What would you do?

T

thanatos

Hagakure with perfume
Local time
1:46 PM
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
209
Location
York, UK
View My Gallery
Hi guys,

I've been lurking for a while and you lot seem a good bunch!

I realise I'm going to get a load of different views here but here goes anyway.

I'm a keen amateur, have a Leica IIIf with 5cm collapsible Summar, Nikon 35mm SLR, and a Nikon D50 as my main cameras (and a selection of others including a Zeiss Ikon direct VF medium format) and want to get a decent 35mm RF (my Leica has a faint RF image and the film wind isn't brilliant, leading to occasional creases).

So would you go for a used Contax G2 (possibly G1) or a new Voigtlander R2A/R3A? I've reduced things down to these two for various reasons. Has anyone used both and so can give a direct comparison?

I've had a look at both so this is about usability as much as anything.

Opinions?
 
New R3A, absolutely. AF is a miserable thing if you're not looking TTL.


The G2 (and especially G1) is not quiet, the VF isn't very bright/large, and the camera is more just a glorified P&S than an RF.

Get the R3A and the 35 or 50 Ultron.

I had the Nokton and thought it was a good lens. Nothing special, but a good lens. Fast, at least.

Oh yeah, and welcome to the RFF.
 
Hi Thanatos
unfortunately i haven't experience with either Contax or Voigtlander so i can't help you but welcome to RFF.

Simon
 
Actually, I beg to differ. I've not ever used the R2/R3 but I had a Bessa R which was a bit of a disappointment for me (although most people on this forum will probably disagree with me). I just hated the sound of the shutter (the double-click) and the feel of the camera, didn't enjoy the large rangefinder spot, etc. The one good thing it had going for it was the brightness of the viewfinder. But I wasn't blown away by the quality of the lenses I had (Nokton 50mm and the Color-Skopar 35mm).

I have the Contax G2, and I must admit I am a bit of a Contax collector. 😉 The Zeiss lenses simply can't be beaten for quality and contrast. Maybe that's just me, but I guess you ought to try it for yourself. It's true that if you don't want AF on your rangefinder, then avoid the G2 at all costs. It has a manual override, but it gets a bit fiddly to learn how to focus with a focusing wheel. However, it is not quiet - the AF mechanism is fast, but whirrs noticeably, and the click isn't that soft either. But I am willing to wager that it isn't as noisy as the Bessa R's shutter.

I have a couple of other old, cheap rangefinders for when I want a "true" rangefinder experience, but I find the G2's lenses serve me well, and it's just an excellent camera - and its build quality is outstanding.

Of course, this view is purely subjective. Others will disagree with me. Ultimately, if you are lucky enough to try both out, that is really the only way of telling which is the camera for you.

Anyone want to buy a used Bessa R? 😀
 
thanatos

Welcome to RFF. I can't help you choose either of your choices not having used them. Have you considered a rehab of your IIIf if you are satisfied with it other than the two problems you noted? Just a thought.

Nikon Bob
 
I have zero experience with the Contax G series, and have only held a Bessa R3a once.. so take my opinion with a grain of salt

the Contax lenses are indeed among the best in the world.. I've seen many amazing photos taken with the G series, and I'm often tempted to pick up a G1 based on the image quality and sharpness

but I'd sooner recommend the R2a or R3a, as it is a true rangefinder, with less quirks and limitations

but either system can give you excellent results, so there is on wrong answer
 
Welcome to RFF, thanatos

I can recommend the Bessa R2A. Owned and used one happily until I sold it to fund glass. I miss it, though. Very bright VF, light, nice build considering the cost, reliable - in all an excellent body. It is sturdier in build than the R, as you probably know.

If a new or nearly new camera is more appealing than fixing your III, I'd have to vote for a Bessa.
 
Nikon Bob said:
thanatos

Welcome to RFF. I can't help you choose either of your choices not having used them. Have you considered a rehab of your IIIf if you are satisfied with it other than the two problems you noted? Just a thought.

Nikon Bob
Click to expand...
I have both a IIIF and a Bessa R. Of the two the R is more usable for me. The viewfinder is large and bright and I think (for the price) the R is the best screwmount rangefinder out there.

The main thing the IIIF has going for it is it's size. With a collapseable lens it is a good pocket camera.

I almost pulled the trigger on a G1 before I got my Bessa. The deciding factor for me was that I already had a few screw mount lenses and I got a really good deal on a used R and 35mm lens from a member here.

