PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
Has anyone compared these two? I have a GSN which I love, but I would really like the wider lens of either the CC or the GX. I can get either for about the same price (without being able to hold them first) so I'm wondering, what are your experiences with the two? Are the lenses comparable in quality? Etc?
Much appreciated!
Patrick
Much appreciated!
Patrick
wintoid
Back to film
My experience is that the GX has a much better lens, and meters to a higher ISO (if you care). The CC has a weird 4-blade aperture, with peculiarly curved blades, that always gives a strange shaped hole. It's not in the same class as the GX's superb lens. Much smaller though, and really solid.
Just my opinions.
Just my opinions.
Bill58
Native Texan
I agree. The GX is superb and much more preferable. Get two, in case one dies!
btgc
Veteran
wait guys, is perfectly round aperture a quality mark of lens itself? Well, highly regarded lenses mostly have round aperture, though for me biggest concern with CC would be slow top speed, making it slow film or dark bars camera. And 35mm for me isn't THAT wider than 40mm - I'd happier with slower 28mm, f2.8 or even f3.5
zuikologist
.........................
Both are nice. The CC is smaller, does have a nice lens (and 35/1.8 is handy) the GX has a slightly higher quality feel and parallax adjusting frame lines. Get both.
RFluhver
Well-known
Hi guys...US$130 for a good condition, functional GX a fair price?
Tnx
Tnx
btgc
Veteran
us$130 may be little steep, though so they go - around 80 and more, depending on how seller represent them. Though, I have seen fully functional GX going for 50. Prices rise when someone wants things baadly.
You probably mean that GX on flickr?
You probably mean that GX on flickr?
RFluhver
Well-known
Yeah...hit me up on flickr dude!
matt_s
Established
GX vs CC
GX vs CC
Both cameras are great- I wish I could find my side by side photos as I recall they were the exact same size (I no longer own the CC). I like the GX a bit better- just a better feel to the focusing and a slightly (1.8 vs. 1.7) faster lens. The parallel compensating frame lines on the GX are nice, and the 40mm lens just worked better for me. The battery compartment cover on the GX is a bit more stealth than the CC button next to the viewfinder also.
You will be happy with either!
Matt
and a CC next to a GSN:
GX vs CC
Both cameras are great- I wish I could find my side by side photos as I recall they were the exact same size (I no longer own the CC). I like the GX a bit better- just a better feel to the focusing and a slightly (1.8 vs. 1.7) faster lens. The parallel compensating frame lines on the GX are nice, and the 40mm lens just worked better for me. The battery compartment cover on the GX is a bit more stealth than the CC button next to the viewfinder also.
You will be happy with either!
Matt
and a CC next to a GSN:
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
Thanks so much for the responses guys! I ended up being able to find a photo on flickr with both the CC and the GX (along with some other cameras). You can see it here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28190275@N03/3348901439/
Seems as if the CC is just a smidgen smaller than the GX, although looks can be deceiving.
Sounds like the GX may be the better choice. The one I see for sale is about $120 which, according to a post above, seems like it might be high?
Seems as if the CC is just a smidgen smaller than the GX, although looks can be deceiving.
Sounds like the GX may be the better choice. The one I see for sale is about $120 which, according to a post above, seems like it might be high?
Bruin
Noktonian
The GX and CC are about the same size. The GX has contacts in the flash shoe, a 5-bladed aperture, and a faster shutter (1/500 vs. 1/250). Unless you must have 35mm FL, get the GX. I only wish the ISO went to 1600, like the GL.
f16sunshine
Moderator
The gx can easily go for 2x what you guys have found them for.
I would jump on it. I have a couple and usually one is with me. Easily the best of the electros. Maybe only the lynx with it's mechanical shutter is a better overall camera.
Here is a link to a thread about my Yashicas with a bit of lineage info
http://forum.mflenses.com/yashica-rangefinders-t9943.html
I would jump on it. I have a couple and usually one is with me. Easily the best of the electros. Maybe only the lynx with it's mechanical shutter is a better overall camera.
