CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Contax G1 or G2

S

spluff

Hello All,

I'm thinking of dipping my toe into the G Contax range. I've been through a few threads on the forum but I cannot work out how much better a G2 over a G1 is. In the UK, a second hand mint G1 costs about £300 and a second hand mint G2 costs about £500. Is it worth paying the difference?

For what it is worth I found the Leica M3 too heavy for me but the Bessa R about right. I'm not sure how they compare in terms of handling against the G1 and G2 - so any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Thanks, Saras
 
S

scarvalho

Saras,
I considered the G1 myself but after doing some research went with the G2. I've always been a fan of manual focus, but I love the speed and accuracy
of the G2 auto-focus. From my research...it's definitely faster than the G1.

As far as feel of the camera.... I've
used a variety Nikon SLR's for years and nothing has ever felt so intuitive in my hands as
my G. I can not compare to the Leica or Bessa, but I do like the solid, weighty feel of the G.

Incidentally, I thought of buying a G1 as second body, but still bought a second G2 instead.
 

afranklin

Well-Known Member
Hi Saras,

I have both the G1 & G2, and use them equally. They are both fine cameras. The G1 IS noticeably smaller. The G2 has a higher shutter speed (6000 vs 2000, and flash 200 vs 100), I believe higher drive speed, and can take a full function datA back, where the G1 can only take a datE back. I don't notice any difference in the autofocus ability, and I don't use manual focus at all. The G2 does have some advantages, and I'd suggest you take a look at the advantages, and see if they are anything you need. There is a decent comparison here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Any specific questions, I'd be happy to answer.

Regards,

Austin
 
I've used the G1 and the G2 side by side. The autofocus speed (and perhaps ability) is much higher in the G2 -- and it is very noticable. I sold the G1 because of it.

progress.gif
 

letigimmi

New Member
I have both in UK (i am Italian) a Contax G 1 for 150 pounds on E-Bay, in condition B+ with "Green label"......is a fantastic camera!!
I use the Contax with the 45mm Zeiss and i am very very happy!!!
wink.gif
 

gjames52

Well-Known Member
Saras:

The options and custom functions of the G2 make it a very versatile and useful tool that will make photographs under varied conditions with ease.

You have in your hands an opportunity to select a number of variables, for focus, exposure, frames/second, compensation, bracketing, and flash that will allow you the control you desire. It looks, feels, and sounds good, and better yet works great. The metering system is very accurate, as it's compensation. Continuous focusing also works well, and the distance reading measurements are very good.

Good Shooting:

Gilbert
 

afranklin

Well-Known Member
Gilbert,

"The options and custom functions of the G2 make it a very versatile and useful tool that will make photographs under varied conditions with ease. ... You have in your hands an opportunity to select a number of variables..."

As the question was G1 vs G2, which ones of these "options" do you not have with the G1? I believe both the G1 & G2 have the same focus options (single, continuous and manual), both have bracketing, both have compensation and both have the same flash options. Of course, some of these options operate slightly differently, but I believe they are all there. Am I mistaken?

Regards,

Austin
 

giantsuper

New Member
A bit about my experience regarding the same dilemma.

I was struggling between purchasing a G1 or G2, and did the appropriate research reading posts on this site, contaxg.com and a few other places. From what I was reading, the G1 sounded like a problem-ridden camera with focusing, noise and speed issues.

I was pretty set on getting the G2, but an opportunity came up where I was able to get a G1 for really cheap. So I seized the deal and crossed my fingers. When I got the camera and put a couple rolls through it, I was surprised at what a remarkable piece of equipment this is. It's build quality is superb, it's small, and most importantly it takes great pictures.

The thing is, I don't disagree about the problems people have with this camera. In fact, using the camera, I find I run into the same issues. That said, the issues are all things that I can live with/work around. They aren't, to me, critical flaws with the camera.

If the G1 is any indication, I'm positive that the G2 is a superb camera. That said, if you want to save some money, the G1 is a great camera and can hold it's own.
 
S

spluff

Hello to All who have responded to my intial query. Many thanks for your thoughts and comments - they have all been very valuable. One thing that came through was the passion you all felt for this great series of cameras and I have decided to join the fraternity.

I have decided to go for a G1 - on the grounds that it is lighter and it is cheaper. I'm looking to carry it with me most of the time - so if it picks up a few knocks I won't feel too guilty if I hadn't spent so much on it. So, at this moment I'm tracking a few items on ebay!!

My only dilemma, though, is should I go for the 35mm or the 45mm. Sorry to call on everyone's expertise - but can anybody point me in the right direction? Typically, when I have used rangefinders I've tended to shot at the wide end - usually between 25mm and 40mm - but I don't have a preference either way. And as a second lens would the 90mm be a good idea?

