DwF
Well-known
foon said:
The manual meter in the Hexar works beautifully. Between that and 1/3 stop increments in terms of shutter speed the Hexar even out performs the M camera.
dgray
Established
Foon, the Hexar does not have an aperture ring around the lens itself like a traditional Rf. Instead, it has an aperture dial on the top deck. The shutter release is in the middle of this aperture dial. You can most easily use the Hexar in some form of Aperture priority by setting the aperture dial to a certain setting with your right forefinger and letting the camera set the corresponding shutter. One issue is that the viewfinder does not display which shutter speed has been chosen (but it does tell you if the speed is below handholding ability - and YOU get to tell it what speed that is for you!). You can also use the camera for shutter priority, but the best way to do this is in manual mode where you use the two little buttons on top to set the shutter and then turn the aperture dial on top until the viewfinder display tells you the exposure is correct. It does this using a +- in the viewfinder, lighting up one or the other sign when over or under exposed, but lighting up both when right on. Again, the issue here can be that you don't know ultimately which aperture setting has been chosen without taking your eye off of the camera and looking. The system works very well, is very fast and reliable, but it is indeed different from a Leica. If you are using a handheld meter, then you are already used to looking away from the viewfinder for exposure info and I would think it would easy to adjust, but it depends how entrenched you are into your old ways
! Take a look at 1) Cameraquest's excellent article and 2) the extensive review on photo.net and take the time to read through all of the user feedback - there is an amazing amount of information there about the camera's functions and what it can do and how.
! Take a look at 1) Cameraquest's excellent article and 2) the extensive review on photo.net and take the time to read through all of the user feedback - there is an amazing amount of information there about the camera's functions and what it can do and how.
foon
Established
Thank you so much for all your excellent replies. I have already read cameraquest's article and photo.net's review. Like Frank said, I think it really depends on the need of other lens. This is something I need to think about for a while.
FrankS
Registered User
The good news is that you can't go wrong with either choice. They are both great cameras.
dgray
Established
I agree, you cannot make a bad choice here. Two great cameras and either one will give you capabilities to take great pictures.
foon
Established
One thing I am worry about the Hexar now is that I have read some people saying that the eletronics don't work, and LCD only show e22. It seems to be a pretty common problem, and hearing the sad news of Konica Minolta. Do you think it will be possible to be repaired in the future?
dgray
Established
I've never had to have my Hexar repaired, but I hear people talk of a Hexar specialist, Greg Webber maybe?, who works on these independently. Remember that Contax is now also gone, so you have the same repair issues with the G2.
amateriat
We're all light!
From my experience:
Contax G/G2: interchangable lenses, TTL flash.
Konica Hexar AF: everything else. Really.
The Contax Gs are crazy-noisy to my ears, which goes totally against my idea of how a a non-SLR 35mm should behave (my Hexar RFs are considerably more quiet by comparison), while the Hexar AF is likely the most quiet 35 in captivity - motorized or non. I lived and worked with one for five years, with a good stash of keeper shots to show for it. The Contax is not a bad camera by any means. But the Hexar is a different experience altogether, and a great one.
- Barrett
Contax G/G2: interchangable lenses, TTL flash.
Konica Hexar AF: everything else. Really.
The Contax Gs are crazy-noisy to my ears, which goes totally against my idea of how a a non-SLR 35mm should behave (my Hexar RFs are considerably more quiet by comparison), while the Hexar AF is likely the most quiet 35 in captivity - motorized or non. I lived and worked with one for five years, with a good stash of keeper shots to show for it. The Contax is not a bad camera by any means. But the Hexar is a different experience altogether, and a great one.
- Barrett
Last edited:
daniel~
Established
As another user of both G1/G2 and Hexar, I'd concur with Barrett's post above.
I bought my Hexar Silver long before I bought my first G1. My first impression is that G1 is such a solid, beautiful, but really noisy camera. I love everything but the noise of it, so if you are used to those 70s compacts as I am(I don't know about Leica, though), you might feel the same way. As for Hexar it's a different story, it can be dead quiet when it needs to be--thanks to the amazing Silent mode. I've read before some argue that Silent mode makes very little difference in noise reduction. This is definitely Not true with my experience.
If noise is not an issue for you, how about AF reliability? G1 occasionally hunts around, G2 slightly better, and yet neither can rival Hexar in this respect. Furthermore, Hexar has less shutter lag, if any.
All that said, I wonder if you can be content to shooting with just one focal length? Not me and that's basicly why I bought the Gs later. What a superb line of lenses...
Since you "can't go wrong with either choice", maybe you should get both!
I bought my Hexar Silver long before I bought my first G1. My first impression is that G1 is such a solid, beautiful, but really noisy camera. I love everything but the noise of it, so if you are used to those 70s compacts as I am(I don't know about Leica, though), you might feel the same way. As for Hexar it's a different story, it can be dead quiet when it needs to be--thanks to the amazing Silent mode. I've read before some argue that Silent mode makes very little difference in noise reduction. This is definitely Not true with my experience.
