Contax G system

[Nick De Marco]

I have only just (finally) got into this system - so far I'm still as excited as when I bought my first Leica.

I recently bought a nice condition G2 with 28, 45 and 90 lenses. And then the other day bought, but have not yet receive, the 21. I think this is the system I shall take (with 3 lenses) on a trip to India next year.

But I don't see half as much discussion about it as other cameras on here - is this the correct sub-forum? Is there anyone out there still in love with it?

Nick

 

[rangefinderG]

G2 system

G2 system

Hello
I have four G2 +21,28,35,45 and 90mm lenses. It is my go to system. Most of my photographic life I've lusted after a M 3 with 50mm. However after having that camera I have found believe it can never match the G system. I have also a G1 which I use in tandem with my M 3. Contax is a quick street shooter.
Japanese technology is far superior in my estimation.
People say the 35mm is the weakest of the bunch but that's sophistry, it's a great lens. It is possible to use a polarising filter by rotating it and watching the speed decline .

 

[cz23]

Hey, guys. What are your thoughts on manual zone focusing with this system? In particular with the 35. Is it even possible?

John

 

[rangefinderG]

Manual focusing

Manual focusing

It can be done of course but why? When I first got into the system (1990s)l was disappointed with the manual focusing so I phoned up Contax. They told me it really comes into its own when used AF. From that day on I've always used it in auto focus mode.
It's a wonderful 35mm easily equal to the Leica 35mm.

 

[Puggie]

I have a G2 (and back up G1) with the 28, 35, 45, 90mm setup. I bought it to replace a Leica M3 I had sold and while technically superb, I don't enjoy shooting with it as much as I did the Leica. The lenses spend quite a bit of time on my Sony A7 they are all superb, as above the 35mm maybe technically the weakest but its still better than most glass out there. Its a superbly thought out system IMHO and I just don't know why I've never really gelled with mine, I want to like it more than I do. Problem now is, if I go back to Leica I need those lenses in L39 fitment,and that is a horribly expensive thought compared to the Contax lenses I have in hand now!

 

[cz23]

It can be done of course but why? When I first got into the system (1990s)l was disappointed with the manual focusing so I phoned up Contax. They told me it really comes into its own when used AF. From that day on I've always used it in auto focus mode.
It's a wonderful 35mm easily equal to the Leica 35mm.

Old habits? Seriously though, zone and hyperfocal focusing with wide lenses are among the great pleasures of using an M. Just wondering if there's an equivalent on the G2 and how it works.

John

 

[Doug]

A favorite camera system, very friendly to use with the AF, zoom finder, and powered film handling. I bought into it originally for the legendary 21 Biogon. I have two G2 with 21, 28, 35, 45, 90.

 

[narsuitus]

I recently bought a nice condition G2 with 28, 45 and 90 lenses. And then the other day bought, but have not yet receive, the 21. I think this is the system I shall take (with 3 lenses) on a trip to India next year.

But I don't see half as much discussion about it as other cameras on here - is this the correct sub-forum? Is there anyone out there still in love with it?

I am still in love with my two G1 bodies with 21, 28, 45, and 90mm lenses.

Will you use an accessory viewfinder with your 21mm?

Which of your four lenses will you leave at home when you take only three lenses to India next year?


Contax G1 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Puggie]

Old habits? Seriously though, zone and hyperfocal focusing with wide lenses are among the great pleasures of using an M. Just wondering if there's an equivalent on the G2 and how it works.

John

You can set a manual focus distance with the little wheel on the front of the camera, there are no handy DoF scales on the lenses though.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Old habits? Seriously though, zone and hyperfocal focusing with wide lenses are among the great pleasures of using an M. Just wondering if there's an equivalent on the G2 and how it works.

John

It is possible to manual focus a G2, but as someone else said, "why would you want to?" If you haven't used it, that answer might seem like a non-answer, but if you have used one, the 'why would you want to' becomes pretty obvious.

Because there are no DOF markings on the lenses, zone focus, done the way one would do it with an M3, becomes more of a guessing game, and the camera is not ideal for that, I would say.

However, with a G2, you could get exactly the same photographic result by setting aperture at f8, f11, then just aiming the camera at the subject, pressing the button in the middle of the AF/MF selector with your thumb as you frame it, whether you are framing it with the camera against your eye, or surreptitiously down by your side, immediately before pressing the shutter. Harder to describe than to do. It works.

It is a brilliant camera, but it's not designed to work exactly the way an M3 works, which is really the reason it is brilliant. But, different. If you haven't used one it might sound like you'd be missing some aspect of what you are used to in terms of zone focusing, but after a while one gets used to a camera that doesn't 'guesstimate' and just set a smaller aperture, use AF, and get the same shot you'd get with zone focus; in my experience, just as quickly.
Some like it, some prefer doing it the way they have always done it. Which to me seems like continuing to wear a cast on a broken arm even after it has healed because you got comfortable with it.
You'd really have to try it and see for yourself if you liked it.

 

[rangefinderG]

G cameras

G cameras

Well said Larry! I couldn't agree more. If the end product is a great photo use the camera as really intended.

