limburg210
Newbie
I'm asking for the best camera to buy.
I'm a professional photographer living in the Netherlands.
I'm ike to use the camera to take wedding pictures in available light in the church.
Now I use Hasselblad and Nikon F100 with 2,8 lenses.
Thanks.
I'm a professional photographer living in the Netherlands.
I'm ike to use the camera to take wedding pictures in available light in the church.
Now I use Hasselblad and Nikon F100 with 2,8 lenses.
Thanks.
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Hi,
The fastest lens on a G2 is 2.0. On the Hexar it is 0,95.
The G2 is af, might not work well in low light. The Hexar is manual focus and is quit oke. However both have a motordrive and make some noise, less then a slr but still.
In your case I'd really recomend a Leica M6 or M7. Much quieter and the best vf for low light situations. Buy a Noctilux with it and you'll be amazed.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
The fastest lens on a G2 is 2.0. On the Hexar it is 0,95.
The G2 is af, might not work well in low light. The Hexar is manual focus and is quit oke. However both have a motordrive and make some noise, less then a slr but still.
In your case I'd really recomend a Leica M6 or M7. Much quieter and the best vf for low light situations. Buy a Noctilux with it and you'll be amazed.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Here's a comparison of the G2 and Leica M6.
I would think that autofocus is a disadvantage with available light in churches, but I don't know about the G2's one.
Next, I think that due to motorised film advance and - in case of the G2 - autofocus, the cameras may be not quiet enough to be used during a wedding ceremony, although I have not tried with my Hexar RF, yet.
Best camera - in my opinion - would be a Leica M or CV RxA with M-mount.
Best regards,
Uwe
Edit: link added
I would think that autofocus is a disadvantage with available light in churches, but I don't know about the G2's one.
Next, I think that due to motorised film advance and - in case of the G2 - autofocus, the cameras may be not quiet enough to be used during a wedding ceremony, although I have not tried with my Hexar RF, yet.
Best camera - in my opinion - would be a Leica M or CV RxA with M-mount.
Best regards,
Uwe
Edit: link added
steamer
Well-known
The G2 has an infared focusing system that supposedly will focus in total darkness within a certain distance.
limburg210
Newbie
Hi Michiel,
Oke, a M7 with a Noctilux is a very good set, but the price is a lot more than a G2 or Hexar. That is too much money to spend for me.
Oke, a M7 with a Noctilux is a very good set, but the price is a lot more than a G2 or Hexar. That is too much money to spend for me.
aizan
Veteran
what lenses do you want? if you need faster lenses than are available for the contax, you'll have to get the hexar rf or some other m-mount camera, but if you don't, the contax will do great.
limburg210
Newbie
I like to make pictures with a RF camera so I can use low shutterspeed without using a tripot.
Andrew Sowerby
Well-known
If you want autofocus get the G2. If you want manual focus get the Hexar. Why compare apples and oranges?
limburg210
Newbie
I like apples and I like oranges.
I think there is more than the autofocus.
I think there is more than the autofocus.
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
limburg210 said:
Yeah, I can see that.
A M6 classic in user condition will not cost much more than the G2 or Hexar.
For lenses you can use the terrfic fast Cosina/Voigtlander lenses. Great quality for a great price.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Hi,
I have both the Hexar and the M6 classic. If you like we can meet and you can fondle them a bit.
On the 9th of June I'll be on the Naarden Fotofestival.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
I have both the Hexar and the M6 classic. If you like we can meet and you can fondle them a bit.
On the 9th of June I'll be on the Naarden Fotofestival.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
haagen_dazs
Well-known
Michiel Fokkema said:
actually the G2 can AF in total darkness because it uses infrared
and that is actually awesome!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
But what do you photograph in total darkness?haagen_dazs said:
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
Another useful model to consider is the Hexar AF. It has a fixed 35 f2 lens in a leaf shutter on it, is much quieter than the contax, and in 'silent mode' where the auto wind motor is slower, the silence rivals the leicas.. May be useful during the actual ceremony.
No matter what the use though, the contax G is a wonderful system.
The G's zoom finder takes some practice though. It's more like an SLR finder than a RF, except you can tell if you caught an eyeblink.
No matter what the use though, the contax G is a wonderful system.
