Keep Contax G2 or sell to fund M-P 240/M-D 262 to use along with my M4?

[Reinvention]

Why take a chance?

Why take a chance?

Buy the M262. Decide about the G2 and/or M4 after you determine that you'll never want to shoot true monochrome again or after you realize that it makes sense to have both the M262 and "(Type 246)" variants.

 

[jsrockit]

You say you don't like the crop sensor of the Fuji system, but the X-Pro2 really is the closest thing to a digital G2 on the market. It's really stunningly similar, conceptually and design-wise. You could make that swap, lenses included, without any additional outlay, and with native lenses, the crop sensor becomes kind of a non-issue. You forget the specs and just shoot.

Yes, completely true... the X-Pro2 or X-E3 certainly were inspired by the Contax G series.

 

[leicapixie]

In terms of "keepers" my least used camera is the star.
A Rolleiflex Automat!
My Leicas are great but when i was pro, it was SLR to the bank.
Period of PJ and portraiture.
Fashion was always my medium format, 60's to 80's.
I have almost never sold equipment unless not used!
My Pentax 6x7 the one I disliked the most!
Selling the G2 will never get you much cash!
Keep it!
Enjoy!

I never allow film to accumulate!
Two films max!
I don't shoot more film, till all are processed.

Right now shooting K-1000 and Ilford Pan 400.
Color in Chinon K-mount! ($10 with 50mm Ricoh lens).

 

[struene]

I would get a decent scanner as a pakon or noritsu. Eats a film in little time in "auto" and the results are great. Its like shooting good jpegs.
If you want to get some "digital-security" why not one of the fuji x100? I guess you wont get more pleasing results with a digital M and you have to look after the digiM all the time because its precious...

You mentioned that turnbacktime is a major disadvantage of film for you... so a decent lab-scanner would solve that. In about the resolution of th v700 (2000x3000) it takes you ~10min. per film, complete with negative convertion and auto-whitebalance and -exposure is 99% spot on. Certainly no 40 films on the row anymore... (In 4000x6000 the Noritsu takes then about 45min to an hour for a film of 36, though you dont have to sit in front of it that time of course)

You mentioned further, that you like the one-handed- and auto-usabilty of the G2. It think thats really a good point while traveling, because when traveling you dont want to be concentrated on shooting 100% but also on the traveling. So one handed use and some auto comes in very handy. You can not use a digital M one-handed, its even more dificult then on a film M, so better go for a lighter and more compact rangefinderstyle body as a fuji x100. I find it to be a perfect travel camera. Same zero-need for postproduction as with a pakon/noritsu-scanner if youre not into it, the jpegs are very good.

Of course i write from my experiences and i mostly travel (when traveling light, i guess backpacking would fit that...) with a x100 or a light m-body as a Bessa or even both... (a Contax G2 would fit that too ; ))
So this is at least a tested and proved solution for your demands.

All M-Bodies, Medium format, fullframe digital etc... stay at home. Just a body and a 35mm is plenty enough. Especially enough space besides for your mind to also enjoy the trip.

Enjoy your trip, be pragmatic about the gear and dont overestimate the importance of the photography in the trip.

 

[Chuffed Cheese]

Yes, completely true... the X-Pro2 or X-E3 certainly were inspired by the Contax G series.

Interesting. Now that you say it, I can see it. I always thought they found a more solid design influence in the TX/Xpan series, but maybe that was a refined version of the Contax influence.

 

[DownUnder]

Yes, most definitely keep the G2.

Leicas and everything that goes with them cost a kidney to buy for each bit, but for all the GASsing and heaps of $$ you will spend, I'm willing to wager that you won't get any better results than you do now with the G2 and those wonderful G2 Zeiss lenses.

If you feel the urge to buybuybuy, why not get a second G2 or a G1? I use the latter. Have two, and five lenses. With a G1 around my neck, the rest of the kit (less film) neatly fits into a small bag. Couldn't be simpler.

