Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,928   Posts: 1,556,826   Online: 868
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32
  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    291
    Images
    10

    contax G2 any good?

    So I,m laid up in bed with a spot of back trouble at the moment and my eyes keep looking at Contax G2 kits on ebay at reasonable prices. Beautiful looking compact cameras with interchangable lenses. I know that the last thing I need is another camera but I can't help wondering, what are the G2s like to use and own? Have you any sample photographs to show produced with a G2 using B&W film? Thanks in advance.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    79
    I have one, and all I can say is that the lenses are as good as anything out there; I doubt there are any better, maybe different, but not better.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,455
    Not to be a complete idiot or anything like that again, but what does the camera body have to do with the images captured? The lenses do most of the important work, all the body does is keep the dark in and hold the film flat.

    More seriously, if you have a twin or doppelgaenger that has one, ask it about the camera's ergonomics. And the twin or doppelgaenger has to look through the viewfinder window with the eye (left or right) that you use. No one whose hands and face aren't much like yours can give you an answer that will be useful for you.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by bogeyes View Post
    So I,m laid up in bed with a spot of back trouble at the moment and my eyes keep looking at Contax G2 kits on ebay at reasonable prices. Beautiful looking compact cameras with interchangable lenses. I know that the last thing I need is another camera but I can't help wondering, what are the G2s like to use and own? Have you any sample photographs to show produced with a G2 using B&W film? Thanks in advance.
    Lovely cameras with lovely lenses - I've owned G2s for several years plus all the available lenses and the G2 combination data back/intervalometer.

    The first one of this Zeiss Contax G series cameras that I bought was a G1 and I still use it.

    I usually load one of these with E6 or C41 film and the other one with B&W film. I've had no problems with any of them - I've found the autofocus to be slow on the G1 - faster on the G2s.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    291
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Not to be a complete idiot or anything like that again, but what does the camera body have to do with the images captured? The lenses do most of the important work, all the body does is keep the dark in and hold the film flat.

    More seriously, if you have a twin or doppelgaenger that has one, ask it about the camera's ergonomics. And the twin or doppelgaenger has to look through the viewfinder window with the eye (left or right) that you use. No one whose hands and face aren't much like yours can give you an answer that will be useful for you.
    Point taken about the importance of quality glass, the feel,size and weight of a camera is also important to me, as well as the placement of the controls. Some camera bodies fit well into your hands and pick up to the eye better than others. Some bodies have brighter viewfinders, sharper focusing and a host of electronics to aid the photographer. If a camera body also looks asthetically pleasing to the eye, credit to the designer. I disgree that the body just holds the film flat and keeps the dark in, have you only ever used a box camera?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Westminster, Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,504
    The G1 and G2 were hot hot hot for a while. Many shooters were leaving their Leicas at home to use the Contax. Now I almost never see them 'cause of digital.

    If you have a Leica M system, you really don't need a G2.

  7. #7
    wilsonneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    578
    Images
    17
    [QUOTE=Dan Fromm;432090]Not to be a complete idiot or anything like that again, but what does the camera body have to do with the images captured? The lenses do most of the important work, all the body does is keep the dark in and hold the film flat.[/QUOTE

    I mostly disagree. Yes, in a very simple camera, you'd be right, but the G1 and G2 are not simple and they are rather unique. Their focusing and exposure systems are unique, as are their viewfinders.

    I thought a lot about buying one, deciding that of the two, I'd prefer the G2 for it's slightly more accurate focusing with a portrait lens and slightly faster advance. Eventually I decided that I'd probably prefer an M6. I'll go that way eventually. In the meantime, I am using an old IIIf as my briefcase camera.

    Neal

  8. #8
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,414
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    433
    I've got a G1, and I have shot a fair bit with a G2 as well. They're tempting enough to make me consider ditching all my Contax SLR gear, they're that good. Brilliant ergonomics and control layout. Everything falls to hand almost intuitively. I'll second the notion on getting a G2 over a G1. It is faster and more precise in focusing, and it has a higher flash sync speed, very useful with fill flash out of doors. It is bigger and a little heavier, but with my beefy meathooks, that would actually be a good thing, as my G1 feels a little petite at times. Right now I only have two lenses for it - the 45 and the 28. You can't ask for better glass than those. Take a look in my gallery for some color neg work done with the G1 - the color shots from Argentina were done with the G1. Also look at

    www.theflyingcamera.com/argentina.htm

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    I once held one, and I wasn't too impressed. The focus seemed slow, and the manual focus is fly-by-wire. There is no rangefinder or ground glass to confirm your focus.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,159
    Quote Originally Posted by reub2000 View Post
    I once held one, and I wasn't too impressed. The focus seemed slow, and the manual focus is fly-by-wire. There is no rangefinder or ground glass to confirm your focus.
    Hi Reub,
    Do you use a RF? It's a better at AF than MF, I think that's what it was truly meant to do
    The G2 is a very well balanced, handling camera, very smooth. Manual focus takes a little getting used to, I vaguely recall that it had a focus confirmation in the VF. Comparing the two is a little like apples 'n those orange things. The G1 is a little less sophisticated, but a great pocket camera.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin