Has anyone sold their Contax G2 to replace it with an X-Pro2?

[rubercoober]

I know many users have described the X-Pro2 as what a digital G would have been, and was wondering if anyone had actually gone through this swap. If so, how do you feel about it? Do you regret the decision? Best choice you ever made?

I've got a Leica M4 and a Contax G2, both of which I love very much. I was worried about the longevity of the G2 after a repair in the spring(everything works perfectly now), and was strongly considering selling it to pick up an X-Pro2, since I don't have a digital camera and it feels like the closest thing to a digital rangefinder aside from Leica models.

At this point, I shoot almost exclusively black and white with both cameras, and wanted to keep the G2 for color film because of how that Zeiss glass performs. Digital can do color and would make my workflow a lot easier, as I'm about to graduate university and am not sure what I'm going to do about a darkroom.

Cheers,

Ruben

 

[Frontman]

I have a nice black paint G2 which I bought shortly after getting an X-Pro 1. I had always wanted one of these cameras, and I got the 28mm and 45mm lenses to go with it. The G2 is wonderful with film, and is a joy to shoot. But the X-Pro was quite an amazing camera, and I think the Fuji lenses are even better than those of the Contax G system. The X-Pro 2 takes things a step further, and a is an amazing camera. The Fuji cameras are wonderful with color, and on my holiday in Southern Europe, though I brought several cameras (2 Leicas, Conrad, Rolleiflex) I pretty much ended up using only the X-Pro. My X series lenses are the 35/1.4, 28/2, and 14/2.8. All are remarkably good, as good as anything made in Germany for much more money. For monochrome, I will stick with the G2 and Tri-X, for anything else, the Fuji is great.

 

[brennanphotoguy]

I think having an M4 and G2 is a bit redundant for the most part. Just keep the one that makes you happiest, which I assume is the M4, and sell the other for an XPro-2.

 

[gavinlg]

It does indeed feel to me like a pretty logical progression from a contax G, except possibly better. Ergonomically it's definitely a step up - AF performance too. The fujifilm lenses are at least on par with the G lenses for the most part. I would go as far to say that people who didn't get the contax G won't get the x-pro either.

 

[rubercoober]

I have a nice black paint G2 which I bought shortly after getting an X-Pro 1. I had always wanted one of these cameras, and I got the 28mm and 45mm lenses to go with it. The G2 is wonderful with film, and is a joy to shoot. But the X-Pro was quite an amazing camera, and I think the Fuji lenses are even better than those of the Contax G system. The X-Pro 2 takes things a step further, and a is an amazing camera. The Fuji cameras are wonderful with color, and on my holiday in Southern Europe, though I brought several cameras (2 Leicas, Conrad, Rolleiflex) I pretty much ended up using only the X-Pro. My X series lenses are the 35/1.4, 28/2, and 14/2.8. All are remarkably good, as good as anything made in Germany for much more money. For monochrome, I will stick with the G2 and Tri-X, for anything else, the Fuji is great.

Awesome, glad to hear you like it. It's reassuring to hear considering you've got both. Thanks!

I think having an M4 and G2 is a bit redundant for the most part. Just keep the one that makes you happiest, which I assume is the M4, and sell the other for an XPro-2.

Yeah, it's a bit redundant, but I had kept both around only because I planned on carrying both with me with two different lenses. Was looking at the G 28mm and 21mm for my Contax, while keeping the 50mm on the M4.

But yeah, it's getting to the point where the G2 hardly gets any use these days, it's mostly the M4. You make a good point, that's what I'll likely end up doing.

It does indeed feel to me like a pretty logical progression from a contax G, except possibly better. Ergonomically it's definitely a step up - AF performance too. The fujifilm lenses are at least on par with the G lenses for the most part. I would go as far to say that people who didn't get the contax G won't get the x-pro either.

I thought so as well, just haven't had the chance to try an X-Pro2. Just realized there are a couple camera rental places here in Atlanta that I could get an Fuji to play with for a couple days. I'm sure I'd like it, but you know how hard it is to sell gear you like for gear you haven't been able to try yet. Thanks for the input!

 

[willie_901]

Using the X-Pro 2 is a very different experience. In my case (X100, X-Pro 1 then X100T) once I climbed the learning curve, I enjoyed using these cameras.

It is possible to use the X-Pro 2 as you would use a real RF camera. The automation can be disable and multiple finder and display options can be set up to create a minimalistic user experience. A bit of research and patience is required. Of course you can ask many of us here for guidance.

The Fujinon lenses are excellent.

 

[kaydee]

I've tried both and I actually went the other way. Bought an Xpro2 and sold it after less than half a year. Bought a Contax G2 and don't feel the same growing pains as i did with the Fuji.

Things I didn't like about the Fuji before owning the G2.

- Didn't care about the files. Colors weren't all that special IMO and took too long to render on my computer.
- Buttons all had plenty of play, felt flimsy.
- i find the menu quite confusing. Coming from a Nikon shooter.

But to be fair, I used the 35mm f2, a 50mm equivalent that I never bonded with. I'm primarily a 28-35mm guy, so I was a bit miffed when Fuji announced the 23mm a month after I sold the XPro2. But not looking to go back. Both Xpro 2 and G2 are secondary cameras to my Nikons, and the G2 for me is more limiting and more fun.

If the Xpro 2 was my primary camera, maybe I would be singing a different tune.