As MacCaulay mentioned you can't beat the Zeiss lenses.

Not much help, I know, but the normal answer to the "Which Camera" question around these parts is: (Everyone--All Together) "Get Both" 😀
 
Nikon Bob said:
thanatos

Welcome to RFF. I can't help you choose either of your choices not having used them. Have you considered a rehab of your IIIf if you are satisfied with it other than the two problems you noted? Just a thought.

Nikon Bob
Click to expand...

I second NB's suggestion. I have a IIf which also had a dim viewfinder, but I sent it to Oleg in Russia and he fixed it up good as new for $74 (which included shipping and new curtains). Click on the Russian Cameras link in the Cool links section for his website.
 
WELCOME ABOARD


One little note of unimportance:
Contax G is discontinued, Are they still available new(old stock)? As a matter of fact there is no more Contax film anything!
Bessa is alive and well and as long as Mr K is at it, there will be more of them(lenses too).
Both were/are made in Japan.
Kiu
 
Last edited:
I'd definitely go with the R2A/R3A. It puts you into the M-mount world ( and you already have Leica LTM glass that can be adapted).
 
I considered both of those cameras when I started RF shopping. Ultimately I went for the R2A because of the range of lenses, viewfinder, quietness (compared to the G anyway), and most importantly the focusing system. Manual focus isn't exactly a pleasure to use on the G cameras, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think hyperfocal focusing is possible on them either. The only plus I could see on the G1/G2 was the superb lenses, especially considering their cost. Finding excellent M mount lenses is easy of course though. Also had to ask myself if I'd miss AF if I didn't have it. I've had the R2A the better part of a year and haven't wished I had AF yet.

Just to be clear on a point made in another post, the R2A/R3A are battery dependant also. Not a big deal IMHO, but that's coming from a former Auto-bang-whiz SLR user.
 
I've owned a G2 and a R3a (also M2, M3, CL, Zorki and probally others over the years).
I found the G2 to be very quick in operation, the auto focus I thought was quite good,
but not perfect, I got a few OOF shots to a roll, but I could cope with that for the speed it gave.
The reason I sold my G system and got true manual rangefinders was the control you get with them
and they can still be fast to operate, even faster than the G2 if you zone focus.
I now have a IIIa, purely because it is the smallest camera of its type I have seen, and 35mm for
me is about portabillity. If I don't need to put the camera in my pocket, I'll take the medium format gear.
The R3a with lens did go in the pocket, but it wasn't comfortable, the III fits nicely.

Hope this is some help,
Cheers,
Andy
 
Thanks for all the comments.

I have to say that it was the quality of the glass with the Contax that attracted me (plus I like the looks, BION) but this is about usability and the R3A is looking like the favourite so far. Especially with the M-mount factor. It's still a toughie though - I'm a sucker for whizz-bang and good looks. Just ask my wife. 😀
 
i just bought an R3A...and it's an AMAZING camera. i honestly am hooked on the 1:1 finder to the point that i can't picture shooting anything else. that is a great feature that isn't discussed too often, or conversely has people saying it sucks because they can't see the framelines. i, for one, can. using both eyes to focus makes it even quicker, as the whole scene "snaps" into view when the rangefinder eye sees focus as well as the free eye. it also avoids making your eye tired from squinting so much. also...you can now get a zeiss ZM 50/2 planar to go on it (i have one, and it's amazing).
 
Oh lordy, lordy. My local camera exchange has a tempting Contax G2 system (body, 21/2.8 plus VF, 28/2.8, 35/2, 45/2, 90/2.8, TLA 200 flash unit, hoods, filters, Contax bag) in pretty good nick for 1250 GBP. My problem? The lovely Mrs Thanatos says, "Why not get it?"

Problems, problems (and 1250 GBP ain't small change, either).

Plus why tell me to get it on a Saturday evening when the shop ain't open till Monday morning? No heart, my wife. 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

8
Want Would You Say Are Sharp 35mm Films?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
4K
Freakscene
Freakscene
A
What would you do if you had to start again? - inspired by Harry the K
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
3K
boojum
boojum
C
A Little Story: What I Learned About Leica This Year
2 3
Replies
47
Views
5K
JeffS7444
JeffS7444
B
Do you use your camera's "silent mode"?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Godfrey
Godfrey
B
Returning (maybe) after Long Hiatus
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
Godfrey
Godfrey
Back
Top Bottom