Sophie's choice: Leica M4-P or Contax G2

[Vincenzo Maielli]

Hi, Tom.
Well, i own a Leicameter MR that i use with a Kanto MR-9 adapter, with my Leica M2 and M3. Is a very reliable meter, knowing the defects/features of the CDS cell and knowing how to overcome them. I don't have any personal experience about the Voigtländer VC Meter II: i have read the reviews written by Stephen Gandy and seems a good light meter.
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Hi, Tom.
Well, i own a Leicameter MR that i use with a Kanto MR-9 adapter, with my Leica M2 and M3. Is a very reliable meter, knowing the defects/features of the CDS cell and knowing how to overcome them. I don't have any personal experience about the Voigtländer VC Meter II: i have read the reviews written by Stephen Gandy and seems a good light meter.
Ciao.
Vincenzo

Thanks for the reply Vincenzo. I've sometimes had problems with centre-weighted meters over-reacting to particular elements in the frame, and then working out what exactly is the correct exposure can be difficult. Hence I tend to prefer spot metering which isn't always convenient.

Tom

 

[Lee L]

The VC Meter II reads the angle of coverage of a 90mm lens for a 35mm frame, so if you bring up your 90mm framelines, you should have a pretty good idea of what you're metering. (I haven't personally used one.)

Lee

 

[cbphoto]

I've owned a couple of Gs before, and I have a couple of Leicas now. I've also owned the Mamiya 6. I don't trust the Gs at all, either in terms of focusing or reliability, and I don't like the optics on the Mamiya at all (give me a Rollei any day). I bring up the latter point because it seems we are coming from two entirely different places, and that's important. The Mamiya camera itself is great, but the other main question has to be what you look for in optics. If you like modern, contrasty optics, then you don't need to consider keeping the Leica if you don't like actually shooting it. I cannot live without my 1950's lenses, and dislike the modern look. The G lenses are modern, but not cold and clinical like the Mamiyas. With either system, you lose the vintage option. I think that's a big deal. You may not.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

In my opinion, an autofocus rangefinder is an oxymoron.
It just seems to go against the way RFs can be used in practice.

My way of using rangefinders (at least with wide-angle lenses) often involves a certain amount of pre-focussing with the help of the DOF scale. That is faster than what *any* AF camera can achieve when you actually shoot.
That is difficult, to say the least, with the Contax Gs.

Also the meter on top of the camera can actually help if you need to shoot dicreetly: With the camera pre-focused and pre-metered without even looking at the subject, then you just bring it up to the eye for the time it takes to (roughly?) compose and release the shutter.

Finally, you don't need German Leica lenses to have good glass. The new Zeiss ZMs are arguably as good or better, the C/Vs can be quite good and even some old Soviet glass can hold some surprises.

I'd really hold on to the Leica and maybe pick up a Contax G2 to try one (they can be found quite cheaply now).

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Please take discussion about the calendar to the Soapbox, and keep this thread on topic.

 

[mesh]

I reckon the G2 would be the best camera to complement the Mamiya 6. I have drooled over a friend's Leica M4P for sooo long, but I think if you are looking for something as a kind of backup and complementary camera, then the Contax would be well worth considering.

 

[Steve Smith]

Yeah, this is so like Sophie's choice. :rolleyes:

Who is this Sophie who likes choosing things?


Steve.

 

[cloneroom]

Which Camera ???

I too am a Leica M4-2/M6 TTl owner looking at purchasing the Contax G2

WHY YOU ASK ?

I have trouble at times focusing the Leica's due to my eye site (no idea why) the auto focus of the Contax seems very appealing.

When I look at the PRICE of the 3 lens setup of the Contax Kit's, its a very attractive Camera alternative. To afford the equivalent 3 lenses by Leica....is just not an option for me.

So which way to go ? I am like many and have accumulated many..many cameras which quite frankly get little use other than my admiration. I recently decided to clean the cupboard and limit my choices. I have decided on keeping the Cameras mention below and purchasing the Contax as well(just cant part with the M6) the others to sell.

Now I know what many of you are thinking..."just sell all the other cameras and get some Leica glass"..this is founded but its the speed and focusing issues which I am trying to improve in regards to my rangefinder issues.

So what to do.....

