First, I want to thank everyone for all of their advice on this question. This forum is really great -- very informative and friendly!
I have come to realize that what is going to matter most is what I think about the difference in optics and the other advantages/tradeoffs
of switching from Nikon to Contax. However, answering this question is not as easy as I had hoped. This is mainly because I've had a very hard time finding Contax gear in my area (and I live in Philadelphia region!). Even my local "pro shop" doesn't carry the N1. (the G2 was much easier to find -- more on this later.) Well, I finally found a place that had an N1. The salespeople had no idea about how it worked, but luckily I had read extensively on the camera so I was comfortable with it after a bit of use. I found it very intuitive to use. I then went back to the shop to test the lens. The next challenge was getting them to let me shoot a role of film with it. At first they refused (even though they told me that the camera was just a s&le and, if I bought it, they'd have to order a new one for me). After I told them I'd buy 2 rolls of film from them and develop them there, they agreed! (Amazing!)
The caveats were that I had to use it in the store only and could only shoot 1 roll of film. Here's what I did: I had my Nikon F100 with me
and I used the following Nikon lenses: 28-105 (my current zoom), 85/1.8 (which I also own), and the store's 28-70 AF-S 2.8 (which they also, at first, were reluctant to let me use). For the N1, I used only the 24-85. Everything was done under store lighting and handheld. I tried to match focal lengths and f-stops as best I could among the lenses -- shooting with Contax then Nikon. I took a series of the photostore clerk (he was quite kind and patient to do this) and a series of photos of the store itself. For each, there were about 4 pictures each (1 for each lens,
except in a few situations were I had out-of-focus shots). I used Fuji 800 Superia X-tra film (had to use high speed because there was no flash
for the Contax). After the film was developed, I labeled picture on the back with the camera and lens info, shuffled them all, then sorted them
based on preference.
Before I give my impressions I want to emphasize 3 points: (1) this was a totally, totally subjective test. I was not trying to compare anything but an overall impression of the lenses. Although I have been into photography for about 25 years, I consider myself to be, at best, a medium-level amateur. (2) I was hoping that I would like the Nikon 28-70/2.8 lens the best. This way, I could buy that lens and keep my
other Nikon gear. (When it was time (some day) to move to digital SLR, I am confident that Nikon will have something to satisfy me). (3) I have been reluctant to even post this because I realize it's so subjective, but everyone has been so nice to give me their advice, that I figured it was only fair to share my experience.
Here's what I found:
For pictures of the store clerk:
I preferred Contax in 3 out of the 4 sets (each set was a specific focal lenght/f-stop). This wasn't even close. I tried this several
times --shuffling and reshuffling, waiting a week in between looking at them, and each time, I picked the Contax. In the 4th set (at 85 mm F4.5), the Contax came out behind the 85/1.8 (but ahead of the 28-70 at 70mm when I included that one in the set). (There was a 5th set here, but I
couldn't use it because the Contax shot was not in focus. I also discarded one of the 85/1.8 pictures in another set because it was out-of-focus).
For the pictures of the store (1 set), I also preferred the Contax
I also took some pictures of a sign in the store with just the 28-70 Nikon and the Contax and for these I sometimes preferred the Nikon and
sometime the Contax (depending on the week I looked at them), so I'd call this a draw.
Why did I tend to prefer the Contax?: it was not because of sharpness. (For 4x6 prints, I'm not surprised.) It was the color and contrast of
the photos. I just really like the saturation and the shadow details with the Contax. Also, I did found that there was a much bigger difference between the Contax and any of the Nikon glass (including the 85mm Nikon prime) than among any of the Nikon lenses.
So, what I am going to do? Well, I don't know yet. For now, I am going to wait and see if Contax comes out with a viable digital (not to
buy it but to make sure that they are really going to be in the digital game) . If they do, I will consider buying the N1 with the hopes of
someday moving to digital. For now, I will stick with my Nikon F100 for indoor photos and fast autofocus situations and use my Contax G2 (which
I am the VERY happy owner of for the past 6 weeks) for available light and travel photos.
So, that's my very, very subjective lens test. I don't have a scanner so I can't post pictures, but that might not even help. I am
now convinced (for myself) that Zeiss makes a lens that I personally find more appealing than the Nikon lenses that I tested. I don't mean
this in any way to be an answer for others, just my own personal experience.
