Contax G2

[Guest]

i'm contemplating getting the G2 with a trio
of lenses. i'm sure the lenses deliver wonderful
images. everyone, almost without exception, has touted the quality of these lenses and i have no reason to doubt them.

i am concerned, however, with a couple of other issues
which seem to crop up in every serious discussion of
this camera system.

one is the commitment of Contax/Kyocera to the
further development of the G product line.

my other concerns are "technical". one reads lots
about difficulties with AF - especially with the
90mm - and lack of focus confirmation. the
"poverty" of the MF aspects of this camera also
do not inspire.

then there are the comments concerning the size

 

[Guest]

1. Size is not an issue. If you want to have something smaller, you have to look for a high-end P&S.

2. AF&90mm with G2 is fine (my own experience). With the G1 sometimes problematic (not my own experience).

As with every camera, you have to get used to the controls and functions. This is a learning curve YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH WITH EVERY CAMERA, if you are really serious with taking photos.

Many people think they have to use the G2 like a P&S just because it is looking similar in size etc. This is a wrong estimation.

3. Just God knows what will happen in the future

As with every manufacturer, a camera system will be produced and also sold in the future, as long as there is enough demand for it. As far as I can see it in the moment, there is a strong interest in the G-line (just look at this thread).

Any further statement would be purely guessing without any facts behind it. This is just confusing people and not helping anybody else!

Even if Contax would discontinue the G-line, I will still make pictures with mine. Why should I stop using it? It is a great system and makes me see things how I want to have it.

For my indivifual photo-style I even do not need more lenses. All focal lenses are already covered with the current system..

Buy one, learn to use it and enjoy it!

Wolfgang

 

[Guest]

Hi Jon,

I propose that you will get used to focus the G2 very soon. My personal learning curve was just 1 film. And even on the first one, there had been only a few mis-focused shots.

I learned to always press focus lock and aim the viewfinder brackets thoughtful. E.g. when shooting people, aim at the eyes (I'm talking about taking pictures here

BTW, using focus lock also sets the correct viewfinder mask for parallax correction, so that you can frame properly.

Sonnar 90 is indeed sometimes tricky to focus. Nothing to write home about, depth of field can be less than a centimeter when the subject is quite near to you and aperture is wide open. This may be wanted, but when you don't need it, stop down to obtain more dof.

Nevertheless, the G2 is able to focus Sonnar 90 correctly. As far as I know it is the G1 which can cause bigger problems with Sonnar 90.

Hope this helped a little bit. Till

 

[Guest]

Jon,

The G2 is capable of exceptional focusing accuracy, even with the 90mm. I understand that resolution is a sullied concept on Contax (and Leica) sites, but it works for me: I can get 70 to 120 lp/mm with the 90 wide open, depending on distance; I doubt any focusing system can do better than that.

Dan

 

[Guest]

Tisk,Tisk Tisk, some of you folks slamming Leica Ms should consider that each system has it's strengths, and therefore it's weaknesses. I have shot with a G2 system and Leica Ms for years. I no longer own the G gear because the Leicas filled my specific needs better. That, however, takes nothing away from the Contax equipment. Especially if it fills the bill for you. To me, rangefinder cameras are very fast to work with in low ambient light. Many Leica lenses offer lower light abilities than the G system. As stated by some of the posters here, there is a learning curve to both these cameras. Its a curve that I completed years ago and found little need for many of the features the G offered. Conversely, someone else may find all of them perfect for their way of shooting.

Every point made for the G could be countered by a Leica M argument, and visa-versa. For ex&le, the statement that a 21 is easier to use on the G than a M. Apply a little Hyper-focal distance and focusing on such a wide lens is a remeadial issue. Also, focusing a M can be as fast as with an AF camera if you know the secret many photojournalist use for manual focusing... always tab your lens back to infinity because most shots require very little lens travel to snap into focus...and you are always turning the focus ring in the same direction...which quickly becomes habit.

The G system is terrific if you need what it offers. For me it didn't cut it in low light, which is where the Leica shines and becomes the only game in town.

 

[Guest]

Does anyone use A G1 or G2 for wedding photography?
I am concidering one of these for the group shots due to the beter image quality of the wides in a rangefinder. Would I be able to use a G1 or G2 with 28,50 and 90 and shoot an entire wedding? No real experience with rangefinders but they intrigue me.

Thanks, Mark

 

[Guest]

Yes, I did try to use a G1 with 45/2 only on a wedding for my friend. But I wasn't the official photographer of that event, I was just shooting for us to capture a memory. I use that even with group picture, but I end up taking the photos from a miles away. Anyway, I don't think you will encounter any problem with using G system on a wedding.

 

[Guest]

Mark,
I'm a professional wedding photographer specializing in candid romantic photojournalism. I use a rangefinder for some of the work, especially B&W free-form candids.
For this, it is wonderful However, to use one for an entire wedding, including group shots and especially of the wedding party, is inadvisable. It is possible to be sure, but more risky than perhaps should be entertained. The risk you are taking is with an event that won't be repeated just because some pictures didn't work out. I've done one entire wedding with rangefinders, but one of them was a Hasselblad X-Pan...and that may have been pushing my luck. Even a good 35mm SLR is better for groups because the framing is more precise, allowing you to make the group as large as possible with-in the viewfinder. The best set up is a rangefinder for candids, and something like the Contax 645 for groups.

 

[Guest]

Mark,

When I got married back in 1992, the official photographer used a Leica M6 for the whole wedding. He never used flash. All shots were in available light only. He did use a tripod for
some shots because of the slow shutter speed.

If the available light is enough, you can use a rangefinder, and no-one will know when they look at the photos what kind of camera you used.

On the other hand, if the available light is too low, or of a bad colour balance, then you will have to use flash, and rangefinders are not great at TTL flash metering. This is where an SLR will be more reliable for you. In my case, I don't even trust TTL flash metering -- it let me down too many times, so now I always use manual mode for flash photography. As long as you can judge the distances accurately, and as long as your flash gun has a consistent output power, (and a manually adjustable output power) you can easily calculate the flash exposure settings to get a good balance with available light. If you are good at manual flash exposure calculations, then you can surely get away with using a rangefinder for the whole wedding job.

 

[Guest]

All this talk about G2's made me take another look at one the other day at my local dealer. It seemed really fast, is it faster than 3 fps? Other than the quirkie finder sticking out, I liked it a lot. It seems really compact, a great alternative to a bigger and heavier SLR. I'm sure the lenses are superb. My biggest concern is how often you find the G2 missing focus and how often do you think it is just operator error? Two more questions are on the use of a polarizer, do you need to etch marks on it in relation to your position to the sun for proper adjustment? Does a polarizer affect focus accuracy?

I had a T2 which was a nice camera but ocassionally it seemed as though it mis-focused. The delay between pushing the shutter on the T2 and the actual firing was a bit too long and I found myself missing a lot of "moments". The T2 is still in the family, I just found the shutter delay annoying. Fortunately, the G2 doesn't appear to have this problem.

Thanks to all who respond!