raid
Dad Photographer
If the G1/G2 lenses have a slight advantage optically over th ZM lenses, can this be actually seen from the optical designs?
The price for a conversion of a provided lens by yourself is not shown on JapanExposures web site, where all price include a lens sourced locally.If the lens cost you $100, did the conversion in Japan cost you only $500?
I thought that it was $700.
As both designs are symmetric ones (opposite to retrofocus for SLR) you cannot. At least you can think of the more lens elements, the less aberrations you will get, but it's not always true. Based on Zeiss official MTF figures, the G21 is slightly better than ZM21 (and Elmarit ASPH 21) for vignetting and distortion. But those figures don't tell anything about flare resistance, handling, mechanical quality, ... 🙂If the G1/G2 lenses have a slight advantage optically over th ZM lenses, can this be actually seen from the optical designs?
As both designs are symmetric ones (opposite to retrofocus for SLR) you cannot. At least you can think of the more lens elements, the less aberrations you will get, but it's not always true. Based on Zeiss official MTF figures, the G21 is slightly better than ZM21 (and Elmarit ASPH 21) for vignetting and distortion. But those figures don't tell anything about flare resistance, handling, mechanical quality, ... 🙂
Here are a couple of quick pix of the G45 Planar.
No it's not, because of register distance of arround 2cm for Leica M & Contax G lenses versus arround 4cm for Contax/Yashica, Nikon F, whatever 24x36 SLR mount...I have a weird idea. Would it be possibly more economical to remount the G lens to old Contax/nikon mount, and then use it with Contax/nikon>Leica M adapter?
No it's not, because of register distance of arround 2cm for Leica M & Contax G lenses versus arround 4cm for Contax/Yashica, Nikon F, whatever 24x36 SLR mount...