Sell my Contax G2?

B

baron

Newbie
Local time
8:46 PM
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
2
Ever since I got my Canon digital (10D), I haven't been using my G2 at all. I have 3 lenses with my G2. I really liked my G2, but don't know if I will ever us it at all. Will there be ever a digital version of the G2? Doesn't seem likely, since Kyocera discountined the Contax.

Do you think I should sell the G2 and lenses now since it still have some value, or should I hold on to it for a few more years? How do you think the value of the G2 will hold up in time?

Thanks,
Baron
 
I would still keep it because you know you love your G system.
 
Awfully hard to say how its value will hold up over time, and it's already taken a severe hit on used resale value even though there are still some new ones to be had. Now would be a fine time to buy or hold, probably not to sell. I just bought into the system this year. But, usually, products of extremely high quality eventually tend to have admirers propping up the price, over time. It may very well happen there will be a resurgence at some level of interest in good film cameras, and the G2 would be a little more familiar to those coming back from digital. Especially if your G2 gear shows some signs of usage, might be a good idea to hold onto it. Surely there'll never be a digital version, that Contax chapter is closed. Why not shoot film and digitize THAT? What three lenses for it do you have? And welcome to RFF! :D
 
I don't think this is the right time to sell off a G2. It's just been announced that Contax is discontinued, so there are shipload of people who will think that all of a sudden these cameras will drop dead on them. So second hand supply will be large for a while and prices wil drop accordingly.

Just ride it out, and in a couple of years, there'll be demand again. Either to replace broken camera's or because the gear will reach cult status. (I think it'll parallel the prices of the Hexar AF, dropping sharply a couple of years ago when manufacture stopped, and picking up again more recently).
 
I thought about selling my Contax SLRs since I got a Canon D60 but the money I'd get for them and my 2nd rate Contax lenses (I've got the slower versions) doesn't temped me to part with them.

The G system is so different to a SLR, wether digital or not, that I realy like to use it and use it at least once a week.

I intended to sell my Contax TVS to finance a G1 but I just put a film in it :)
 
This is probably not the place, but I could use some advise. Can someone give me a short comparison between the G1 and G2? I have been playing on the fringes of the Contax cameras and just would like a user's opinion.
Thanks
 
Richard we have a sticky "which body thread" here http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227.
:)
But to answer your question, I just recently added a G1 to the G2 I have for some years now.

The main differences are in the controlls and the AF system.

IMHO the G2 is better for tricky pictures where you want to set the focus manualy or lock focus and exposure on different points in auto everything.
On the G2 you can focus on one point, hold the focusing button with your thumb, meter and lock exposure with the AE lock on a different spot, recompse and fire.
The G2s active infrared focusing is dead on in non existing light, the camera can focus on a plain wall which you can't see, where the G1 needs manual help, which is more guesswork than anything else.
The G2 is reported to be more accurate focusing the 90mm, which I can't prove before my G1 comes back from Kyocera :)

My intention is to use the G1 with 28 or 35 and the G2 with 45 or 90 depending on the situation.
 
Richard, the G1 is slightly smaller, enough to be an advantage. But the controls on the G2 are better... less modal in some places, moving the manual focus to the front where it is less accidentally moved, and that nice added focus lock button. The G2 has a lot of little improvements.
 
The same thought has occurred to me lately, been shopping some Leica stuff, and i really don´t need two sets, but then again if i´d just bought what i needed (or anyone else on this site for that sake) there wouldn't be much to talk about either :D

So keep it, the G2 is a marvellous camera, sharp lenses and well built.
Fun to use also.

Keep it , case closed .

Then lets do some window shopping at ebay .. that should keep the mind busy for a while ;)

vha
 
Thanks for all your replies!

I also believed that the price of the G2 is probably quite steady for now. It seems like I could sell my set for close to $1k on eBay, and I bought it used from eBay, so I'm not loosing that much. My set is still in good condition.

With the money I get from the sale, I figured I could get some nice lenses for my Canon, which I have been waiting for a while.

But it's just hard to let the Contax go, especially I haven't used it in 2 years. It really is a marvelous camera to use, great construction, and quality of the lenses are superior. It's kind of difficult to scan my film, negates any cost savings and the trouble as well. Well, the G2 might come in handy if I decide to travel to some wilderness for long periods of time and I want to portability.

By the way, is it bad for the camera to remain unused for such long periods of time? The batteries have been taking out.

Thanks,
Baron
 
I still think you get better quality images from Zeiss lenses and a dedicated film scanner! I'd keep the G2 and sell the Canon.
Click to expand...

Its sad, but even with the best Nikon/Minolta scan you cant get better results than the 10D. I had in the past the 10D, later I sell it. I bought the M6 and some months later I bought the Minolta Dual Scan IV, ok this is not the top performance in the scans... but my money its limitaded. Its fine for upload photos in Internet. But you cant get very good results on paper, if you compared with the DSLR of 6 mpx. One scan of 3000€ cant get more quality of one capture of one mid-level DSLR. The drum scan probably gets quite good images... but I believe that its very expensive for mine economy
 
I have a flatbed scanner that accepts 120 film. Using a 2400 setting, the file size exceed 37mb. The scan was good enough to make an 8x8 print without any flaws. I think dedicated film scanners are capable of equaling DSLR file from which to make prints. Even Pop Photography gave Minolta's latest film scanner a rave review.
 
Richard I dont have doubt that one flat scan like epson 4890 its great for medium and large format. But poor, for a 35 mm.

My Minolta is great, but you need to know how use it. If you use very capable lens and finally you scan the photo, probably dont have many differentes between the best performance lens and the good performance lens. Its my opinion.

I dont want appologies. :)
 
I think I understand what you are saying. Your experience with the Minolta scanner is unlike that of others who have reported on them here. Could yours be misaligned or out of adjustment? I'm thinking about buying one of these and am concerned now that you brought up these issues. Do you like the performance of the scanner? What size does a 35mm negative produce at maximum resolution? I thank you for your input!
 
In B/W produces 11/12 mpx archives. In color 40/45 mpx. I like the performance of the scanner in B/W, but in color or slide have very grain... I use the program of Minolta, no Silverfast or others... Its fast, and have nice internal AF. I like very much, but I dont know if other expensive scan can do bettter in prints... Because when you scan some negative you miss between one 25 % of quality...
 
Do you think I should sell the G2 and lenses....
Click to expand...

:bang: No.

It's probably the best rangefinder ever made. They'll come a time when you'll go back to it so keep it (and its super-sharp lenses). :D
 
why should you keep that stuff you never use ?
by the way i use my g2 nearly every day with a lot of fun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom