Why did you get a G?

[NoTx]

Here is a simple but funny question:

Why did you get a G?

Me? I grabbed it for the glass. I love the high quality from wide open and closed down. The photos look great.

[Socke]

I started into the Contax/Yashica mount with a Yashica FX-D and a Hanimex 35-70 zoom in 1982 or 83 and lost interest in photography around 1988 when I quit the navy and studied economy.
In 1998 a friend shot at a boat party with his then new EOS3 and I regaind interest and brushed up my FX-D.
At the lokal dealer I got a 139q with 50/1.7, on Ebay a RTS, a 35/2.8, 135/2.8 .....
One day I saw the G2 with 45 at my lokal dealer and it was a wonderful compromise between the 139q and my Rollei 35TE :-)
So I was hit by the next bug, since then I have 28, 45, 90mm and the TLA200 flash which I don't use often.

Hopefully I can resist the Zeiss Ikon until they bring a digital version :-)

[Bruce A]

I wanted first rate lenses in a fast compact body. My eyes are getting bad, ( doesn't middle age suck?), so the auto focus was atractive. I considered leica, but with the rebates for the price the contax was tough to beat. Got the whole system, 28,45,90 for what a leica body would cost.
The lenses are truely outstanding. I can't imagine the leica offerings are any better.
Once I got used to letting the little man in the machine doing the focusing and exposure, the camera works flawlessly. My only gripe is that I find it tough to use the exposure lock when held vertical.
Absolutely top notch stuff, and at the price a relative bargain.
Kyocera customer support is a nightmare. Just try to get some technical support out of them. They don't answer emails off their website, and if you try to call better pack a lunch and have comfortable underware on. I was on hold for over an hour before I gave up.
I just want to know if my old vivitar 283 flash voltage will damage the camera, and they have not provided any answers.

[furcafe]

When I got my G2, I was looking for an RF system that had some automation, primarily aperture-priority AE (AF was not as big of a deal) & the Hexar RF hadn't been produced yet!

[GeneW]

Originally posted by Bruce A
I just want to know if my old vivitar 283 flash voltage will damage the camera, and they have not provided any answers.

Bruce, digital camera users have the same concerns about the voltage of older flash units. I have a Vivitar 285 from years back and I'm able to use it safely on all my cams with a Wein Safe-Sync Hot Shoe Adapter that regulates the voltage into a safe range.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=245292&is=REG

It's small, not too expensive, and as a bonus, has a pc input as well.

Gene

[jdos2]

I got my first one...

I had always an interest in photography, but I couldn't ever make it work. Back in the Navy days, I bought a Canon AE-1 camera (not the program!) and started to read about f-stops, shutter speed, and so forth. I had bought a zoom (low quality) and a 50mm f/1.4, to mirror what my mother had (who had won contests) but I couldn't ever take pictures that would even come close to what she, or others did. The "secrets" of photography eluded me, and on top of that, based in Cuba, my film took over two weeks to come back to me. I wasn't ever satisfied with the results, and though I did try, I lost all my slides of that era, and not sadly.

Flash forward to the year 2000, and a girlfriend I was dating had the interest. She had an eye for it, and managed to take nice looking pictures with basic equipment. I started to do some research on the Internet, and gladly found Robert Monaghan's site. The storm had begun, and I figured I should start with Medium Format, having never heard of it before, and reading constant testimonials about the vibrance of prints, glowing colors, interesting DoF effects, even with cameras costing $20. I had inherited my grandfather's Polaroid 430, and fixed the battery. I visited the local camera store...

They were selling CASES of Polaroid that was out of date from the Cleveland Police department. I ended up buying three(!) for about $150(!!)

I started taking pictures, but I wasn't satisfied with the results from the auto exposure Polaroid, and decided that something else would give me better results.

I walked out of another local camera store with a worn out Mamiya RB with a 127mm lens, Polaroid and 6x45 (light leaky) back. It had such potential, but because of the light leaks, the camera and I quickly became alienated- the Polaroid shots on it, of course, were masked on both sides, so they were really proofs, not the finished project, and the shots with the 6x45 back all had streaks, low contrast, and were out of focus on all too many frames. That softness was a hallmark too of my previous experience with photography, and I wasn't yet satisfied. After more research, I found others who couldn't focus on a small ground glass screen, "seeing too far into the areal image."

So I continued my research. I found Tony Sansone, and got a Mamiya Universal with a 127mm lens, two Polaroid backs (gotta have one for B&W, one for color!) and a 6x7 film back.

Suddenly, everything changed. Prints were sharp. I used the Polaroid at a rate of boxes per week, and I learned and learned. Film, I didn't do as much with, but after figuring out what I had been missing (the ability to focus on ground glass, in spite of focusing aids) I really went on a bender of sorts. Film was still expensive, though, and the camera hardly portable. I began to fill out my kit, and got lenses in trade for my RB. I wanted faster lenses, I wanted a smaller box.

The GF of the time had heard good things about "Contax" cameras (and was referring to the older II, IIa cameras) and the store that sold me the RB was offering a G2. After reading up on it, and enjoying the reputation of "as good as Leica for far less money," I took the plunge and bought the kit.

