DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Future of the Contax N

thedruid

Well-Known Member
As I try to decide which way to go Contax or Canon this is a question that comes to mind. Most of my work is done in medium format but I do get calls for 35mm during the year, in the past I've rented but recently been thinking of adding a body plus a few lenses to cover those jobs. Last week was at a trade show of sorts lots of vendors, with customers mostly swarming Canon and Nikon booths. I saw the Contax rep was alone and felt it would be a good tome to check out the N and lenses...maybe get some info on future lens additions. The rep had little or no info, when asked about future prime lenses he answered "what do you mean by prime lenses". I explained slowly that the 24-85 was a zoom lens and a 28mm lens was a prime lens at this he pulled out the Contax G2 with 28mm....
Anyway what are the feelings here, do you feel Kyocera is commited to the system? Are you concerned.
 
> The "N" system already has an outstanding collection of lenses ... you can carry 3 lenses with ou and have a field of range from 17 to 300mm! Yep, a few more primes would be nice ... but I think that it is an honest statement that a CZ zoom blows away most other manufacturer prime lenses in quality. Yes, you suffer in the f-stop (2.8 at 17 ...) but still, the quality is there and again ... just w/ 3 lenses you have such a range!

You could also, in your bag, go w/ the 17-35 at 2.8, drop in a 50mm at 1.4 and then fill in the upper range at 70 to 300 (at 3.4). Not a bad set of great lenses!

And don;t forget that with the NAM 1 adapter, you can put your medium format 645 lenses on the N1 or the ND!

michael.
 
Yes, Dermot. This is why my N1 kit is now for sale. I had to make a choice between Canon, Leica-R, and Contax. With the first two companies, i know what i have and what i can get. Canon already has the digital dominance, in addition to fantastic film bodies and lenses. With the Leica R8, i have the prime glass i prefer, and i can get a small, fast 35/2 or 1.4, 28mm, 24mm.... I don't use zooms any more, and even if the N zoom were optically equal to primes (not sure i buy that), it's still HUGE and can't make images at 1.4 or f2.....

Regardless, i do find it almost offensive that a company that supposedly creates pro-level goods doesn't have elements of a lens line that any working pro would consider essential. And, with no information about a digital future, what are we left to think? The Contax future is too uncertain for me and too indefinite. Perhaps sometime in the future i'll buy back into the system, but i won't ever go into a camera line unless the EXISTING components already satisfy my needs. I can't afford to be so optimistic.
 
> Another consideration regarding primes:

The N system has the following primes: 50 1.4 100 2.8 85 1.4 400 4.0

The N system using the Nam1 adapter can use the following 645 PRIME lenses: (I have put the rough 35 equiv focal length in parantehsis)

35 f 3.5 (20 mm) 45 f 2.8 (25 mm) 80 f 2.8 (50 mm) 140 f 2.8 (85 mm) 210 f 4 (130 mm) 120 (75 mm) 350 f 4 (210 mm) 55 f 3.5 (35 mm)

Remember, the parantehsis are a rough equivalancy of the focal length.

So, I count 4 N mount Primes and 8 of the 645 mount Primes for a total of 12 primes for the system. Not bad for a camera that has been out less than 3 years!!

And don't forget the zooms: there are 5 N mount zooms and one zoom in the 645 system that can be used via the Nam-1 adapter!!! (I think!?)

That is a total of 17 lenses.

Michael.
 
