Jan,
I began to use rangefinders 10 years ago because of my bad experience of SLR. The little story is I began to make photos in 1976 with the first Minox. I loved this pocket camera and of course the 35 mm. It's a kind of "simple rangefinder" and I got some habits there. Some years later, I wanted to enhanced my possibilities in different lens. So I bought a great Canon A1 with some lens. I've never made some too bad photos with it. I tried several times but the results was always bad and awful, I was inside the photos and lost the atmosphere. SLR was'nt for me. So I looked around me to have a good, solid (I changed 2 times the meter of the Minox for 2 times the price of the camera) and simple camera. I bought a nice M2 with a 35/2,8 summaron, 50/2 sum and 90/2,8. I had a great pleasure several years and just to go to the M6 for easy use of meter (necessary to sell M2, 50 & 90). (I haven't understood, until now, why nobody proposed on the market a kit or something like that, to upgrade any of the M with only the meter inside for a reasonnable amount of money compared the difference between the M6 and previous M, don't you ?) So afterI've had a great time with the M's, I wanted to go forward in having 28 or 21 mm and a 90. The Leica prices was to high so I looked for the others RF proposals. And I bought the G2 which give me some very different rendition in B&W and colors. I need now more practice to master the G2 and why I was "nostalgic" (here we are !) is that with the M system, I was in a very quiet atmosphere to create some pictures, more than with the G2. The M wiewfinder is "really" nicest except for the 90, and the fact that you master the RF patch is a real plus. I'm quite stress of having the necessity of always have my finger on the press button to focus, and to trust in the "dark" of the capacities of the autofocus, although I'm used to employ the hyperfocal, even with the G2.
I'm not enter in religion with the M. There was not much affordable and clever choice when I was looking for. But I have to practice the G2 more. The images,I said are different, the grain is not the same, the colors rendition too, of course with an old summaron of the 60's you have some pictures which have a particular flavour, black is black, contrasts are higher and colors are in the same way.
I need to improve my practice of the G2. It's a wonderful little machine. I can take some pictures in real low speed, easyest than with any M's, the meter is really more subtle too. I'm surprised of this capacity. I took some photos with f.16 or f.11 to have deep view and the G2 response is impressive.
I'm quite surprise of the quality of the pictures I see on the contaxGpages. Quality in the sens of sensitivness, a poetical way to see and catch the "reality" of this world.
Thank you for your reply,
Nicolas
I'm going to see your home page soon,