I have come to realize that what is going to matter most is what I think about the difference in optics and the other advantages/tradeoffs
of switching from Nikon to Contax. However, answering this question is not as easy as I had hoped. This is mainly because I've had a very hard time finding Contax gear in my area (and I live in Philadelphia region!). Even my local "pro shop" doesn't carry the N1. (the G2 was much easier to find -- more on this later.) Well, I finally found a place that had an N1. The salespeople had no idea about how it worked, but luckily I had read extensively on the camera so I was comfortable with it after a bit of use. I found it very intuitive to use. I then went back to the shop to test the lens. The next challenge was getting them to let me shoot a role of film with it. At first they refused (even though they told me that the camera was just a s&le and, if I bought it, they'd have to order a new one for me). After I told them I'd buy 2 rolls of film from them and develop them there, they agreed! (Amazing!)
The caveats were that I had to use it in the store only and could only shoot 1 roll of film. Here's what I did: I had my Nikon F100 with me
and I used the following Nikon lenses: 28-105 (my current zoom), 85/1.8 (which I also own), and the store's 28-70 AF-S 2.8 (which they also, at first, were reluctant to let me use). For the N1, I used only the 24-85. Everything was done under store lighting and handheld. I tried to match focal lengths and f-stops as best I could among the lenses -- shooting with Contax then Nikon. I took a series of the photostore clerk (he was quite kind and patient to do this) and a series of photos of the store itself. For each, there were about 4 pictures each (1 for each lens,
except in a few situations were I had out-of-focus shots). I used Fuji 800 Superia X-tra film (had to use high speed because there was no flash
for the Contax). After the film was developed, I labeled picture on the back with the camera and lens info, shuffled them all, then sorted them
based on preference.
Before I give my impressions I want to emphasize 3 points: (1) this was a totally, totally subjective test. I was not trying to compare anything but an overall impression of the lenses. Although I have been into photography for about 25 years, I consider myself to be, at best, a medium-level amateur. (2) I was hoping that I would like the Nikon 28-70/2.8 lens the best. This way, I could buy that lens and keep my
other Nikon gear. (When it was time (some day) to move to digital SLR, I am confident that Nikon will have something to satisfy me). (3) I have been reluctant to even post this because I realize it's so subjective, but everyone has been so nice to give me their advice, that I figured it was only fair to share my experience.
Here's what I found:
For pictures of the store clerk:
I preferred Contax in 3 out of the 4 sets (each set was a specific focal lenght/f-stop). This wasn't even close. I tried this several
times --shuffling and reshuffling, waiting a week in between looking at them, and each time, I picked the Contax. In the 4th set (at 85 mm F4.5), the Contax came out behind the 85/1.8 (but ahead of the 28-70 at 70mm when I included that one in the set). (There was a 5th set here, but I
couldn't use it because the Contax shot was not in focus. I also discarded one of the 85/1.8 pictures in another set because it was out-of-focus).
For the pictures of the store (1 set), I also preferred the Contax
I also took some pictures of a sign in the store with just the 28-70 Nikon and the Contax and for these I sometimes preferred the Nikon and
sometime the Contax (depending on the week I looked at them), so I'd call this a draw.
Why did I tend to prefer the Contax?: it was not because of sharpness. (For 4x6 prints, I'm not surprised.) It was the color and contrast of
the photos. I just really like the saturation and the shadow details with the Contax. Also, I did found that there was a much bigger difference between the Contax and any of the Nikon glass (including the 85mm Nikon prime) than among any of the Nikon lenses.
So, what I am going to do? Well, I don't know yet. For now, I am going to wait and see if Contax comes out with a viable digital (not to
buy it but to make sure that they are really going to be in the digital game) . If they do, I will consider buying the N1 with the hopes of
someday moving to digital. For now, I will stick with my Nikon F100 for indoor photos and fast autofocus situations and use my Contax G2 (which
I am the VERY happy owner of for the past 6 weeks) for available light and travel photos.
So, that's my very, very subjective lens test. I don't have a scanner so I can't post pictures, but that might not even help. I am
now convinced (for myself) that Zeiss makes a lens that I personally find more appealing than the Nikon lenses that I tested. I don't mean
this in any way to be an answer for others, just my own personal experience.