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.
I believe the black version of the G2 is currently in higher demand than the Silver one. The Black one is more descrete, and less of them was made. I guess my answer would be that the Black G2 is a quasi-special-collector's camera and they know they can sell them without discounting them.
Well the silver one looks like a consumer camera, which is discreet in it's own way. The sliver one isn't painted, so the finish is more durable. The black finish will scratch if provoked. Both are nice, I'd agree the black is probably in higher demand, thus the price rebates on silver right now.
I am not agre, the black brick does look in my opinion more visible than the silver one wich looks in my eyes more discret.
I have never liked cameras in Black, why do they manufacture the most cameras in black ? in the sun the get hot very quickly etc. White or something with a modern painting or in different color anodicized could be made without further expense.
In 1930 Filmcameras were black, and still today common and silver too.
But anyone has a different view or another taste.
But I would go for the Black laquer version (not black version) if I would get a black one.
Yes there are very rare G2 in Black Laquer finish. As much as I know lenses are non Laquer finish, but I am not shure.
Its sad Contax did not advertise the whole range of different finish, it looks like Contax does b...l s..t consumer.
The f..k up the Contax Brand more and more when the keep going like this. Consumer wish to get the Black version but cant get it or it is a very hard to get item.
I dont understand this marketing from Contax, thoght they wanna sell Cameras and satisfie customer.
In Europe its much worse than in USA, Contax treats consumer like real m....r f...er customer.
How do you tell whether the black version is black titanium or laquered and which is the more valuable/desirable? I have a black kit in an aluminium Contax case all bought in Singapore in 1997. I do find that the black finish fingermarks badly whereas my titanium "silver" titanium finish T2 does not suffer from this at all. I would expect that the titanium finish G2 would not be troubled by it either.
Hi David, out of interest does the combo of lacquered body and anodised lenses look odd?
Eh! Hem! .... John you could not possibly have bought the 1999 lacquer version in 1997 ..... so you must have ...... the a******d version
See the photos above .... the 1997 version is said to be grey-er, that's because it's takes a lot of effort to get a true black when anodising aluminium or titanium. I would expect the anodised version to show some metallic surface finishing marks, while the lacquered version would not!
Even though the black versions may have a little more "kudos", your comments have swung me towards the vanilla Titanium "silver" version! It seems both black versions show up paw marks too easily! And I don't need the sneak factor of a black body.
Besides, I guess the "silver" lenses are more numerous (and possibly cheaper, for that!).
You know what will happen now, don't you? I'll talk myself into buying a G2 and those pesky Kyocera people will announce the G3 or even a G3 Digital ..... don't worry, I won't hold my breathe
I had to buy a silver 35mm in 1998 since I couldn't find a black one. It looks OK on the black body but that might be another reason to go for the silver body version. The 35mm is my favourite. I don't know if they now do a black 35mm.
I'm sure I bought my kit in 1997 enroute for Australia. In which case, it must be the anodised one but it looks more like the laquered version in your pictures. I wonder if the serial number would throw any light on it.