View Full Version : G2 vs Hexar AF
I know there was a similar topic before..but I have more questions so I want you guys opinion. I want an autofocus camera because I am really slow when focusing close up with my m4.
I'm think between the hexar AF and a contax G. How is the viewfinder on g2 compare to the one on G1? I have used my friend's G1 a long time ago, and I dislike it, too small and dim. The thing I like G2 better is the faster shutter speed and easier manual operations, as well as the focusing lock on the back(I think I would prefer that than locking focusing by half pressing the shutter release). Though the hexar has a slower shutter speed, I think I can solve that issue with ND filters, and the hexar supposedly has a good viewfinder. What do you think?
The G2 is a little better viewfinder than the G1 you used, but the Hexar's viewfinder is light years better than the G2s finder. Not only is it bigger and brighter, but it is also placed on the very outside left edge of the camera body to make it more comfortable when you hold it against your face. I love my G2 as well, and the viewfinder is manageable and you can get used to it, but the Hexar is a joy. I also feel more comfortable with the Hexar's autofocus than the G2's. It definitely hunts less and is very accurate. Of course it doesn't have to focus a 90/2.8 wide open up close, so it's not quite a fair comparison. The focus lock button on the back of the G2 is indeed a nice feature, but using the shutter button half way down to lock the Hexar is very intuitive - gazillions of SLR users have been doing this for decades - it becomes second nature very quickly even if you haven't done it before. The Hexar is also legendary for being quiet - check out the review thread on photo.net for some really good info on it. If I had to choose only one, though, it would come down finally to whether I could live with only one focal length. If so, I'd get the Hexar, if not, the G2.
In my non-expert opinion - perhaps in absolute terms the G2's viewfinder is not as large or bright as some but it took me only two half-days of shooting to get used to it. It feels very natural to me now. I bought the G2 despite the many negative comments one finds online about the viewfinder, the camera's noise relative to Leica, focusing issues with the 90mm lens and I must say that not only have I not had any problems getting well-focused shots with the 90/45/35 lenses, I could not fathom ever selling this gem of a camera. It grows on you faster than you'd expect! Of course, I love my Hexar AF as well :). My suggestion - get both, I doubt you'd regret it.
The G2 is AF, and that makes it less important to have a really big, bright VF. Of course both are, but I think the Hexar was meant to swing both ways more than the G2.
Oh well. I tried the G2 once, I liked how fast it was, how small, etc., but I did not like lots of other things. One being he viewfinder.
Hexar all the way
The G2 is a far better camera then the G1 only the viewfinder from the g2 is better and has a larger "look in". The manual overrides are better. Af is better So if the choice should be G1 or G2 go def. for the G2. But if you only want a second camera for specific needs I would go for the hexar The Hexar is more in line with the Leica M. By the way, although the viewfinder is a bit small I like the G2 viewfinder !
Arrgh! 2 to 2 now, that doesn't help me deciding at all, even though I was kind of expecting that. I still want to thank you for your excellent replies. I wish I could handle both camera's before buying any of them, but I don't know where there would be some I can get my hands on. Well, I still have a month's time to decide on which on to go for since I don't have the money to buy either one now, hopefully my GAS will die down a bit.
One question, does the G2's viewfinder show more than the image area and have framelines? I really like to look beyond the frame (one of the things I prefer over SLR's). If not, how does the parallex correction works?
The G2 and G1 viewfinder show a little less than what is on film and have no framelines. The viefinder zooms to the focal lenght used and is masked for paralax. It even zooms to show the difference in FoV when you focus from near to far.
It is as close to a SLR viewfinder as it can get on a RF :-)
It is as close to a SLR viewfinder as it can get on a RF :-)
That's something I don't really prefer :p
Thanks for the info ;)
DCourter
01-29-2006, 03:40
My failing eyes just forced me to make the same decision. I liked the idea of a the Hexar's stealth mode and more classic look. The G2's viewfinder and thumb focusing was a plus for me after years of SLR use. In the end, the decision was all about the optics. I wanted a complete system and Zeiss glass from 16 to 90mm was tough to beat.
