Why Contax and/or Zeiss at all?

[Guest]

hello all,

I've spoken to some people in vrious camera shops, some of whom have said that zeiss lenses appeal to a 'certain market or photographer' - on further probing, i don't really get any answer from them. from doing some research, these lenses seem to produce contrasty and sharp images, using high quality material. to explain my position, i'm seriously considering building up a new manual focus system, and one of my main considerations is a contaxt system, with an RX or Aria. Can anyone explain the type of image zeiss produces, and/or how this is different from, for ex&le, canon fd lenses, which i use now?

thanks,
Marc

 

[Guest]

A seldom considered difference between the Contax G and the Leica M system is weight.

Stated below are the weights of two comparable, ready-to-operate systems.

Contax G2, Biogon 28, Planar 45, Sonnar 90, TLA 140 = 1220 g
Leica M7, Elmarit 28, Summicron 50, Elmarit 90, without flash! = 1860 g
(all Leica lenses in black, titanium is beyond)

This, among other things, mostly lacking fill-flash capabilities, detains me from travelling to Leica.

Till

 

[Guest]

For me, the cost would be the main difference! The M7 has precise focussing, the viewfinder is bright & tracks perfectly, and the stealth shutter is handy for candid's. The G is AF and noisy. But it isn't as simple as that! I still like my G2!
William

 

[Guest]

Hi Till. For me, the cost would be the main difference! The M7 has precise focussing, the viewfinder is bright & tracks perfectly, and the stealth shutter is handy for candid's. The G is AF and noisy. But it isn't as simple as that! I still like my G2!
William

 

[Guest]

>Hi all - and consider: my AGFA-Klack of 1958 is even much more lightweight!!! Everybody has his own criteria... even depending of situation. In some situations I like heavy weight! Herbert

 

[Guest]

> Till wrote:

This among other things, mostly lacking fill-flash capabilities, detains me from travelling to Leica.

Till,

At the risk of asking a question that has been hashed over quite a bit, how do you get fill flash with the G cameras. I use a TLA 140 mounted on the camera (can you mount it off the camera?) and simply rely on the auto settings since I am unaware of flash settings that allow one to decrease flash intensity. But when I do this, the flash is often too intense.

As for fill flash on the M6, although I have an M6TTL, I do not have a flash setup, but I know there is one. Why do you say there is no fill flash cap ability? Does it also lack adjustment?

And while I quite agree that the Leica is heavier, I prefer the Leica because I like knowing that I am in focus (the two images come together and you know where you are), and I like controlling every aspect of exposure. On the G1, manual focus is cumbersome, and even when you use it, you dont actually see anything getting focused. And the metering is, frankly, a mysery to me. I don't know what the meter is measuring--I assume it is center-weighted--and occasionally I will get overexposure. I am sure this is operator error, but the point is that to me, the M6 is just easier to use because it is up front about both focusing and metering. There is something about keeping it simple-stupid as on the M6 that is appealing.

Bill Lafferty Pittsburgh

 

[Guest]

> As for fill flash on the M6, although I have an M6TTL, I do not have a > flash setup, but I know there is one. Why do you say there is no fill > flash cap ability? Does it also lack adjustment?

Any camera can use fill flash, but the Leica SF-20 does have the ability to reduce the output of the flash, and does fill flash very well.

Austin

 

[Guest]

Bill Lafferty says:

>>>I prefer the Leica because I like knowing that I am in focus (the two images come together and you know where you are)

Bill,
I have been worrying about the focus problem all the time because I am a long term SLR user and wanted to swith to RF camera. With this swith you will lose the "I am sure this is sharp because I see it is" viewfinder.
I lasted a while before I realized that the Leica M has no advantage whatsoever in this area compared to the Conatx G.
What you see in the Leica finder is exactly what you describe: two images coming together. But what you do not realise at first is that these images are steered by a complex mechanical system. If this mechanical system is not 100% well adjusted you will still see the two images coming together but the point of focus is wrong.
Add that to the well known (but almost never mentioned by Leicaphiles) fact that you have your Leica M and it's lenses adjusted every few years to be sure the focus point is allright (not to mention the shutter adjustment at the highest speed) and it is obvious that a Leica M will not give you more focus "assureness" then a Contax G.
In both cases you have to rely on the camera adjustments (whether mechanical or electronic) for good focusing and in both cases you cannot be sure the focus point is exactly right until you have seen the slides.

This was my eyeopener and I now own a G-2 with 21/28/45/90 and soon the 35 too for the price of a Leica M6 with a summicron 50 mm.

Marc-paul

 

[Guest]

I lasted a while before I realized that the Leica M has no advantage whatsoever in this area compared to the Contax G...

The Leica M6 (and M2, M3, M4, M5) and MP series cameras DO have several advantage of the G series (of which I own a G1 body and 3 lenses).

1)More lenses 2)Faster lenses 3)Ability to fire the shutter without batteries (I have learned to carry several spare batteries because the G just up and dies at inconvenient moments without warning) 4)Much brighter finder 5)DOF markings on lenses 6)Plain old hand-made kewlness 7)Very quiet operation 8)Computer chips aren't thinking for you

The M7 of course has the same finder and lenses but you give up the ability to fire the shutter AT ALL SPEEDS when the batteries die, and the shutter speed can be set automatically by computer (like the G series).

The G1 and G2 are great cameras, take pictures at least as good as the Leica M series because the lenses are terrific, and you get faster shutter speeds and the ability to catch more shots on shorter notice. Focus can be a problem because you aren't always sure you are getting the focus point where you want it, and you need to memorize DOF for the lenses or keep a card with DOF around.

The argument about the RF on the Leica getting out of alignment is kind of silly. If you should be so unlucky to drop the camera, take a roll with it and see if the focus is where it should be. The RF alignment isn't just going to suddenly go away, the mechanisms for the M rangefinders have been refined over the last sixty years or so and they work well. I SERIOUSLY doubt you will find a G2 in operating condition in 40 years, but check out Ebay. You can still find great condition manual Leica M bodies of all stripes, as well as the earlier Leica type III bodies (etc).

Dana Curtis Kincaid

 

[Guest]

As a very long time Leica user I have owned models 111a, 111b,M3,M4,CL and currently M6, I can honestly say I have never had any problem with r/f alignment. Neither am I aware that there are "recorded" problems in this area.
Colin Elliott