Keeping
Ricoh GR3
Leica M6 TTL/MotorWinder
Olympus Stylus Epic
Konica Hexar AF
*Contax G2 Kit

Selling
Leica M4-2
Voigtlander R2A
Voigtlander L
Nikon D300/Grip
Norrita 66/Kit
Yashica GTS
Nikon F4
Graflex 5x4
Lomo A
Fujifilm GA645 Zi

*To Purchase

http://simonjohnsonstreet.blogspot.com

 

[cbphoto]

Unless you absolutely need to change lenses, selling the Hexar AF for a G2 is a major step down, in my opinion. I've owned both (kept the Hexar), and I know it's a personal thing, but that Hexar is so accurate and fluid compared to the Contax.

 

[2F/2F]

I would say to sell the Leica if you do not feel like using it. However, don't trade it for the Contax. They don't even compare. Auto focus on a viewfinder camera? Give me a break! It is a great camera for some people, I am sure. I am sure it is built well and has excellent optics. However, in the end, nothing more than a highly glorified point and shoot. I have no problem with AF SLRs, where you can see what is going on, and take manual control of the AF motor, but it makes no sense to me on a viewfinder camera.

 

[mrisney]

The Mamiya viewfinder is vastly superior to any of the Leica M's, and the images are grain free at 18"x18" - I scan on Nikon Coolscan 9000 and print on a Epson 3100. I sold off quite a bit of gear this year . Sold a Polaroid 600SE, Fuji GW690, a Rollei 6100. I'm left with aforementioned Leica , and the Mamiya 6 with the 50mm, the 75mm, and the 150. Anyone who has used a Mamiya 6 or 7, knows that these camera's and lenses are really some fine gear. 35mm is limited, it's a fast format typically - and if that's the compromise, I think the G2 might be faster to load, to meter, to focus then my Leica M4-P, and I could never afford the 28, the 24 or a 21mm Leica lens. I'd like to try those lenses out, since they have quite the reputation. The only thing that cautionse, if the G2 develops an electrical glich, I will rue the day - I swapped it out for a very reliable, fully mechanical bomber Leica - that's the most pragmatic reservation I have.

 

[cloneroom]

Unless you absolutely need to change lenses, selling the Hexar AF for a G2 is a major step down, in my opinion. I've owned both (kept the Hexar), and I know it's a personal thing, but that Hexar is so accurate and fluid compared to the Contax.

Cheers..I think you are right I will keep the Hexar.. I am able to grab a Contax G2 Kit with 3 lenses

Carl Zeiss 28mm F2.8,
Carl Zeiss 45mm F2.0 and
Carl Zeiss 90mm F2.8.
3 lens hoods,
3 front lens caps,
3 rear lens caps,
2 UV filters,
3 leather pouches.

For about $1300 Aus/1,148.87 USD, does this seem like a good deal....

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

For about $1300 Aus/1,148.87 USD, does this seem like a good deal....

At least in Europe (Germany) they seem to go for even less....

 

[Anton Lukoszevieze]

Originally Posted by ajuk
"Yeah, this is so like Sophie's choice."

Who is this Sophie who likes choosing things?
Steve.


not the most subtle comparison....at all.....Sophie's Choice is a novel by William Styron, also made into a film, the crux of the novel is that Sophie reveals her deepest, darkest secret: on the night that she arrives at Auschwitz, a sadistic doctor makes her choose which of her two children should die immediately by gassing and which should continue to live, albeit in the camp.....

but perhaps Steve was being ironic?

 

[cbphoto]

Cheers..I think you are right I will keep the Hexar.. I am able to grab a Contax G2 Kit with 3 lenses

Carl Zeiss 28mm F2.8,
Carl Zeiss 45mm F2.0 and
Carl Zeiss 90mm F2.8.
3 lens hoods,
3 front lens caps,
3 rear lens caps,
2 UV filters,
3 leather pouches.

For about $1300 Aus/1,148.87 USD, does this seem like a good deal....

That sounds about right if the condition is good. Prices have shot back up on these recently. Check KEH.com for comparison

 

[cloneroom]

Cheers will do now...

 

[cloneroom]

Seems to be a little cheaper than the going rate to be honest so a good deal I would say

 

[sangetsu]

I have a G2 and an M4, and they are both great. I wouldn't sell the Leica simply because I love it. The M4 is a tank of a camera, and I love using it, but for getting a good picture quickly, the G2 is better. The G2's auto focus is not DSLR quick, but it can focus more quickly than most of us have the ability to do manually. If you think you can focus faster, the G2 can also be focused manually. The G2 is quickly becoming unmatchable in regards to price vs performance, I got mine with the 28 and 90 lenses for $500.

 

[Steve Smith]

but perhaps Steve was being ironic?

No. I don't like doing the ironing!


Steve.

