Contax G3 Digital?

[awalkinthestreet]

I saw today a source on instagram that showed images of a Contax G3, the source claimed to have received credible information about the release. Whether it's true or not, I have no idea, hopefully it is...

I wrote some intial thoughts based on the assumption that this is real here... along with some photos

The images suggest that it will have the Leica M mount.

Any thoughts about this? Would you buy a Contax digital rangefinder? What features would it need for you to justify buying it?

www.awalkinthestreet.com/contax-g3-digital-initial-thoughts/

 

[lonemantis]

None of this seems to make sense. Who exactly is supposed to build this camera? Contax was just a brand, and hasn't existed as a real company since the 1960s. Kyocera, who built all of of the modern Contax cameras (i.e. G1, T2, 645, etc.) has been out of the camera business for over a decade.

Secondly, using an M mount defeats the original purpose of the G-series: fast AF lenses with Leica-level image quality and lots of automation. Obviously we're biased towards rangefinders here on RFF, but the digital RF market is such a small niche I don't see any room for a lower-priced competitor to Leica.

 

[splitimageview]

those hard edges look painful.

Just someone's imagination at work...

 

[awalkinthestreet]

None of this seems to make sense. Who exactly is supposed to build this camera? Contax was just a brand, and hasn't existed as a real company since the 1960s. Kyocera, who built all of of the modern Contax cameras (i.e. G1, T2, 645, etc.) has been out of the camera business for over a decade.

Secondly, using an M mount defeats the original purpose of the G-series: fast AF lenses with Leica-level image quality and lots of automation. Obviously we're biased towards rangefinders here on RFF, but the digital RF market is such a small niche I don't see any room for a lower-priced competitor to Leica.

You're right, I have no idea who would build this, logic suggests that it's speculation. Part of me hope that it is real and that it would enter the market as a lower priced competitor to Leica's digital RF's but maybe I'm dreaming.

 

[Photosynthetech]

The Contax G3 digital = Fuji X-pro2

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

The Contax G3 digital = Fuji X-pro2

Agreed! 👍👍👍

 

[CVickery]

Fake...aperture set by dial in top plate...M lenses have no aperture linkage and aperture must be set on the lens.

 

[Photosynthetech]

Agreed! 👍👍👍

Would have said X-pro1, but that's more like a Contax G1.5 digital.

 

[Frankton]

The guy who posted it, Leicacraft, has been posting a bunch of these artist renderings on Instagram lately, all with a zillion tags. I think its only a ploy to gain more followers. As interesting as these renderings are, I doubt that any would actually be produced.

It is interesting, however, that he never once posted anything about the Konost camera, which is the most likely camera to come to market...

 

[B-9]

It's looks more like a sports car than a camera...

Why is this considered sleek? Its uglier than the new Leica SL.

The fake thing in the pictures... Yuck

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Would have said X-pro1, but that's more like a Contax G1.5 digital.

I was just saying in another thread how much the XP1 looks and feels like a black Contax G2...even the rather uncertain/slow autofocus. Both great cameras, still...

 

[sevo]

None of this seems to make sense. Who exactly is supposed to build this camera? Contax was just a brand, and hasn't existed as a real company since the 1960s.

It has never been a company. It was the name Zeiss-Ikon chose for their interchangeable lens rangefinder (whose drafts and team they inherited from taking over Contessa-Nettel, hence the name).

Kyocera,

... licensed the name from the Zeiss foundation, some years after the camera side of Zeiss Ikon went belly up. Supposedly the Zeiss Ikon brands have by now, after a decade of inactivity, reverted to the Zeiss foundation.

While it is not entirely impossible that Zeiss might get into the M compatible camera market again (they already did so a decade ago with the film ZM), your argument is perfectly valid, any other name would be more appropriate than Contax G, as that was a fairly recent AF system, with another mount...

 

[kbg32]

This doesn't make sense at all. And what an ugly camera!

I bought into the Contax G system years ago when they were going to develop a full frame auto focus digital G, along with the then current G system. Unfortunately, as we know, that never happened. The N Digital system was quite unique at the time, being one of the first full frame digital cameras. Kyocera stopped production on Contax in 2005.

 

[lam]

Reminds me of an old Mac Pro tower shrunken and some dials placed upon it.

AH or a external harddrive case ..!

 

[Hsg]

The camera looks very polished and the result of careful thought and design. I doubt it is the work of some photoshop hack.

 

[rbelyell]

the same folks who lauded leica for the design of the T now say this is ugly? wow, knee-jerk criticism from the 'no one but leica can make a camera' crowd, what a surprise.

i think this is Gorgeous and forward thinking. probably a hoax, but if not, i call shotgun! thanks to OP for brining it to our attention and for your initial thoughts.

 

[Frankton]

As some background, here are other mock cameras that he has posted. Either a fun design project for class or something else...I figure its all for fun. But if it is actually a relaunch of Contax, I am very intrigued.

https://www.instagram.com/p/-1VZJThosK/
https://www.instagram.com/p/931LQPBopn/
https://www.instagram.com/p/9uA1_dBoro/
https://www.instagram.com/p/9ONiS4hovw/
https://www.instagram.com/p/9t5G2JBot_/?taken-by=leicacraft

 

[littleearth]

lol Looks absolutely horrible. Contax would never make such an ugly camera.

 

[btgc]

I don't bother if someone likes to imagine how this or that camera would look. Today is 2015, do you really believe optimal shape of camera is bar?

In my book best ergonomics compact camera achieved in Olympus C5000 with its curvy shape. It sits in hand like glued into. You can add smaller or larger grips to bars (been there with DP) but that doesn't make them anywhere closer to what ancient C5000 felt like. Key factor is sculpted back, providing natural thumbrest, not only front grip.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't bother if someone likes to imagine how this or that camera would look. Today is 2015, do you really believe optimal shape of camera is bar?

In my book best ergonomics compact camera achieved in Olympus C5000 with its curvy shape. It sits in hand like glued into. You can add smaller or larger grips to bars (been there with DP) but that doesn't make them anywhere closer to what ancient C5000 felt like. Key factor is sculpted back, providing natural thumbrest, not only front grip.

Key factor is that some of us still prefer a bar... the whole "in my book" thing.