If noise is not an issue for you, how about AF reliability? G1 occasionally hunts around, G2 slightly better, and yet neither can rival Hexar in this respect. Furthermore, Hexar has less shutter lag, if any.
All that said, I wonder if you can be content to shooting with just one focal length? Not me and that's basicly why I bought the Gs later. What a superb line of lenses...
Since you "can't go wrong with either choice", maybe you should get both!
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
"Though the hexar has a slower shutter speed, I think I can solve that issue with ND filters,"
It actually works the opposite, the ND filters would slow it down even further. 250 top speed is a serious limitation. You'd have to use very slow film and what would happen if all the sudden you found yourself indoors? Otherwise, nice camera.
For my PS, I've gotten used to a Contax T2 loaded with Ilfo HP-4. The other compartment of the DOMKE satchel holds one of my M6 w/ 35mm1.7 Ultron and Superia 100.
It actually works the opposite, the ND filters would slow it down even further. 250 top speed is a serious limitation. You'd have to use very slow film and what would happen if all the sudden you found yourself indoors? Otherwise, nice camera.
For my PS, I've gotten used to a Contax T2 loaded with Ilfo HP-4. The other compartment of the DOMKE satchel holds one of my M6 w/ 35mm1.7 Ultron and Superia 100.
daniel~
Established
Yes, there're times, though not often, when 1/250 top shutter speed becomes a problem. When you want shallow DOF outdoor pic on a sunny day and it's ASA 400 film inside Hexar AF... can kind of solve it with an ND filter, yes, but remember that Hexar does Not meter through the filter, so you will have to do filter compensation yourself. Not very cool, is it? Now imagine if you shoot B/W and switch between filters with different factors.... Therefore, the real solution is keep things simple and forget about filters! Anyway, no such problem/limitation if with G1/G2.
In further "defense" of my own G system, I would add that I prefer being able to read the shutter speed in the G's viewfinder, unlike Hexar that gets me to take my eyes from its VF to top panel for info...
As for the "e22" problem, I've never read about it before in local user forum. Perhaps it is less than common.
Therefore, the real solution is keep things simple and forget about filters! Anyway, no such problem/limitation if with G1/G2.In further "defense" of my own G system, I would add that I prefer being able to read the shutter speed in the G's viewfinder, unlike Hexar that gets me to take my eyes from its VF to top panel for info...
As for the "e22" problem, I've never read about it before in local user forum. Perhaps it is less than common.
FrankS
Registered User
35mmdelux said:
danielnorton
Daniel Norton
e22
e22
I think I've read something about this before when I was researching the Hexar, seems it has something to do with using a certain kind of filter that get's caught on the built in hood when focused at the closest distance, I've got a UV filter on mine and have never had this problem.
I also keep it loaded with 400 ISO and have never been in a situation where 250 @ 22 was not enough. And rarely use filters.
e22
I think I've read something about this before when I was researching the Hexar, seems it has something to do with using a certain kind of filter that get's caught on the built in hood when focused at the closest distance, I've got a UV filter on mine and have never had this problem.
I also keep it loaded with 400 ISO and have never been in a situation where 250 @ 22 was not enough. And rarely use filters.
daniel~
Established
So that's what "e22" problem is about--Hexar AF getting stuck with certain filter at closest focusing distance? Then I've read about it on the net before.
So far as I know, it actually happened with some early models only. Not really common, and if that's the case, Konica would recover it and offer a free "spacer" to prevent it from happening again. None of the local users I know have encountered this problem.
So far as I know, it actually happened with some early models only. Not really common, and if that's the case, Konica would recover it and offer a free "spacer" to prevent it from happening again. None of the local users I know have encountered this problem.
G2Fan
Member
What can I say, both cameras are trully a joy to use. If I had to pick one, I would opt for the G2 becuase of the ability to use more than one focal length, and more flexible flash options. Other than that, you trully can't go wrong with either. But they are really different cameras, and, if money is not an issue, both would be great to have.
G2Fan
G2Fan
W
wtl
Guest
Can't speak for anyone else but, after a few months of use of G2, I kept coming back to my M6 up to a point the G2 was sitting so I sold it. I tried my friend's Hexar and it feels closer to M6, but AF still turned me off.
Both don't compare to your M4.
If you go Hexar AF, do watch out the shutter button on Hexar can fail, so I heard.
Both don't compare to your M4.
If you go Hexar AF, do watch out the shutter button on Hexar can fail, so I heard.
foon
Established
I think you're right, I shouldn't be comparing them to my m4.wtl said:
I took sometime thinking about my leica now, and I think I should hang on to it, there is so much I should be learning and not spending time thinking about new gear.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Originally, I thought we were comparing the G2 to the Hexar. If we are talking about the Hexar RF, than it's a whole different comparison.
I owned a Hexar RF for approximately a day. It compared most favorably to the G2. As a matter of fact, the controls were set up just like the G2. Except for the lack of auto focus, I couldn't really see keeping this camera. I have my CLE for auto exposure with my Leica lenses, and it is much more compact. The G2 is so much faster in every respect to the Hexar RF.