I would agree with DC. Decide what you need lens-wise and make your choice based on that. If you want/need interchangeable lenses of diff focal lengths, there is only one choice. If you want/need only a great 35mm lens, then again, the choice is clear the other way. Good luck!
danielnorton
01-29-2006, 09:24
Years ago, just before they stopped making them I found a mint Hexar for like $250 and was about to buy it when a friend talked me into waiting and saving for a g2.. "gotta have a whole system"
I never did save enough for the g2 and eventually got a Konica Auto S2 to fill my "point and shoot" needs...
Well I finally got my Hexar AF a few months ago (actually that is what brought me to this forum) and I have to say I don't miss having a "system" I love the feel of the Hexar and using it, once you get past the quirks, is a dream.
The Hexar is truly my take anywhere camera and the lens is REALLY sharp.
So one more vote for the Hexar :D
Daniel
I have considered selling my Hexar (seriously) on at least two occasions but I always come back to it. If you are seriously considering a Hexar you owe it to yourself to get one. When traveling occasionally I leave my M cameras home and I love these cameras. I never regret that if I have the Hexar with me.
one more vote
I agree with Frank. It depends on what your needs are in terms of focal lengths. I have a G2 and love it. It's quick, the lenses are superb. You'll be used to the viewfinder within half a roll.
jpressman
01-29-2006, 10:35
I had a Hexar for a little while, but felt too restricted by a top speed of 1/250. Plus, the quality of my negs were just not as good as my G2 45. The viewfinder doesn't make a lot of difference to me, since with AF it's just a framing tool.
thedilettante
01-29-2006, 12:27
For me the issue is how comfortable you will be swapping back and forward between the G2 and M4. I have had a G2 for some years and think it's a great camera. Some months ago I got an M6 and I have been using it exclusively since then. Yesterday I was in Chinatown for New Year and shooting away with the M6 when I hit the end of the roll. It was very crowded and I didn't want to stop to reload so I swapped to the G2.
It felt so weird - the camera I used to love now felt completely uncomfortable in my hands. It was to do with the location of the finder - being more toward the centre than the Leica.
I am a lefty so that may have made it worse but the camera/eye/hands thing just felt wrong. In the end I put it back in the bag and reloaded the M6.
I've never used the Hexar but if the layout is more like the M's I'd go for that if you want to be able to swap back and forth without needing to "re adjust" to the feel. If that's not a problem then I'd go for the G2.
Ben
Good point, Ben. If you are planning on switching back and forth, the Hexar AF is very much like a Leica M.
Yeah, the Hexar's viewfinder is more like an M's, but the aperture ring on the lenses of the G2 are more like the M's too. The interface of the exposure system using the aperture ring and the shutter dial on manual can be used in a way on the G2 that is not much different than a Leica. The Hexar's aperture dial and exposure system is a fantastic system as well (especially the amazing Program mode), but it will always be a change from the M. So... once again, there are pros and cons both ways.
Yep. I think we're back to the needs in optics.
Yeah, the Hexar's viewfinder is more like an M's, but the aperture ring on the lenses of the G2 are more like the M's too. The interface of the exposure system using the aperture ring and the shutter dial on manual can be used in a way on the G2 that is not much different than a Leica. The Hexar's aperture dial and exposure system is a fantastic system as well (especially the amazing Program mode), but it will always be a change from the M. So... once again, there are pros and cons both ways.
How about Hexar's manual exposure? Can I set the shutter speed and change the exposure by twisting the aperture ring? I like to use handheld meter when the lighting condition is difficult for in-camera meter.
When I was looking for a 35mm point and shoot, I looked at both the Contax Gs and Hexar. I bought the Hexar because of the viewfinder.
Manual exposure can be done with the Hexar. There is a dial around the shutter button to set the aperture and two buttons to change the shutter speed.
The top shutter speed for the Hexar is 1/250s. I always use 400 ISO film and have not found this to be a problem in daylight.
The Hexar meter is very good. I usually use a separate meter with my other cameras, but I don't bother with the Hexar even with slide film - but then I am just using the Hexar for snaps. The Hexar also has a spot meter.
How about Hexar's manual exposure? Can I set the shutter speed and change the exposure by twisting the aperture ring? I like to use handheld meter when the lighting condition is difficult for in-camera meter.
The manual meter in the Hexar works beautifully. Between that and 1/3 stop increments in terms of shutter speed the Hexar even out performs the M camera.
