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!

Contax G2

Hello,

Otola, thanks. Actually I am looking for a compact one for travel. As I mentioned earlier, I have several SLR systems which are Nikon F3, F2AS, FM2, Canon A-1 and Minolta SRT 100X. This is why I am looking into the G2. The N1 seems nice. I would like to hear more from you about this N1 like what do you think of it and Nikon that you have.

David, don't you mind to explain why you think that Nikon quality is not even close to the G2? Is it because of CZ glass? features? I myself have not been to the G2 before.

Thanks,
Kian-Guan
 
>Kian-Guan, there is definitely some good Nikon glass. But not worth the bother and expense of finding the good stuff, in my opinion. And then = you've also got the weight to deal with, of lenses and bodies. I went through = this two years ago when I sold my G system to get the "versatility" of a = Nikon system. Yes, I got versatility, but I also got nearly 100% mediocre photographs. So I sold that lot and bought another G system. I spent $$$ = to end up where I started. No regrets, though, live and learn.

The CZ lenses for the G are just plain incomparable. Even bad shots look good, just because of the glass. And the body is a joy to use -- = something that can't really be said for the MF rangefinder alternatives.

Enjoy your shopping and buying experience!
 
> In the Biogon 28 overview Contax's own website says the G System > Biogons are superior to Contax SLR wide angles. CZ also treats the > G-System Sonnar 90 as an implied benchmark for the SLR Sonnar 85, > noting that the 85 is equivalent in quality to the 90. I hadn't > noticed this endorsement before.

-- Max
 
>I have both the 85 sonnar and the G-90 sonnar. I get the better results with the 85, possible because it's manual-focus and thus has the potential for greater precision. The 85 1.4 is considered to be a cut above the 85 sonnar, I've heard, and it seems to have practically a cult following. I coudn't afford it, myself. I believe the 45 G- planar is on a par with my 50 SLR planar, the G-45 being less subject to apparent focus error than the G-90, on account of greater depth of field. This is *in practice*, mind you, not on the basis of published lens tests. I don't own CZ wide-angles, however the theory about retrofocus design should hold up, and the tests I've seen bear it out. If I had it to do over again, I'd approach the G as a wideangle-to-normal camera and start with the 28 biogon, as the ex&les from it that I see are just delicious. But, alas, I don't have it to do over again: personal finances. Rangefinder wideangles should perform noticeably better than their SLR counterparts for the reasons cited here by others. I honestly believe that from 85mm up, one's better off with an SLR overall, since you've already sacrificed much compactness by adding it to a RF. The only remaining advantage the RF will have *in use with telephotos* is freedom from mirror slap and blackout, which doesn't amount to much for what I do.
 
Thanks, David for your reply and feedback.

Guys, just curious, which titanium finish or black finish you like the most. As for me, both are so beautiful.

Thanks for your time.

Kian-Guan
 
> Kian-Guan, >=20 > I have the black G2, which I consider lovely, but the titanium is in some= ways > more practical. Accessories such as lens hood caps tend not to be availab= le in > black, and you will do much better looking for used lenses on eBay and > elsewhere. Of course the color doesn=B9t affect the functioning =AD the titan= ium > will work just fine on a black body =AD but it might look a touch odd.
 
Kian-Guan,

NOW we're getting down to brass tacks :)

I started with the all-black kit (28, 45 & 90, plus TLA 200 and hoods). It's definitely beautiful and perhaps more "stealthy" to shoot with. I've since acquired the rest of the lens line, all in the standard silver Ti finish. They look fine on the black body.

I have to vote for the Ti finish as being the more practical. First, I'm a fussbudget and am constantly wiping hand and nose-prints off the black camera--it always looks smudged. Second, the black finish will wear off in spots, something I suspect the Ti finish isn't susceptible to. Finally, the silver camera will stay cooler in the midday sun, something I worry about when the temperature hits 100 deg. F (37 C?).

Regards,

--Rick
 
Kian-Guan,

just a matter of taste; but Kyocera has stopped production of the black outfits.

Call me silly, I firstly got a whole titanium set and then traded it on eBay against a black one. At a profit, for sure. I feel much better now in stealth mode! ;-)

All the accessories, such as lens hoods, filters, metal caps are still available in black. Only cons are that my beloved flash TLA 140 has never been available in black and that I did not find a black Biogon 21 until now. Sadly, it has never been imported officially to Germany.

Till
 
I have a black version. I hate it when I find another chip on the finish. So far, I have two. Performance wise, it's a G all the way. No complaints here.
 
> Till, > > Where did you find black hood caps? Not to mention a black Biogon 21mm?
 
Back
Top