I enjoyed it. I still took plenty of dud shots, pictures of things that weren't really photo-worthy, and the lenses never let me down. Beautiful 135 photography was possible, and the look of the lenses on paper and slides was simply beautiful. But it wasn't enough. I still shot out-of-focus pictures. I wasn't practicing with the camera. I wasn't reading the owners manual and figuring out the auto-focus point. I wasn't paying attention to the detail important for that particular camera. I became slowly astranged to it, continuing to delve deeper into the Universal, then other MF cameras.

I traded my first G for a Mamiya 7, and regretted it almost immediately. The Mamiya 7 was certainly competent, took amazing pictures, had a nice, bright finder, was easy to use, but was plastic. Rangefinder went out of adjustment. Didn't have any feeling of permanence. It left me in trade for something else (I don't even remember, now!)

The folks at the local camera store and told me of a special deal on a Leica M6TTL with a 35mm ASPH Summicron. I bought it, extending credit to the limit. The camera was... Nice, but it just didn't have the look of the Contax G glass. The downsides to the camera added up until I simply decided to call Igor (a local camera reseller), and found that he had a Contax G2 kit in black, and traded away the Leica for it.

I'm not rational (logical) at all times when it comes to cameras. They pass through my life, the Universal being the only one that I've kept for any length of time. I realize I spent more in $ on the Leica than that particular kit was worth.

I had to send the G2 back to Kyocera for a CLA, but otherwise, I've been very happy with it again. I don't use it enough, I'm sure, but it is used, and when I have a professional gig, it's hanging from my shoulder and taking pictures. It's about the perfect 35mm camera for me. Experience has taught, and I finally learned. Keep what takes the nice pictures. I got an RB kit with several lenses and backs (and bodies!) for less than I paid for the original way back (from the local pro-shop, they went digital) and those cameras were maintained. I always did like the look of the pictures from them, and they are my studio cameras. The Universals? I could sing praises for days, such beautiful colors, such saturation, such good wide-angle shots...

And the G2 fits perfectly in there.

Or was this too much info?

[SolaresLarrave]

I saw one around the neck of an acquaintance of mine and its looks left a mark on me (at the time a fervent SLR user). Later I asked him about the uses of the Contax for street and he replied with a very detailed and well-informed messsage. I sprang my first one and only G1 green-sticker body a few months later, as a kit, with the 45/2 Planar. The 35/2 came later, from a photographer in Seattle, for the incredible sum of $150 (w/caps & hood). Aren't I lucky?

Sure, that camera was the queen until the Leicas arrived... But I still would take it for trips: the titanium finish is really tough, and the AF is quite precise. My only objections: a relatively noisy shutter (well, even the Leica's can be noisy) because of the AF whirring, and shutter-lag. Otherwise, it's an excellent tool!

BTW, I got the TL140. A bit taller, should make red-eye less likely.

[gabrielelopez]

I alwais loved the rangefinder photography in general, even tough never had a real RF camera for many years....after some tryout I arrived to this wonderful G1 with a 45, and is totally love, I swear I prefer it to my old M6TTL for construction and versatility. I don't want (can't) deal with leica expensive glass..what I want, whatever name they put on the camera, is a fast-little-strong-no too expensive-with razor lenses camera..

Isn't a contax G just this?? I hope there will be a long future for this camera in market!

[nickchew]

Why?
Value for money.
;-)
Nick

[jdos2]

Feh.
Literalist.

:-)

[kbg32]

Speed - autofocus, auto exposure. I wanted to shoot chrome with my meterless M4s, but I found it too slow. My Ms are great for negative film - set the hyperfocal distance, exposure, and shoot away. I find the same satsifaction shooting chromes with the G system. The glass is great.

[kjoebek]

When I was living in Tokyo about 4 years ago, I had too much money and a nasty GAS problem. And then I got my self a G1 with 28mm, 35mm and 90mm. Now it's my slide-camera.

[canonetc]

Couldn't afford a Leica at the time and wanted something different. Many perks including AF, faster film loading, and the lenses were more affordable for really comparable quality. Many perks to having one.

Took the G1 to India when I was in denial about needed glasses to see with. Only through the G1 viewfinder could I see sharply beyond ten feet! Funny.

Moved from G1 to G2 after I got glasses and when my G1 developed focusing problems. Haven't used G2 much since getting the Leica, but I still like my kit (have black body with silver 28, black 40 and silver 90 lenses, plus TLA200 flash and G1 leather system bag).

Chris
canonetc

[JCdeR]

I like the touch and feel, not an awfull lot of plastic.
It's solidly manufactured
The lenses are amongst the best, and cheap ... well relatively

The negative points, I have certainly come to live with;

viewfinder to small, not a big problem
Manual focussing, quite liked it and certainly got use to it
Noisy ... well it does produce, but nothing out of the ordinary

The one thing that always bugged me was the easy movement of the +1, +2 0 -1 -2 knob at the top (forgot what it's calles) but this always accidently moved.

For the rest good camera, especially if you purchase seconds hand, it's a bargain...

[JCdeR]

BTW I don't have it anymore, I had all the lenses except the 16mm and I ended up using the 35 99% of the time ... Which I personally think has great detail and contrast, but quite a strange Bokeh compared to Leica's ...

[Lunatech]

I went with the G series for the glass and the compact size of the equipment versus an SLR.