Posts: 6,717
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
The Contax RTS to me looks rather... SLR from its time. The one that impressed me (and after all this time has had the biggest influence) was the Canon T90, designed by Luigi Colari (and Canon).
Posts: 6,717
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
I don't see much difference between for instance a Canon F-1 and a Contax RTS?
The T90 is the big shift between SLRs and the AF SLR/DSLR design language, including the top LCD with a lot of information (and automation), and the controls.
Posts: 180
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2017
Reputation:
4
My take: New Sigma is fresh for FF, yet no viewfinder is a no-go.
If I would be a full time professional, bigger cameras might be interesting. However as an enthusiast I value smaller size. Cameras like Pana G80/90 or EOS R are very comfortable to hold. Never bothered pinky to end below the camera. OTOH, Canon UI certainly doesn’t work for me, I vastly prefer Pana here.
Actually, with mirrorless, fully functional rangefinder style became possible again, compared to film days when RF style sacrificed focusing capabilities that made SLRs cameras of the choice at the time. Lately, I enjoy GX80/GX9 as good compromise of very solid UI and small size. Benefit of VF in the left corner is nose not interfering with the screen. I love touch screen interface to move focus point quickly, compromised only when screen gets wet. Together with ability to put AF point anywhere in the frame are great new features of today.
Posts: 2,947
Threads: 155
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
14
No EVF with no visible grip ........ electronic shutter only ....... image scan speed halves in 14 bit ....... looks like a lot of drawbacks just because it's small!
and the lack of a VF means shooting at arms length .... seriously?
Dave's clichés
Posts: 6,717
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
I totally agree with you, dave. It is not good/perfect for anything, not for an FF stills solution and not for serious video solution.