Foon, the Hexar does not have an aperture ring around the lens itself like a traditional Rf. Instead, it has an aperture dial on the top deck. The shutter release is in the middle of this aperture dial. You can most easily use the Hexar in some form of Aperture priority by setting the aperture dial to a certain setting with your right forefinger and letting the camera set the corresponding shutter. One issue is that the viewfinder does not display which shutter speed has been chosen (but it does tell you if the speed is below handholding ability - and YOU get to tell it what speed that is for you!). You can also use the camera for shutter priority, but the best way to do this is in manual mode where you use the two little buttons on top to set the shutter and then turn the aperture dial on top until the viewfinder display tells you the exposure is correct. It does this using a +- in the viewfinder, lighting up one or the other sign when over or under exposed, but lighting up both when right on. Again, the issue here can be that you don't know ultimately which aperture setting has been chosen without taking your eye off of the camera and looking. The system works very well, is very fast and reliable, but it is indeed different from a Leica. If you are using a handheld meter, then you are already used to looking away from the viewfinder for exposure info and I would think it would easy to adjust, but it depends how entrenched you are into your old ways:)! Take a look at 1) Cameraquest's excellent article and 2) the extensive review on photo.net and take the time to read through all of the user feedback - there is an amazing amount of information there about the camera's functions and what it can do and how.
Thank you so much for all your excellent replies. I have already read cameraquest's article and photo.net's review. Like Frank said, I think it really depends on the need of other lens. This is something I need to think about for a while.
The good news is that you can't go wrong with either choice. They are both great cameras. :)
I agree, you cannot make a bad choice here. Two great cameras and either one will give you capabilities to take great pictures.
One thing I am worry about the Hexar now is that I have read some people saying that the eletronics don't work, and LCD only show e22. It seems to be a pretty common problem, and hearing the sad news of Konica Minolta. Do you think it will be possible to be repaired in the future?
I've never had to have my Hexar repaired, but I hear people talk of a Hexar specialist, Greg Webber maybe?, who works on these independently. Remember that Contax is now also gone, so you have the same repair issues with the G2.
amateriat
01-30-2006, 20:25
From my experience:
Contax G/G2: interchangable lenses, TTL flash.
Konica Hexar AF: everything else. Really.
The Contax Gs are crazy-noisy to my ears, which goes totally against my idea of how a a non-SLR 35mm should behave (my Hexar RFs are considerably more quiet by comparison), while the Hexar AF is likely the most quiet 35 in captivity - motorized or non. I lived and worked with one for five years, with a good stash of keeper shots to show for it. The Contax is not a bad camera by any means. But the Hexar is a different experience altogether, and a great one.
- Barrett
As another user of both G1/G2 and Hexar, I'd concur with Barrett's post above.
I bought my Hexar Silver long before I bought my first G1. My first impression is that G1 is such a solid, beautiful, but really noisy camera. I love everything but the noise of it, so if you are used to those 70s compacts as I am(I don't know about Leica, though), you might feel the same way. As for Hexar it's a different story, it can be dead quiet when it needs to be--thanks to the amazing Silent mode. I've read before some argue that Silent mode makes very little difference in noise reduction. This is definitely Not true with my experience.
If noise is not an issue for you, how about AF reliability? G1 occasionally hunts around, G2 slightly better, and yet neither can rival Hexar in this respect. Furthermore, Hexar has less shutter lag, if any.
All that said, I wonder if you can be content to shooting with just one focal length? Not me and that's basicly why I bought the Gs later. What a superb line of lenses...
Since you "can't go wrong with either choice", maybe you should get both! ;)
35mmdelux
02-01-2006, 07:21
"Though the hexar has a slower shutter speed, I think I can solve that issue with ND filters,"
It actually works the opposite, the ND filters would slow it down even further. 250 top speed is a serious limitation. You'd have to use very slow film and what would happen if all the sudden you found yourself indoors? Otherwise, nice camera.
For my PS, I've gotten used to a Contax T2 loaded with Ilfo HP-4. The other compartment of the DOMKE satchel holds one of my M6 w/ 35mm1.7 Ultron and Superia 100.
Yes, there're times, though not often, when 1/250 top shutter speed becomes a problem. When you want shallow DOF outdoor pic on a sunny day and it's ASA 400 film inside Hexar AF... can kind of solve it with an ND filter, yes, but remember that Hexar does Not meter through the filter, so you will have to do filter compensation yourself. Not very cool, is it? Now imagine if you shoot B/W and switch between filters with different factors.... :rolleyes: Therefore, the real solution is keep things simple and forget about filters! :D Anyway, no such problem/limitation if with G1/G2.