I owned a Hexar RF for approximately a day. It compared most favorably to the G2. As a matter of fact, the controls were set up just like the G2. Except for the lack of auto focus, I couldn't really see keeping this camera. I have my CLE for auto exposure with my Leica lenses, and it is much more compact. The G2 is so much faster in every respect to the Hexar RF.
S
Socke
Guest
From uncounted forum posts, my own experience and talks with others I think it depends where you come from. A Contax G is totaly different to a Leica M.
The G is a hell of a snapshooter, just forget about metering, set it to a sensible aperture and remember about focus and recompose and you'll get nearly every shot. The lenses are first class and the body is well built.
You can switch off all automation, except film advance, a feature often overlooked by manual camera users, and have all the creative controll you want.
My G1 has a worn out pressure plate and the corners are polished and the only problem was a slow shutter response which got better with use. It had been sitting in a shelf for three years.
My G2 hasn't seen as much use as the G1 but I doubt it is any worse and only time will tell.
But they are not Leicas and they aren't made to be or to replace one.
Seems as if the Contax G system was made for me, so much so that I allways have a film in the G1 and can't send it to Kyocera to get the ROM updated for the 35.
I tried a M2, I like 35mm, recently and meterless wasn't for me. I'll have a look on a Hexar RF next and, hopefully, a ZI.
But if I'd been grown up on Leica Ms instead of Contax SLRs, I'm pretty sure I'll hate the Contax G .-)
The G is a hell of a snapshooter, just forget about metering, set it to a sensible aperture and remember about focus and recompose and you'll get nearly every shot. The lenses are first class and the body is well built.
You can switch off all automation, except film advance, a feature often overlooked by manual camera users, and have all the creative controll you want.
My G1 has a worn out pressure plate and the corners are polished and the only problem was a slow shutter response which got better with use. It had been sitting in a shelf for three years.
My G2 hasn't seen as much use as the G1 but I doubt it is any worse and only time will tell.
But they are not Leicas and they aren't made to be or to replace one.
Seems as if the Contax G system was made for me, so much so that I allways have a film in the G1 and can't send it to Kyocera to get the ROM updated for the 35.
I tried a M2, I like 35mm, recently and meterless wasn't for me. I'll have a look on a Hexar RF next and, hopefully, a ZI.
But if I'd been grown up on Leica Ms instead of Contax SLRs, I'm pretty sure I'll hate the Contax G .-)
sleepyhead
Well-known
I have a hexar AF, but have not tried the G2.
Personally, I love the Hexar, but I think that its finder is over-rated. At least on my example the frame lines seem dim. Like others, I've on several occasions thought of selling the hexar in order to raise cash for, say another M lens, but I alway have stopped myself because the Hexar lens IS SOOO GREAT, I would go so far to say that it is better than the type 4 summicron that I've used.
The Hexar also fills a certain niche, namely, AF for when you want it (I find it useful for photographing my fast-moving small kids) and super quiet (also good for the kids as they tend to ignore the camera), and things like school performances where loud shutter sounds would be rude/distracting. The hexar also has the advantage of not saying "Leica" on it, so people don't know its a good/expensive camera.
As far as the 1/250th shutter speed limitation, I have been annoyed by that on occasion mainly due to the fact that I tend to use very fast film, especially in the winter here in Scandanavia, so on the occasional bright sunny day I'm stumped. Furthermore, the hexar's lens is most beautiful in my opinion at around f/2-2.8. Therefore, in my IDEAL world, I would have two Hexars, one with Neopan 1600 and one with FP4+ or Plus-X. I tried using a 4X ND filter, but it's a bit fiddly as the meter is not reading through the filter.
Good luck with your decision making.
Personally, I love the Hexar, but I think that its finder is over-rated. At least on my example the frame lines seem dim. Like others, I've on several occasions thought of selling the hexar in order to raise cash for, say another M lens, but I alway have stopped myself because the Hexar lens IS SOOO GREAT, I would go so far to say that it is better than the type 4 summicron that I've used.
The Hexar also fills a certain niche, namely, AF for when you want it (I find it useful for photographing my fast-moving small kids) and super quiet (also good for the kids as they tend to ignore the camera), and things like school performances where loud shutter sounds would be rude/distracting. The hexar also has the advantage of not saying "Leica" on it, so people don't know its a good/expensive camera.
As far as the 1/250th shutter speed limitation, I have been annoyed by that on occasion mainly due to the fact that I tend to use very fast film, especially in the winter here in Scandanavia, so on the occasional bright sunny day I'm stumped. Furthermore, the hexar's lens is most beautiful in my opinion at around f/2-2.8. Therefore, in my IDEAL world, I would have two Hexars, one with Neopan 1600 and one with FP4+ or Plus-X. I tried using a 4X ND filter, but it's a bit fiddly as the meter is not reading through the filter.
Good luck with your decision making.