 

[mrisney]

OK, first week of using the G2. So this is a first impression of sorts,
I just sent off 5 rolls of Portra 400 NC to the lab, and will put up a few
soon. It's all about the potential of the lenses. So this post will be about
gear, and usability.



The viewfinder reminds me of my mother's old Olympus Stylus point and shoot.
It's tiny and dark. Again if anyone has had the chance to use a Mamiya 6 or 7,
the rangefinder lines in these camera's are quite good, better than Leica M.
So against the Mamiya rangefinder, its no contest - since I always thought the
M4-P was OK, I agree with the most common complaint against the Contax G's
- The viewfinder is crap.

The manual focusing is awful compared to my Leica and the Mamiya 6.
It's really meant, in my opinion, to be used in auto focus mode.
But, it's actually works well, when I discreetly want to take a candid
of people, I can hold it down near my waist, depress the button slightly, and
assume that the camera is going to pick up the subject, I like that.

The motor winder is nice, I like it, and I was able to shoot 5 rolls of film this week
much faster than I typically do with my Leica M. It's seductively simple, and
the camera is very well designed. The lenses look like very good glass, sharp,
when I hold them up to the light. That was the whole point,
to pick up a 35mm RF system, that I could shoot quickly with, but have excellent optics.

This could really work, I am impressed. The M4-P requires me to dial in the
aperture and speed according to what the Voigtlander II meter suggests, which,
requires fiddling with it's small dials, then holding it up to my eye, focus in the image,
and when people see me holding a camera up to my face the moment is gone,
their bodies and faces stiffen up, and the rather time consuming process of preparing
a picture is all for not, I end up catching a remnant of what I saw in the first place.

The same problem exists with the Mamiya 6, As great as the images both the Leica M,
and Mamiya systems produce, both cameras require far too much manipulation, IMO,
to catch a candid. So I think that the Zeiss Contax G people have been onto something
all along.
Funny, because when I think it about it, rangefinders are a cult camera, and the Contax G
is like a subculture within that cult.
This camera has it's warts, for sure. But I am quickly being won over,
by its strengths. The acid tests are the images though, that will be the deciding factor.

To be continued, when I post more images ....

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

As to the glass quality, well, let's put it this way - I have a photo that I took of the workshop in the cathedral of the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona with the 21mm- it was a hand-held grab shot, 1 second exposure. I had it enlarged to 12x18, and it is still tack-sharp with no loss of contrast or clarity. I sold that print of it for $350 USD to one of my regular patrons. You'll have NO regrets about the optics - from the day the original G1 came out, everyone who has used the system has done nothing but rave about the optics. The 35mm f2 is considered to be the weakest link in the chain, but is still a good lens. The 90 had focusing issues on the G1, but the G2 fixed that. On the G2, the auto-focus is fast and reliable, even if not the quietest thing you've ever shot with. The glass is easily the equal of, if not better than, Leica glass. The manual focus on it is not intuitive, which is the biggest dig against it that I can think of. It does work in the rangefinder, along with the auto parallax correction, and it also gives you the distance readout on the top LCD. If you're good at distance estimation, you can use the distance display to pre-focus manually, then bring the camera to eye in the split second before taking the shot.

 

[elekm]

From everything that I've read, the quality of the lenses has never been in question. Rather, it's the accuracy of the autofocus. And it sounds to me as if the autofocus in a non-SLR design has the same difficulty as other autofocus system -- it might lock focus on something that's not what you intended. Because it's not an SLR, you have no visual way of knowing if the camera has confirmed focus on what you want.

By the way, the camera is/was made by Kyocera, but lenses were made by Carl Zeiss. So, it's not a Zeiss Contax G -- that is, you'll never see the Zeiss name on the body, only on the lens.

 

[cbphoto]

The camera and lenses are all manufactured in Japan. The lenses are nice, in my opinion, but they have their own look. There is no quality scale for lenses - they have personalities. The G lenses are quite distinct, but comparing them to Leica or anything else (as someone mentioned above) isn't really fruitful.

I really dislike the Mamiya 6 lenses, which is sad - that system is otherwise perfect.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

The G2 is certainly a great value. But the optics may be tweaked towards color vs B&W. To get into Leica at a lower price point look to a Leica M4-2 with Mandler designed lenses. The 35/50/90/135 frames are more accurate than the M6 frames.

No problem to shoot B&W without an internal meter.

I highly recommend a Minolta Auto Meter IV F. Great carry case and flexible functions. Easy to read and reliable. Gives exposure consistency between frames for easier B&W printing. Common AA batteries which last forever.