So just what is wrong with being a "lazy" photographer? It means you concentrate on the image above all else, and let the camera do the fiddly bits for you. Most of us go this way. A pox on the guilt-trippers who tell us to go manual manual manual. Go off with you and play with your Kodak box cameras... oops, they were made for lazy photographers too!

Leicapixie's thread is well worth noting as a very apt viewpoint. Well stated, mercifully brief. She has it right.

Scanning can be as a PITA, but do you really have to scan every negative? Keep your processed films is archival plastic sleeves, keyword everything, date and caption the sleeves, file in a good dated sequence. Scan what you intend to work with. Good and easy. Life is too, too short. Drink good wine, good traveling, shoot more film, make love more often. All more fun than cuddling up to a darn scanner.

It's all about apply the KISS principle to your life - in every way, photography included.

 

[jsrockit]

Interesting. Now that you say it, I can see it. I always thought they found a more solid design influence in the TX/Xpan series, but maybe that was a refined version of the Contax influence.

Hmmm, that could be too... I was going by them both being AF cameras with a VF window. Even the Konica Hexar AF could be an influence. However, my own experience is with the G series and Fujis, so I made that conclusion.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, I had a G2 for a year or two and got rather fewer keepers out of it than I ever did from any of my Ms, because with an M I can focus the thing reliably.

The G2 had nice lenses and when they were in focus -- which in all fairness was most of the time -- the pictures were very good. But not better than a Leica.

I now use an M9 alongside my film Ms and I vastly prefer using two (fairly) similar cameras, as well as having a digital option.

Cheers,

R.

 

[rubercoober]

I was in a similar situation years ago, when I got my first rangefinder - a Leica M3. I used it exclusively for daily/weekly shooting, for over a year, and really bonded with it. Then came a flurry of other rangefinder bodies, GAS, and pretty soon I had to sell the M3 and some other gears that were accumulated just to be financially sound again.

Long story short, I never felt that connected to a camera since. Had an M5, sold that, bought another. But still never felt that connected with it in use. Now I lucked out and am in possession of another M3, so I'm looking forward to keeping this one for the long term. You never know what you've got, until it's lost!

I feel you. I worry about seller's remorse for sure, especially as I've experienced it with music equipment that I've sold to and wish I still had. A lot like the guitar I'm talking about parting with to fund a camera...
Glad you got another M3 though! Can't beat shooting on a film Leica, I love my M4.

Get the M-D 262 if you like (and trust) the M4–and want to consolidate your shooting approach.

Minimal changes in shooting experience between the two: the digital readout in the finder, and the choice to use aperture priority. Switching between the M and the G is arguably harder, given the VF differences. Shooting my G1 is kind of like going to the optometrist.

You also can’t be tempted to chimp which, if you are as monkey-minded as me, is a considerable relief from small-screen editorial fidgeting after any (every!) exposure. I have other digital cameras with EVF/screens to scratch that perfectionist itch.

Good luck in the decision!

The VF is one of my least favorite bits about the G2, switching from the G2 after shooting the M4 for a couple weeks always throws me off. Especially the placement of it - my eye will be used to the M4 viewfinder position and there's always an adjustment period with the G2 and the small VF/placement.

The M-D sounds ideal for sure as I love my M4, it's just so much money. I'd be on it if I could get one for like $2200-2500, no question. But the seamless transition between shooting the two seems pretty great and that in itself almost seems worth the money (although hopefully on the low end of the used market - $3800-4k)>

I am willing to bet that if you had both cameras for ten years you would still have gotten substantially more keepers from the G2, because I doubt it really is a “matter of owning it longer” and, yes, the G2 does make us lazier photographers. There is a linkage there; it is just easier to get good photographic results with the G2, precisely because of the AF, the AE, the higher available shutter speeds, not to mention the one of a kind vf framing/auto parallax capabilities. It seems like a sin somehow, but there it is.

But, the M cameras are nicer as “things”, there is no doubt about that, so I understand your quandry completely, as I have the same one, minus the trip. I have both systems, and reason tells me that, if I was just concerned with photographic results, I would sell the Ms and all the lenses, and keep the Contax system, hands down. But, I haven’t been able to make myself do that, because I enjoy the act of shooting the M more than the act of shooting the Contax. Results vs. process.

I currently have the luxury of being able to keep both systems, but if finances forced me to sell one system off, the Leicas would go, in a heartbeat, because I’ve weighed the pros and cons for years. Just a personal opinion, and I can certainly see reasons for going the other way, which have already been enumerated.

Another suggestion for long term and travel system, keep the Contax, add the 35-70, sell off all the M items, and buy a Leica Q. Just kidding, sort of.

(and I hope it isn’t your only guitar Best of luck with your decision, and have fun on your trip. You’ll have a camera of some sort which is all that matters.

Keep my contact info if you decide to sell the G2 body and the flash I don’t have a black one yet

Yeah, you're right - all that stuff does make it so much easier to take photos. Also the reason I got so much better at photography when I got it, as I was shooting so much without second guessing what i was doing.

The shooting experience is so different with the Leica though, you're right there too. Even just cocking the shutter makes me happy. It's so stupid that something so simply can be so gratifying, but somehow it is. It's definitely a results vs process thing at this point. But I like shooting with both for their owns reasons, which makes it even harder.

And no, I've got a good number of guitars right now hahaha

Thanks for the input, something will work out one way or another.

I often struggle with the idea of selling extraneous gear and putting it towards a simpler but more expensive solution.

The problem is that I like to shoot with the gear I have whether intermittently or not. The cameras I have are just fun to shoot with.

The struggle is real.

So real. Even worse for me - I have to deal with choosing to keep extra music gear alongside photo gear, and I have fun with all of it.

Be a lazy photographer and have fun. Don't sell your tuned-up and fresh G2. There is nothing else like it in film land so try to be satisfied with the best, and use that thing until nobody is left to fix it. Then move on.

In your shoes I'd buy a scanner, as the lack of a quality scanner seems to be the main problem.

Don't sell the G2. Don't sell the G2. Don't sell the G2.

Hahaha thanks for the input. I was plenty satisfied with it until I let the Leica GAS hit me a couple years ago. Looking into scanners now and trying to work out all the math to decide.

 

[rubercoober]

You say you don't like the crop sensor of the Fuji system, but the X-Pro2 really is the closest thing to a digital G2 on the market. It's really stunningly similar, conceptually and design-wise. ...
If not, though, I'd say go for the digital M.

Definitely going to look into the X-pro2 more, thanks.

You won't. The editing is also super easy. Believe me. It may take you about 30 minutes the first time to figure out how you want things to look. Go with the less is more philosophy and don't over-cook the images (the way some like to crank on the clarity and saturation) and you're done. But I'm pretty sure you've already got that figured out!

M240s are now in the $3k range or less. So worth it compared to stuff like M10s, M9s etc.

Where are you? If you're in LA you can swing by and try out mine (I'm not selling!) just to see how you like it.

Yeah, M240 seems like a fairly sensible purchase in the spectrum of digital Leicas at this point in time.

I'm in Atlanta, I appreciate it though! I've got a former photo professor who offered to let me try his sometime, so I'll try to do that soon.

Keep the G2, you’ll only regret it... and you can’t get it back. You can get a Leica digital anytime.

Yeah, this is my worry...

I've never owned a G2 so cannot comment on that dilemna, but I tried the scanner route and it didn't really work out for me. Even though the maths financially was there in terms of the cost of the scanner + a bunch of films + processing vs. a digital Leica, I found the overheads in terms of time were acting as a dis-incentive to shooting. Finding the time to sit and make proper scans, plus all the little bits of time sourcing decent film and sorting processing, plus the delay just waiting for the lab, meant that I was using other lesser cameras to take pictures for more immediate results.