 

[splitimageview]

here's a must read. There's a hyperfocal distance chart also.

http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000378.html

 

[Puggie]

The AF while not blisteringly quick due to the motor drive is still quite nippy and very decisive and accurate in my experience. It is a very effective system for what it set out to achieve i think.

 

[froyd]

here's a must read. There's a hyperfocal distance chart also.

http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000378.html

Yes, a must read. The other must read I've come across is: http://www.photowithmonkey.com/drupal/node/83

However, I fess up that I never prined the stickers. While the thought of DOF scale initially seemed appealing, I decided that I was fighting against the way the system was designed to work, so now I just use AF and occasionally use zone focusing with the 28. Unfortunately, I find that teh MF wheel is very easy to move, so I need to double check the zone focusing is still where I had set it to be...therefore defeating the speed and convenience of the technique.

 

[Bolo Kukus]

I have a G1 - in fact I have four of them, after buying my first new and paying a kidney for it I bought up big in Japan after 2008 when film cameras crashed and they were going for about A$125.00 each. Why four? Well, two to use, the other two as 'insurance' for when the first two inevitably break down.

The G1s are still available quite cheaply even if prices have gone up. G2s are better, but too expensive for my retirement budget, so I make do with the simpler (and almost as good) G1.

My go to lens is the 28. I also have the 21 (used now and then), the 35 (almost never), the 45 (sadly, ditto) and the 90 (in pristine condition, used maybe 5 times in 19 years).

The AF lever moved wildly on all my cameras and I found I had to stick it down with a very small bit of gaffer tape, which works well. Contax once had a quick repair for this 'flaw' but the cameras had to be sent either to Japan, the USA or Germany so I decided no.

The Zeiss (in fact I believe they are actually made by Cosina) give exquisite definition and colors unlike anything I can get with my Nikons or my Rollei TLRs, which in the latter case is really saying something.

I agree with one of the posters who said the experience is "as good as" shooting with a Leica M. I would add "almost" - I had an M2 and then an M3 in the 1980s and still kick myself for having sold them, one of the (many) terrible decisions I made in the course of my life. Of course I needed the money at the time - isn't that always the way when we part with our otherwise priceless possessions?

Take the time to read the camera manual, it contains much valuable information.

Buy UV filters and lens hoods for your lenses. That will be all you need to make truly outstanding images.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I am an avid G2 user, and have owned a G2 system for about 5+ years now.

I have found that the images the camera produces are consistently superb. The camera itself was probably the pinnacle of Japanese camera technology during its heyday -- titanium construction, AF, motor drive, multiple shooting modes, etc.

And the lenses IMHO are equal to most rangefinder lenses that you'd get in the Leica ecosystem. Some might call that heresy but the Contax G 45mm F2 is one of the best lenses I've ever used.

Just for fun, here's my kit:

 

[Rangefinder 35]

I have and have been using G system for 13 years now. It's my go-to camera when I'm backpacking. When doing that I limit myself to 2 bodies ( G2 , G1), 21mm (a must in confined spaces, like the forest, the mountains), 35mm, which I like more and more, and 90mm, used only sporadically. I also include flash T-140, electric cable release, couple Polarizers, and a set of spare CR-2 s. The batteries are hard to find in the field if you run out of juice. I love the clarity of imags I get with Carl Zeiss lenses, and even though the cameras can be finicky at times,I put up with it...

 

[splitimageview]

The only thing I really don't like about the G series is the eye position required of the viewfinder. I wish it were a larger exit pupil.

It's time to pick up a G1 body and a 35. Again.

 

[Bolo Kukus]

Reading through this post has rekindled my interest in using my 45mm Planar. and I plan to take it bush walking with me this weekend.

The 45 is considered to be THE best Contax G lens ever and IIRC was also rated as one of the finest standard lenses ever made. Kudos to it.

The 21mm is nothing short of sensational. It has almost no linear distortion (unlike the clip-on viewfinder but that can be safely ignored when shooting). By comparison with the G 21 my Nikon 20mm D is much more of a 'line bender,' especially with horizontals.

Images from the Contax G Zeiss lenses show a unique phenomenon I can only describe as 'wrapping' - the light and colors seem to flow around the subjects. Tones are excellent with B&W and color rendition is nothing short of superb. The G lenses are also somewhat more contrasty than their Leitz counterparts, which suits me.

There were many posts about the G1 and G2 until about two years ago. Of late there is more interest in these cameras, which is good, as they are unique and very durable products, most likely one of the finest cameras ever to come out of Japan. I read somewhere that, unfortunately, the two G lines were introduced at a time when digital photography was poised to take off in a big way, so buyer interest in new film camera lines was minimal and the cameras were discontinued due to poor sales. Sad but as we know, the same happened with many other fine camera brands from 2000 on.

 

[DavRaz]

Contax G

Contax G

Had a G2 and all of its lenses except for the zoom. The camera was outstanding and the lenses superb. Got to the point that on a fixed income
I could not afford the film and processing. Prayed that Contax would make
a digital version.Alas it was not to be.