Lens contrast color fidelity and resolution

[Guest]

Shaun,

The 90 Sonnar is a very sharp lens, and it will challenge the G1's focusing system in less than ideal conditions. Even the G2's more sophisticated focusing system can be fooled in some situations. But I like the lens a lot. (I have the G2.)

The 28 is a good all-around choice for travel and landscapes, and it's sooo compact. I have to admit though, that I've used mine a lot less after getting the 21, which is probably my favorite G lens.

Because you have the 35 already, I'd get either the 90 or the 21 as my second lens.

--Rick

 

[Guest]

You'll probably get a lot of opinions on the G1-90mm question. I have indeed found that combination to be somewhat sub-par, even when used carefully. I've seen long threads on the subject, and many *insist* that the only time it's a problem is at nearest focus and wide open. I have found it to give trouble in many situations, however it's possible that there is something the matter with my G1. Adding a 28 may be a little redundant, since you have the 35, but I must say I am so impressed with the results I see from the G1/28 combination. I'd describe the 45 as somewhat "hard" in rendition, with very strongly rendered out-of-focus areas that are not exactly to my taste, but there is no question that the lens has astounding test results and sells for a good price by comparison with some of the others, and it boils down to what qualities you prefer in your images, I suppose. That's my two cents. The 28 biogon pictures just look beautifully balanced and natural to me. Chas.

 

[Guest]

My G1 and 90mm work together great. The focusing is indeed only a problem at close distances and large apertures as some of the other comments said. For portraits it is excellent, for ex&le at 1.5 m (4-5 feet) at f5.6 or f8 with the TLA200 flash and Agfa 160 portrait film i got incredible results with tripod. Vivian

 

[Guest]

>[I have both the G2 and G1 and find that the G2 handles the 90mm much better. This is one lens I could not live without even though I am a wide angle user for the most part. When everything comes together the images are incredible. I have the 35mm also and in hindsight would have maybe preferred the 28mm. Too bad there is not a 24mm available. > Barry

>]

 

[Guest]

For nearly 18 months I am the proud owner of a Contax G2 with 21/28/45/90 mm lenses. I will describe my experiences with the lenses for the convenience of to-be-users.

As I always use slow slide film (mainly Fujichrome Velvia, Provia 100, Astia and Agfa Scala) projected by a Leitz Pradovit projector with a super colorplan lens high quality lenses are important. The major reason for me to switch from my Olympus OM gear to the Contax system was the lens quality. The Olympus lenses did not deliver the quality that I was expecting using these films (which evidently bring out all the good AND bad performances of the used equipment).

When compared with the Olympus primes I have (2,8/28---1,4/50---2,8/100---4/200) the Zeiss lenses are definitely better. This can be seen by anybody (when using the right projection equipment). The Zeiss lenses are sharper, more contrasty and give a more “plastic” image on the slides. It is more real life then I have ever seen before! Another plus for the lenses is that they do not care when used against strong light (or even with the sun in the image field). This is incredible and something that the Olympus lenses (although well coated) cannot achieve.

Concerning the image quality I do not see any difference between the lenses. This means that I can not see any difference between the 45 mm and the 28 mm for instance. Others do seem to see this however but I cannot confirm these statements to be true. All lenses are in my opinion remarkably good.

Built quality of the lenses is also very good. They are rugged and have full metal tubes and bayonets. The diaphragm ring does not click on half stops (which is very inconvenient when using slide film) so this can be improved.

Another omission is when using the metal Contax hoods with the lenses. It is not only that they are very expensive (the hoods and hoodcaps) although beautifully built, but when using them some vignetting of the viewfinder occurs with the 28/45 mm lenses. The 45 mm only has some vignetting when used on short distances, but the 28 mm has vignetting on every distance which I find a design flaw which is very annoying.

What you must get used to is using the 21 mm. It has a separate viewfinder which has to be put on the hot shoe (making it unusable for a flash; but who will use flash with a 21 mm on the camera?). This is a good finder but it is giving some parallax problems on close distances you must be aware of. And of course you miss all the other finder info which can be troublesome. As a wide angle fan I love the 21 mm which has (IMHO) no competitors when it is coming to producing high quality images.

Marc-paul