In the end I kept my M6 and a handful of lenses, and sold the stuff I really wasn't using, to get an M262. I did think about the M-D 262, but in the end decided that the extra flexibility in terms of setup, which is possible because of the screen, was beneficial, plus I liked the idea of the slightly lighter camera.

If 35mm film is high enough quality for you, buy a Pakon 135. If it isn’t, I’d consider looking at modern(ish) medium format options, such as a Fuji GF670 or Mamiya 6.

Truthfully if I had more time/better time management skills, I'd just invest in a scanner and spend more time in the darkroom. I just don't. This is probably the main reason I've avoided investing in a scanner so far. I appreciate the input, thanks.

Buy the M262. Decide about the G2 and/or M4 after you determine that you'll never want to shoot true monochrome again or after you realize that it makes sense to have both the M262 and "(Type 246)" variants.

If I had the disposable income, I'd buy it and decide later. Going to have to settle and rent one to see how I actually like it.

In terms of "keepers" my least used camera is the star.
A Rolleiflex Automat!
My Leicas are great but when i was pro, it was SLR to the bank.
Period of PJ and portraiture.
Fashion was always my medium format, 60's to 80's.
I have almost never sold equipment unless not used!
My Pentax 6x7 the one I disliked the most!
Selling the G2 will never get you much cash!
Keep it!
Enjoy!

I never allow film to accumulate!
Two films max!
I don't shoot more film, till all are processed.

Right now shooting K-1000 and Ilford Pan 400.
Color in Chinon K-mount! ($10 with 50mm Ricoh lens).

Good advice, just hard when I don't have time to process stuff and it gets backed up. Same thing could happen with digital, I know, but at least it's a matter of sorting through images vs driving to the lab/studio to process them.
Thanks for the input!

I would get a decent scanner as a pakon or noritsu. Eats a film in little time in "auto" and the results are great. Its like shooting good jpegs.
If you want to get some "digital-security" why not one of the fuji x100? I guess you wont get more pleasing results with a digital M and you have to look after the digiM all the time because its precious...

You mentioned that turnbacktime is a major disadvantage of film for you... so a decent lab-scanner would solve that. In about the resolution of th v700 (2000x3000) it takes you ~10min. per film, complete with negative convertion and auto-whitebalance and -exposure is 99% spot on. Certainly no 40 films on the row anymore... (In 4000x6000 the Noritsu takes then about 45min to an hour for a film of 36, though you dont have to sit in front of it that time of course)

You mentioned further, that you like the one-handed- and auto-usabilty of the G2. It think thats really a good point while traveling, because when traveling you dont want to be concentrated on shooting 100% but also on the traveling. So one handed use and some auto comes in very handy. You can not use a digital M one-handed, its even more dificult then on a film M, so better go for a lighter and more compact rangefinderstyle body as a fuji x100. I find it to be a perfect travel camera. Same zero-need for postproduction as with a pakon/noritsu-scanner if youre not into it, the jpegs are very good.

Of course i write from my experiences and i mostly travel (when traveling light, i guess backpacking would fit that...) with a x100 or a light m-body as a Bessa or even both... (a Contax G2 would fit that too ; ))
So this is at least a tested and proved solution for your demands.

All M-Bodies, Medium format, fullframe digital etc... stay at home. Just a body and a 35mm is plenty enough. Especially enough space besides for your mind to also enjoy the trip.

Enjoy your trip, be pragmatic about the gear and dont overestimate the importance of the photography in the trip.

I guess I'm not really too concerned about the "preciousness" of the Leica in the sense that insurance should hopefully cover anything that could happen to it, but also the fact that I already walk around with a Leica M4 without any trouble. Scanner is definitely a serious consideration at this point.