The G's zoom finder takes some practice though. It's more like an SLR finder than a RF, except you can tell if you caught an eyeblink.
jaap
Jaap
I don,t know about the Hexar rf but the G2 is perfect suited for available light work. And the lenses are second to none ! (not to say they belong to the best)
pvdhaar
Peter
If that's the only consideration, you'd be better of with a VR image stabilized lens. I can imagine that you'd be wary of the noise that that a (D)SLR makes, but one thing's for sure, my D50 with AFS-VR lens is way quieter than the film advance of my Hexar RF ever was.limburg210 said:
Also in rangefinders, there are tremendous differences in hand holdability, especially when the slow speed mechanism kicks in. On my Bessa-T, when slower than 1/15, the slow speed gear train really kicks in and it makes the camera jump. On the Leica-M, the slow speeds gears set in very gently, and there's absolutely no jerking motion.
With respect to focussing in dimly lit environments, the 0.6x finder of the Hexar RF makes it harder than the standard 0.72x Leica-M finder. And although active autofocus (like that on the Hexar AF autofocus model) can work in total darkness, there's a real world risk of focussing on the background instead of the subject unless you've got visual confirmation of what the camera has done.
Long story short: get an AFS/VR lens for your Nikon or a Leica-M.
pvdhaar
Peter
Oh, just forgot. There are a couple of flashes in the Nikon line-up (for instance the SB800) that can put out a deep red focus assist pattern, even when the flash itself is disabled. I find it a godsend indoors when the light is so so.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I think this is one of those "how long is a piece of string" questions.
I own a Hexar RF, a Contax G2, a Leica M (an M3), a Hexar AF and both manual and AF SLRs. If this were me and I needed to be sure of catching key shots in low light with critical focus accuracy, on film, using available light then I'd choose either a Hexar RF or an autofocus SLR. The SLR (if there's on-camera or on-non-firing-flash focus assist) would probably work better in really low light (note: I can't focus an MF SLR to save myself in low light). But the RF would work better if there were enough light to get decent contrast on the RF patch.
But that's just me (and on those assumptions).
My problem with the Contax G2 and Hexar AF, for catching shots that have to be caught is the lack of confirmation of the point of focus. Assuming correct alignment, a coincident rangefinder will do that with precision. The ground glass on the SLR will do that with a deal less precision.
With the AF on either the Contax Gs or the Hexar AF you just have to trust it. Now it may be that I've owned neither camera long enough to be fully around all their quirks, but I've found that focus is precise only mostly. My fault, not that of the camera, but (so far) I've found the dividing line between a hit and a miss is pretty fine and I don't always get it right. And there's no in-viewfinder indication that I've got it wrong.
My reason for prefering the Hexar RF over a Leica M comes down to two things: film handling and auto-exposure. I find the .6x finder on the Hexar RF is good enough to consistently focus a 55/1.2 and 75/1.4 accurately and fairly close up, which is good enough for me. I like the ability to see 28mm framelines easily enough while wearing glasses. I think that precise, stepless, auto-exposure might be pretty important for nailing exposure for weddings (notoriously tough, though I have no real personal experience). And I imagine you'd go through a lot of film at a wedding, so I imagine film handling would be at a premium.
That having been said, I imagine a Leica M7 (or M8 if you want digital and have cash to burn) would solve the AE problem (the G2 and Hexar AF both have excellent AE, just by the way). The M8 obviously wouldn't have a film handling issue, though the M7 would. Either of those would be quieter than the Hexar RF (though I don't find it especially loud, and its lots quieter than almost any SLR).
A ZI body would solve the AE and film handling problem (not quite as nicely as the G2, or either Hexar, but it should still be pretty good). Its also said to have a truly excellent finder and I imagine it is quieter than a Hexar RF but louder than an M7 (and all are hugely louder than a Hexar AF, even when that's in non-silent mode).
And that's why I say its a "piece of string" problem. There are so many options, and so many trade-offs, that it comes down to what you want and what trade-offs best suit you, and your style of working.
...Mike
I own a Hexar RF, a Contax G2, a Leica M (an M3), a Hexar AF and both manual and AF SLRs. If this were me and I needed to be sure of catching key shots in low light with critical focus accuracy, on film, using available light then I'd choose either a Hexar RF or an autofocus SLR. The SLR (if there's on-camera or on-non-firing-flash focus assist) would probably work better in really low light (note: I can't focus an MF SLR to save myself in low light). But the RF would work better if there were enough light to get decent contrast on the RF patch.
But that's just me (and on those assumptions).
My problem with the Contax G2 and Hexar AF, for catching shots that have to be caught is the lack of confirmation of the point of focus. Assuming correct alignment, a coincident rangefinder will do that with precision. The ground glass on the SLR will do that with a deal less precision.
With the AF on either the Contax Gs or the Hexar AF you just have to trust it. Now it may be that I've owned neither camera long enough to be fully around all their quirks, but I've found that focus is precise only mostly. My fault, not that of the camera, but (so far) I've found the dividing line between a hit and a miss is pretty fine and I don't always get it right. And there's no in-viewfinder indication that I've got it wrong.
My reason for prefering the Hexar RF over a Leica M comes down to two things: film handling and auto-exposure. I find the .6x finder on the Hexar RF is good enough to consistently focus a 55/1.2 and 75/1.4 accurately and fairly close up, which is good enough for me. I like the ability to see 28mm framelines easily enough while wearing glasses. I think that precise, stepless, auto-exposure might be pretty important for nailing exposure for weddings (notoriously tough, though I have no real personal experience). And I imagine you'd go through a lot of film at a wedding, so I imagine film handling would be at a premium.
That having been said, I imagine a Leica M7 (or M8 if you want digital and have cash to burn) would solve the AE problem (the G2 and Hexar AF both have excellent AE, just by the way). The M8 obviously wouldn't have a film handling issue, though the M7 would. Either of those would be quieter than the Hexar RF (though I don't find it especially loud, and its lots quieter than almost any SLR).
A ZI body would solve the AE and film handling problem (not quite as nicely as the G2, or either Hexar, but it should still be pretty good). Its also said to have a truly excellent finder and I imagine it is quieter than a Hexar RF but louder than an M7 (and all are hugely louder than a Hexar AF, even when that's in non-silent mode).
And that's why I say its a "piece of string" problem. There are so many options, and so many trade-offs, that it comes down to what you want and what trade-offs best suit you, and your style of working.
...Mike
Last edited:
S
Socke
Guest
rxmd said:But what do you photograph in total darkness?
Sometimes I shoot in very dark places with flash, often the results are realy funny since I can't frame my pics
Paul T.
Veteran
"With the AF on either the Contax Gs or the Hexar AF you just have to trust it.... there's no in-viewfinder indication that I've got it wrong.'
I use the Hexar AF a lot, and I find the focus is very reliable indeed. In the dark or not. It IS possible that if you focus on something very small, ie a match box, close up, you might misfocus due to parallax error on the focus crosshairs, until you get used to it.
There IS a basic focus confirmation on the camera in the form of a small display on the upper right, a short line which goes from closest focusing distance to infinity. A gap in the line indicates the distance at which you're focused. It will tell you pretty reliably whether you're focusing on the hedge six feet behind the person you're trying to photograph. I have used the Hexar for photos of people swinging across trees on ropes, 50 feet abover the ground, and it nailed them perfectly, complete with motion blur and crazed grins.
IN a situation where the outcome is crucial, and a 35mm FOV is close to what I want, I'd always rely on the HExar AF. I do find the metering is more often fooled by backlight than other cameras (maybe I'm spoiled by the semi spot-metering of the CL), and with Tri X it's very contrasty, with a very defined 'look'. I'd say its biggest drawback for weddings, if you're shooting black and white, is that it definitely emphasises people's wrinkles and double chins!
I use the Hexar AF a lot, and I find the focus is very reliable indeed. In the dark or not. It IS possible that if you focus on something very small, ie a match box, close up, you might misfocus due to parallax error on the focus crosshairs, until you get used to it.
There IS a basic focus confirmation on the camera in the form of a small display on the upper right, a short line which goes from closest focusing distance to infinity. A gap in the line indicates the distance at which you're focused. It will tell you pretty reliably whether you're focusing on the hedge six feet behind the person you're trying to photograph. I have used the Hexar for photos of people swinging across trees on ropes, 50 feet abover the ground, and it nailed them perfectly, complete with motion blur and crazed grins.
IN a situation where the outcome is crucial, and a 35mm FOV is close to what I want, I'd always rely on the HExar AF. I do find the metering is more often fooled by backlight than other cameras (maybe I'm spoiled by the semi spot-metering of the CL), and with Tri X it's very contrasty, with a very defined 'look'. I'd say its biggest drawback for weddings, if you're shooting black and white, is that it definitely emphasises people's wrinkles and double chins!