Thanks once again,

Rgds, Saras
 

tomasjpn

Well-Known Member
Saras,
There are many people on this board perhaps more qualified than I to respond, but I've found the 35mm to be a more versatile lens than the 45. I had both and sold the 45 as it saw little use compared to the 35mm.

Mark Edwards
 

afranklin

Well-Known Member
Hi Saras,

I strongly suggest getting a "green label" G1 or some lenses won't work with it. The 45 is the best of all the G lenses as far as sharpness and image quality, and the 35 is fine, but, IMO, not as good.

Regards,

Austin
 

jsmisc

Well-Known Member
Hello Saras,
I think if you can have only the one lens, I'd go for the 35. The 45 probably is better but not so as you would really notice the difference and the 35mm is the more versatile of the two. If you had both, you might find as I have done, that I am saying to myself I must put on the 45 and get some use from it, otherwise I would probably stick with the 35 pretty well all the time. IMO that plus a 90 would be a good combination.
Regards,
John
 

neilb

Active Member
Saras,
I use the 35 and the 90 with my G2. The 35 is a very versatile lens, and its the one I use the most. I personally don't like the bokeh it produces, but I don't tend to make images that depend on smooth bokeh, so it's not a problem for me. I find it a great lens.

You can see an ex&le of the bokeh I'm talking about in this image, shot on Reala 100 at either f4 or f2.8. I don't know how this would look on the 45.. maybe better, maybe worse.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The 90 is a great companion for the 35, if you ever wanted to get a second lens.

Neil
 

joachim

Member
Saras,

you got a number of replies. Nobody commented on the size so far. The 35mm is substantially smaller than the 45mm - Size seems an issue for you. Also if you think of getting two lenses, I think the combo 35 & 90 would be more useful than 45 & 90.

In the end, I would try to make up my mind which focal length you want. What is your subject matter? Does that require a standard or a slightly wide lens? These are the key points in my view. The rest comes afterwards.

If you are still interested in comments on G1 vs G2 vs Leica/Voigtlander. There has been a discussion on Klaus Schroiff's photozone (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) recently. It is a pretty recent thread in the rangefinder category of the forum.
 
S

scarvalho

More fodder for thought....it does depend on what and how you like to shoot. I use the 21 and 45 most often, then the 90 and lastly the 28. However, from the info on the type of system you're trying to build...I'm in agreement with all who have supported the 35 and 90 combo.

There is something absolute about the results I get from the 45 though....
 
F

farnborough

Hello Saras,
first of all I would see to buy a G1 only with the green sticker inside, so you can use all the lenses.
Secondly, I would start off with the 28mm and the 90mm, and eventually buy the 45mm later.
I wish you all a nice Easter Feast,
Peter
 
P

picturetaker

The G1 bether than the G2 ?!
If someone has to choose between the G1-G2 I have to say the G1 is much lighter than the G2 but not with faster shuter than 1/2000s and longer X exposure.
The manual focus dial is also a much cheaper solution than on G2.
But for the normal use of taking photograph the G1 outperforms the G2 because its so much lighter and a bit smaler than the G2.
If you dont need the few more gadgets built in in the G2, go for the G1.
Of course the G2 is the bether built camera with more futures including optional multi function back, but this camera is to heavy to go on a hike with.
Depending how far you go.
 
What?? Hiking with G1 is OK, but the G2 is too heavy? Does that extra 100 grams make THAT much of a difference? That difference is virtually unnoticable in "normal" picture-taking. Do you have a bad back, small arms? Hell, people hike with alot more than a G2 regularly, and go quite far.

I would not say the G1 outperforms the G2 in any way. In normal use, you might miss the picture because of the G1's slowness (I certainly have, which is why I sold it) Sometime you just can't get your subject to hold still! The G2 outperfoms the G1 in every way, provided of course, your arms can handle holding the extra 100 grams.
 
J

jgban

Saras,
Regarding your question 35 vs. 45mm, I think it is really purely a matter of the focal length you prefer (as long as you got a "Green label" G1). In case you have not seen it, a member has posted a link to his/her (?) nice test of the 35mm:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


It is sharp enough for me, at least.

Juan
 
P

picturetaker

When you go on a photo trip around your home city with your G2 and do the same the next day with the G1, wich one do you prefer to take with when you wanna travel light.
It wont be much different but you will be happy to have a lighter G1 with one superb 35mm Zeiss lense on it.

If you have to choose between a 35mm and a 45mm, both are excelent lenses but the 35mm has a more intresting angle than the 45mm and it is more versatile.
I am not sure, but it is rigth on the G1 they did change the stiker from silver to green for the camera update.
So it does not matter what color the stiker is but there should be a stiker when using with a 35mm and 90mm Lense ? or does it ?
 
Top