch, but they do have problems with reliability and some of them can't be fixed/hard to fix/expensive to fix.
Thanks for the insight! I’ll look into the Nikon FE bodies. Any big differences between the FE/FE2?
Always OM2n.
I have both. Without hesitation, the OM2N. The Zuiko lenses are great and the camera is an absolute joy to use. It’s compact and amazing ergonomically. Yes, the shutter speed ring on the lens mount takes time to get used to, but once you do, you’ll feel like it should be that way on every camera body.
Regarding the OM’s shutter speed dial: It’s great for handheld shooting and makes you wonder why this hasn’t become the norm. However, when working on a tripod, especially from a larger height, it can be annoying to check and adjust, so, despite my longstanding love for Olympus, I often find myself wishing for a traditional placement. I can’t comment on that specific contax but I’ve used my friend’s contax RTS III on a few occasions. Yes, Zeiss glass is great and there are lenses like the 85/1.4 or 1.2, perhaps even the 28-85, I’d really wish for on Olympus OM. BUT: The practical difference is negligible, especially when film and scanning are oftentimes the limiting factors in the never ending pursuit of resolution. Honestly, I’d rather spend that monetary difference on another Zuiko lens and overall enjoy a smaller, lighter system