Michael,
I thank you for the suggestion, but i'm wondering where you found the information about the equivalent lens focal length conversion. From information i've seen, the focal length of the lens remains the same, but relative to the film format, it changes the perspective/angle of view. For ex&le, an 80mm 2.8 is a 'normal' lens on the 645, but will be a short telephoto (still 80mm) on the N1. Similarly, to get a 35mm prime on the N1, i'd have to buy the 645's 35mm f3.5. This lens sells for $2400, is a relatively 'slow' 3.5 max aperture, and has a honking 95mm front lens element. Not exactly a reason to give up a small 35mm f2 prime available for EOS or Leica-R.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001D85
 
Derek,

I mis-spoke w/ the eqivalance (I think!). I belive you are right, that the focal length would stay the same. But, the point of yours that I don't understand, is why would you even consider a 35 mm prime (the 645 at 3.5) when you could have the 17 to 35 zoom at 2.8? I think we coverd this material last week, that you just hate the idea of a larger zoom, even if the quality is outstanding.

How much is a Leica-R body? And how much is the Leica Prime for the R body? And, does Leica have a digital body for their the lenses that fit on their R body?

Michael.
 
Hi, Michael.
I didn't mean to imply that i would consider the 645's 35mm as a prime on the N1. I certainly wouldn't. The 17-35 zoom is a consideration, but i really am trying to minimize the size of whichever 35mm system i would be carrying during travels. I'm still not convinced that any zoom can match primes for quality, but even if this one could, it's too large of a lens for the way i'd want to use it.

I recently sold a Leica M7 that was my 'carry everywhere' camera. Instead, i bought a leica R8, that i carry everywhere. I can do this because, with a 50mm prime, it's not so intrusive when slung over/across a shoulder. The same would be true of the 35/2 i will get soon. But, a zoom with an 82mm front element on an N1 is just too much. Under certain circumstances, it's not a problem, as i'm also used to MF gear, but it's too much to replace the M-rangefinder i sold.

I paid $1050 for the R-8, in 'demo' condition. And the (amazing) 50mm Summicron was about $450, also 'demo.' No, Leica does not (yet) have a digital body. They did, though, over the summer, announce that they are in process of developing an R-Module, which will fit onto existing R8/R9 bodies. I don't know that i will ever buy it, as it will be 10MP, and cost about $4000, with a crop-factor of 1.3.... And, it won't be out for another year, but still i take this as a more positive sign than Contax' discontinuance of the N-Digital without even a peep about what may come next. That, and reading hints that they had another digital in the works but scrapped it when Canon beat them to the punch with the Digital Rebel....

Whatever. The digital thing is only a small consideration for me at this point. I had a Canon D60 a year ago, but sold it because of my love of Tri-X. I'm not yet ready to go back. I would if i could get a full-frame body with 10+ MP for less than $3000.... since that's not available yet, i'm about to get a Pentax 67.....

Peace-
derek
 
I believe that Canon's digital body with the Novoflex adapter takes the Leica lenses. If it does that'll give me a chance to test my 90 f2 versus the Canon 85 f1.8 and live without autofocus as I do with the Leica R9. I can't compare it to a Contax ND because the one I had was defective and after I finally got it returned I can't get another now that they're "discontinued / abandoned".
This doesn't mean though that during today's Leica/Contax rhetoric I think one side is right versus the other - in my bag right now is just one camera to carry around. A G2. If I tried focusing an M7 every time I wanted to take a picture with these poor old eyes I'd dream a little yellow box at night - but I love the 35 f 1.4 summilux and that's why I also happen to own an M7 - and if could put a Zeiss lens like that on the G2 I'd carry that engineer up and down the street.
Ken
 
I hope this does not become a Contax v Leica war. Yes, I'm aware of the 50 f1.4 , 851.4 the 100f2.8 pretty basic everyone has them, I applaud the 400 Apo f4 an interesting option with a decent price. The 17-35 seems like an awesome lens but at 95mm the front thread bigger than my MF lenses, lets face it the 24-85 and 75-300 are pretty slow. Prime lenses in the 20-24 and 28-35 range f1.4 - f2 are needed to fill out the range a bit. They did it with the C/Y mount and instead of building on it this total redesign seems to have come to a halt. Remember when the 45-90 for C645 was announced thay also said a 90-180 was on the way...Who here is running TWO systems just to cover the bases??
 
Back
Top