Here is a link to a thread about my Yashicas with a bit of lineage info
http://forum.mflenses.com/yashica-rangefinders-t9943.html
Maiku
Maiku
The one thing you have to consider are batteries. The GX uses, now banned mercury batteries. You can buy or improvise an adaapter to use alkaline batteries. The CC only requires the ready available alkaline battery.
I have both. I like GX more because it feels more substanial. It feels like a better made camera. Focusing seems smoother and the over/under lights are easier to see.
There is no differnce between the black or chrome body GXs. Go for the chrome body because it cheaper. The black bodies usually go for 50$ more than the chrome.
One great thing about the CC is the shutter. It is so quite I sometimes think the shutter has not fired.
Both offer great lenses. Both produce great photos.
Mike
I have both. I like GX more because it feels more substanial. It feels like a better made camera. Focusing seems smoother and the over/under lights are easier to see.
There is no differnce between the black or chrome body GXs. Go for the chrome body because it cheaper. The black bodies usually go for 50$ more than the chrome.
One great thing about the CC is the shutter. It is so quite I sometimes think the shutter has not fired.
Both offer great lenses. Both produce great photos.
Mike
PMCC
Late adopter.
No experience here with the CC, but another vote for the GX. I think of it as a down-sized but highly refined GSN, and that's saying something. These days they seem to be going for $120 on "buy it now," so they probably can be had for less if one is patient. Battery replacement requires a tin-foil workaround unless you can get a purpose-made adapter (the Yashica dude used to sell them but haven't seen it offered lately). I'm wondering how the GL is different, besides the desirable ASA 1600 setting. Anyone have experience with it?
btgc
Veteran
From scratch I remember that GL has ATL cell (automatically compensates when filters are mounted), ISO1600 as you say and tension rollers in film chamber like my casual Ricoh P&S has. Some cosmetics, too, though not drastic changes from base G35.
bawang
Established
No experience with the CC, also. But I have and still use the GX and GL. This is my take. I like the feel of the bigger GL, it is slightly heavier and bigger. The GX feels a bit cramped and too light handheld (caveat: I like the feel of super heavy Zorki's 
). My guess is I would not like the CC as much being lighter and smaller. As far as lenses and IQ are concern, my uneducated experience would rate the GX as having a better nicer color and sharpness, not to say the GL is a slouch in this department. Both produces sharp and contrasty image. Differences between 35 and 40mm is not huge and I like the perspective from 40mm FL anyway. I had wanted to sell both to fund a Leica, but the advise of the good folks here help me decide against it. Now, I have BW film in GL (for the ISO 1600 most of the time) and color in the GX.
I think f16sunshine has experience using both CC and GX and I would seriously consider to his advise.
). My guess is I would not like the CC as much being lighter and smaller. As far as lenses and IQ are concern, my uneducated experience would rate the GX as having a better nicer color and sharpness, not to say the GL is a slouch in this department. Both produces sharp and contrasty image. Differences between 35 and 40mm is not huge and I like the perspective from 40mm FL anyway. I had wanted to sell both to fund a Leica, but the advise of the good folks here help me decide against it. Now, I have BW film in GL (for the ISO 1600 most of the time) and color in the GX. I think f16sunshine has experience using both CC and GX and I would seriously consider to his advise.
pb908
Well-known
never have GX, but on my GL (I believe it has the same 40mm lens as on GX), the lens has produce beautiful color & contrast, I can say "more" than my hexar AF does.. I still doing some test to compare both, if it is proven, that will be the time to let hexar go.
Clark.EE
Well-known
GX all the way
GX all the way
has to be the GX, lovely Camera!
I have 2 silver & 1 black, + 2 sets of wide/tele lenses.
Best of the electros.
Seems all Yashica prices are on the rise at the moment.
Especially the Better ML SLR lenses.
Buy now to avoid dissappointment.
GX all the way
has to be the GX, lovely Camera!
I have 2 silver & 1 black, + 2 sets of wide/tele lenses.
Best of the electros.
Seems all Yashica prices are on the rise at the moment.
Especially the Better ML SLR lenses.
Buy now to avoid dissappointment.