I was going to say, the one handed usability sort of applies to the M-D or the M-P 240, right? Aperture priority and zone focusing beforehand, with no shutter to worry about advancing? My experience with using the G2 on the run also tended to include using TTL flash to help ensure sharpness, which could be done with the digital Leicas as well, so long as the zone focusing is done beforehand and flash power is sufficient to cover the distance. It's really just the manual focus vs autofocus argument at this point, I guess. Do you find it more difficult to use one handed because it's heavier? Or some other reason?

The key is to be pragmatic though, you make a good point. X100 series is on the list to check out too. Thanks for the advice.

Yes, most definitely keep the G2.

Leicas and everything that goes with them cost a kidney to buy for each bit, but for all the GASsing and heaps of $$ you will spend, I'm willing to wager that you won't get any better results than you do now with the G2 and those wonderful G2 Zeiss lenses.

If you feel the urge to buybuybuy, why not get a second G2 or a G1? I use the latter. Have two, and five lenses. With a G1 around my neck, the rest of the kit (less film) neatly fits into a small bag. Couldn't be simpler.

So just what is wrong with being a "lazy" photographer? It means you concentrate on the image above all else, and let the camera do the fiddly bits for you. Most of us go this way. A pox on the guilt-trippers who tell us to go manual manual manual. Go off with you and play with your Kodak box cameras... oops, they were made for lazy photographers too!

Leicapixie's thread is well worth noting as a very apt viewpoint. Well stated, mercifully brief. She has it right.

Scanning can be as a PITA, but do you really have to scan every negative? Keep your processed films is archival plastic sleeves, keyword everything, date and caption the sleeves, file in a good dated sequence. Scan what you intend to work with.

The damn Leica GAS. I'm not really concerned with getting better image quality with the digital Leica, as I'm happy with the image quality I have now and if I can recreate that digitally with a Leica, that would be cool. They are so expensive though.

You make a good point as well - the price of a M-D or MP240 would easily cover 2 or 3 backup G2 bodies, and maybe even some lenses. And maybe a scanner hahaha. My concern with buying more into a dead system I guess is answered with that.

You right about the lazy thing, it's only helped me make better images. I just romanticize the idea of shooting full manual and getting great images (don't get me wrong, my M4 has certainly achieved that for me) and worry that I'm not doing enough to truly own that image if I didn't "work" for it. It's stupid, I know.

And yeah, leicapixie's point rings true - I'd keep it all if I could.

Another thing that would help not having to scan everything is making contact sheets, but that's even more time consuming cause i've got to set up chemicals and bust out the photo paper and dial in the exposures just right. I really do need to do better at archiving everything properly, luckily I'm only two archival negative binders deep and may be able to do it all in a day or two.

Good and easy. Life is too, too short. Drink good wine, good traveling, shoot more film, make love more often. All more fun than cuddling up to a darn scanner.

It's all about apply the KISS principle to your life - in every way, photography included.

These are probably the most insightful words so far, I really appreciate it. Thanks so much.

 

[struene]

The onehanded topic: Yes i mean also the ergonomic aspect. Even the analog leica is a bit too heavy and "slipery" to hold an shoot it longer just in one hand.
Less weight goes well -> Zeiss Ikon.
Added ergonomic grip goes well, too -> Bessa.
The digital Leicas arent more ergnonomic from the grip point of view then their analog counterparts, but are heavier and even more fat/thik, which makes it unpossible for me (and I dont have small hands) to hold and shoot them in one hand for longer time.

You mentioned Flash: OK i dont want to keep on coming back to the x100 but it has a very good Flash System. The integrated Flash quite usable (GN10? well at least its not too shaby) and the very cute little auxiliary flash FE-X20 is about GN20, saves the cameras batteries, and takes "normal" AAA batteries. thanks to the manual dial on the top i also use mine on the analog m-bodies, where it fits nicely - ergonomicly and look-wise. I actually use it quite often in "combat distances" as zonefocus "shotgun" flash on f11/f8. On the x100 and on the analog M-Bodies. (but mainly on Zeiss Ikon and Bessa, because of the one-handed thing... ; )

So again, just out of my experience, but maybe it helps...