In further "defense" of my own G system, I would add that I prefer being able to read the shutter speed in the G's viewfinder, unlike Hexar that gets me to take my eyes from its VF to top panel for info...
As for the "e22" problem, I've never read about it before in local user forum. Perhaps it is less than common.
[QUOTE=35mmdelux]"Though the hexar has a slower shutter speed, I think I can solve that issue with ND filters,"
It actually works the opposite, the ND filters would slow it down even further. QUOTE]
I think you've got that backwards, 35mmdelux.
danielnorton
02-01-2006, 09:29
I think I've read something about this before when I was researching the Hexar, seems it has something to do with using a certain kind of filter that get's caught on the built in hood when focused at the closest distance, I've got a UV filter on mine and have never had this problem.
I also keep it loaded with 400 ISO and have never been in a situation where 250 @ 22 was not enough. And rarely use filters.
So that's what "e22" problem is about--Hexar AF getting stuck with certain filter at closest focusing distance? Then I've read about it on the net before.
So far as I know, it actually happened with some early models only. Not really common, and if that's the case, Konica would recover it and offer a free "spacer" to prevent it from happening again. None of the local users I know have encountered this problem.
What can I say, both cameras are trully a joy to use. If I had to pick one, I would opt for the G2 becuase of the ability to use more than one focal length, and more flexible flash options. Other than that, you trully can't go wrong with either. But they are really different cameras, and, if money is not an issue, both would be great to have.
G2Fan
Can't speak for anyone else but, after a few months of use of G2, I kept coming back to my M6 up to a point the G2 was sitting so I sold it. I tried my friend's Hexar and it feels closer to M6, but AF still turned me off.
Both don't compare to your M4.
If you go Hexar AF, do watch out the shutter button on Hexar can fail, so I heard.
Can't speak for anyone else but, after a few months of use of G2, I kept coming back to my M6 up to a point the G2 was sitting so I sold it. I tried my friend's Hexar and it feels closer to M6, but AF still turned me off.
Both don't compare to your M4.
If you go Hexar AF, do watch out the shutter button on Hexar can fail, so I heard.
I think you're right, I shouldn't be comparing them to my m4.
I took sometime thinking about my leica now, and I think I should hang on to it, there is so much I should be learning and not spending time thinking about new gear. :)
Originally, I thought we were comparing the G2 to the Hexar. If we are talking about the Hexar RF, than it's a whole different comparison.
I owned a Hexar RF for approximately a day. It compared most favorably to the G2. As a matter of fact, the controls were set up just like the G2. Except for the lack of auto focus, I couldn't really see keeping this camera. I have my CLE for auto exposure with my Leica lenses, and it is much more compact. The G2 is so much faster in every respect to the Hexar RF.
From uncounted forum posts, my own experience and talks with others I think it depends where you come from. A Contax G is totaly different to a Leica M.
The G is a hell of a snapshooter, just forget about metering, set it to a sensible aperture and remember about focus and recompose and you'll get nearly every shot. The lenses are first class and the body is well built.
You can switch off all automation, except film advance, a feature often overlooked by manual camera users, and have all the creative controll you want.
My G1 has a worn out pressure plate and the corners are polished and the only problem was a slow shutter response which got better with use. It had been sitting in a shelf for three years.
My G2 hasn't seen as much use as the G1 but I doubt it is any worse and only time will tell.
But they are not Leicas and they aren't made to be or to replace one.
Seems as if the Contax G system was made for me, so much so that I allways have a film in the G1 and can't send it to Kyocera to get the ROM updated for the 35.
I tried a M2, I like 35mm, recently and meterless wasn't for me. I'll have a look on a Hexar RF next and, hopefully, a ZI.
But if I'd been grown up on Leica Ms instead of Contax SLRs, I'm pretty sure I'll hate the Contax G .-)
sleepyhead
02-14-2006, 22:52
I have a hexar AF, but have not tried the G2.
Personally, I love the Hexar, but I think that its finder is over-rated. At least on my example the frame lines seem dim. Like others, I've on several occasions thought of selling the hexar in order to raise cash for, say another M lens, but I alway have stopped myself because the Hexar lens IS SOOO GREAT, I would go so far to say that it is better than the type 4 summicron that I've used.
