LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
Recently I bought G1 with 45mm. I am impressed with its quality but I could not feel great about the focus mechanism of G series...
So If I want to get rid of my 45mm, which lens would be in equal quality for my M6, (with a similar price range)?
I am looking for similar characteristics...no swirly bokeh, similar sharpness...
I believe current formula summicron is of equal charateristics but it has higher price...
So If I want to get rid of my 45mm, which lens would be in equal quality for my M6, (with a similar price range)?
I am looking for similar characteristics...no swirly bokeh, similar sharpness...
I believe current formula summicron is of equal charateristics but it has higher price...
Last edited:
crist
Crist
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
I know this but it comes to quite high prices, right?
ZM Planar 50mm. Or just practice more with the G1 focus. If you know what the camera wants, you'll nail focus every time.
raid
Dad Photographer
I felt quite at home with my G1 from the first roll.
misterb
Member
another option
another option
Another option is to get a G2. I found the viewfinder and focussing better than the G1.
another option
Another option is to get a G2. I found the viewfinder and focussing better than the G1.
kzphoto
Well-known
I had the pleasure of using a g2 / 28, 2.8 for a month or so. It's a great camera. No focusing issues, but it did have some trouble focusing out doors.
68,000 Yen for a 45/2 conversion isn't over the top if you love the lens.
68,000 Yen for a 45/2 conversion isn't over the top if you love the lens.
kg4nih
Established
Another "vote" for the ZM Planar 50mm. I have, use and very much like both. Each is my "standard" lens for my ZI and G2 respectively.
uhligfd
Well-known
Some lenses simply have no equivalent. So bite the bullet and learn to use this one, maybe on the G2 if the G1 does not suit you; and the same holds for the Zeiss G 21mm 2.8 lens, if you have one.
Two of the best lenses ever made history wide.
Two of the best lenses ever made history wide.
cidereye
Film Freak
Agreed, I still use both but the rear focus lock button on the G2 is one of the very best features of the camera and one I initially thought:- "Why?".
The VF is not dramatically larger (it's no Leica M granted!) but it is a fair bit larger over the G1 and this obviously makes the camera a lot nicer to use.
Hmm. AFAIK the viewfinders are the same.
misterb
Member
To get the most out of the G lenses, I shoot color, usually Fuji Reala 100 and lately Kodak Ektar 100. Eye popping colors!
No contest between the Leica and Contax G viewfinders (Leica's so much better), but the eye relief of the G2 is significantly better than the G1.
Trouble focusing out doors??
No contest between the Leica and Contax G viewfinders (Leica's so much better), but the eye relief of the G2 is significantly better than the G1.
Trouble focusing out doors??
Phantomas
Well-known
Great, thanks for the reminder. Just sent them a question and if the reply is possitive i will be buying this lens!
Seriously, the sharpest RF lens i've ever seen. Love the results it produces. As a matter of fact it's one of the main reasons I keep my G1.
Seriously, the sharpest RF lens i've ever seen. Love the results it produces. As a matter of fact it's one of the main reasons I keep my G1.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
which one are you getting phantomas?
Phantomas
Well-known
The 45mm of course, what else
Upon closer inspections I have some tiny reservations. Two actually: conversion changes min focus distance from 0.5 to 1m (not so close for tight portraits); and ergonomics seem not the best (the way the aperture is changed, would need to hold the lens while changing aperture (no click-stops either)).
Now I need to decide if the above is bad enough, coz otherwise that Planar is one fantastic piece of glass.
Upon closer inspections I have some tiny reservations. Two actually: conversion changes min focus distance from 0.5 to 1m (not so close for tight portraits); and ergonomics seem not the best (the way the aperture is changed, would need to hold the lens while changing aperture (no click-stops either)).
Now I need to decide if the above is bad enough, coz otherwise that Planar is one fantastic piece of glass.
binky
Established
Phantomas, for portraits, the G90 is not that shabby (actually, quite a bargain...for a G)
but I agree, that either the G45 or G21 is reason enough to own a G1/2 (A used set is comparable in price to a converted lens)
but I agree, that either the G45 or G21 is reason enough to own a G1/2 (A used set is comparable in price to a converted lens)
Last edited:
Phantomas
Well-known
Binky - I'm not a fan of anything longer than 50mm on an RF. Prefer SLR for long lenses. And while it's true that 45mm is not per se a portrait lens, I do like to have the ability to get in closer than 1m.
G45 is really the only lens that blows me away from G series. The others are excellent, no doubt about it, but to me not as unique as 45mm. (Haven't tried the 21 though).
G45 is really the only lens that blows me away from G series. The others are excellent, no doubt about it, but to me not as unique as 45mm. (Haven't tried the 21 though).
binky
Established
I understand...a few times I was tempted to order one through Dirk and mount it on a CLE. I have a G2, but I still think about just having a light kit with several lens....
it's a beauty...
your choice is not easy
John
cidereye
Film Freak
What I was meaning is that the eyepiece on the G2 is aprox 1/3 larger so it's a lot easier to sight than the G1.
Japan---Exposures
Member
Not quite, the lens is tested for rangefinder accuracy up to 0.8m, but the helicoid may actually turn further than that so you may get closer focus, just no RF coupling.