The Hexar also fills a certain niche, namely, AF for when you want it (I find it useful for photographing my fast-moving small kids) and super quiet (also good for the kids as they tend to ignore the camera), and things like school performances where loud shutter sounds would be rude/distracting. The hexar also has the advantage of not saying "Leica" on it, so people don't know its a good/expensive camera.
As far as the 1/250th shutter speed limitation, I have been annoyed by that on occasion mainly due to the fact that I tend to use very fast film, especially in the winter here in Scandanavia, so on the occasional bright sunny day I'm stumped. Furthermore, the hexar's lens is most beautiful in my opinion at around f/2-2.8. Therefore, in my IDEAL world, I would have two Hexars, one with Neopan 1600 and one with FP4+ or Plus-X. I tried using a 4X ND filter, but it's a bit fiddly as the meter is not reading through the filter.
Good luck with your decision making.
I like the finder of the G2 very much There's nothing in the finder except the tiny auto focus brackets,no frame lines nothing to disturb a clear view. Just a composing window in a black invironment. A disadvantage it's a bit small.
I have both and recommend you buy both. They are different tools.
Keep Tri-X in the Hexar rated 320 or 400. Filters are a pain so avoid them on this camera. Also, do not drape your fingers over the meter like I used to do.
As for the G2, I would recommend the 28 and 45 lenses and a better flash unit than the standard TLA140 and TLA200. Socke has an older TLA30, I am looking for a newer TLA360.
Kevin
Yes, the flash. The TLA200 is nice but takes the expensive CR2 batteries. The TLA30 is cheap and swivels but is a bit big for such a small camera. The TLA360 has all the features one may want, including 2nd curtain sync, but is even bigger and very expensive :(
BUMP for an interesting topic.
I am a big Hexar AF fan. I have owned 4 and have experience shooting it in all sorts of conditions. I have experience using an ND8 filter to compensate for ISO 400+ film outdoors, and it does *kind of* work but it won't let you reach f/2-f/4.
The other day I shot with a friend's Contax G2 and I have to say, it was a really nice camera. The viewfinder was small but that is really my only complaint about it. If you are shooting the camera in low-light, the Hexar AF will be your best bet because the shutter speed limitation mentioned above will not hinder you, but if you are looking for a camera to shoot in all light conditions with the ability to isolate focus and blur the background, the Contax G2 (1/6000 top shutter speed in A-Priority mode) is for you. Also, I am a simple lens guy-- I like 35mm for 90% of my shooting, with 28+50 filling in the rest, so the Hexar AF's fixed 35mm lens is fine with me.
This being said, I am saving for a G2 because I wont have to switch films in and out all the time to make up for the shutter speed limitation and the 35mm lens for the G2 has less distortion.
I like being able to shoot one film speed for BW and color (ISO 400) and with the Contax G2, I will be able to stick to one film speed without having to carry around low-ISO film around with me to make up for the slow shutter of the Hexar AF if say the sun comes out.
klhbeetle
08-15-2012, 19:50
A couple years ago I purchased a Hexar AF and a Contax G2 with it's 35/2 planar (plus 21, 28, 45) within a few weeks of each other in order to test them both out. I sold the Hexar shortly thereafter. The Hexar is quieter without a doubt. Yes, the viewfinder is bigger, but when you take into account the framelines cropping the center of the frame, I'd put them at the same size. What it came down to for me was the image. The Hexar, while very sharp with fine color rendition, didn't have quite the same tonal quality to it's images. My photos looked flatter, less 3-dimensional than with the G2's 35mm Planar. Hexar photos look similar to those taken with my Contax T3, also an excellent camera/lens, but not quite as pleasing (to me) as the G2. I wonder which the OP chose?
matt_mcg2
08-27-2012, 07:19
I had the G1 and the Hexar AF. I sold the G1 and kept the Hexar, which probably encapsulates my feelings. I much prefer the Hexar finder, and I disliked the Contax noise. I'd used other autofocus/autowind (SLR) type cameras of a similar vintage before so I was surprised at how noisy the Contax was by comparison.
That said, looking back, the photos I took with the Contax were excellent and for all the brilliance of the Hexar for ergonomics, if I had to pick one focal length, it'd probably 45 over 35. So, if someone had made a Hexar AF with a longer lens ...
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.