Contax G vs. Leica M Lenses...
Old 06-04-2015   #1
jarane
Registered User
 
jarane is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Contax G vs. Leica M Lenses...

Hi everyone,
newbie here (to this forum, anyway).

I have read tons of threads about people giving their personal opinions when it comes to Contax G vs. leica M lenses.

Im wondering if anyone in this forum actually did an objective shootout of the two optical systems. Not the cameras.
Same scenes, shot on the same tripod, same (or very similar) focal lens, etc
Several Google searches didn't bring any informative results.

Could be very interesting to see such a face-off.

Best to all,
E.C.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2015   #2
arseniii
Registered User
 
arseniii's Avatar
 
arseniii is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 372
Planar 45mm, sonnar 90mm and biogon 21mm n G-mount are the best lenses I ever had a pleasure to use. I much prefer G colors, bokeh and 3d rendering to any Leica lens. Zeiss is a better glass at a better price hands down. Leica is a better brand and long term support! Besides, i heard they now manufacture digital RF
__________________
More by korshe~ on Flickr and korshe.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2015   #3
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarane View Post
I have read tons of threads about people giving their personal opinions when it comes to Contax G vs. leica M lenses.
...
About 18 years ago, I had both ... Leica M6TTL and Contax G2, with a complement of lenses for each (16, 28, 45, 90 for the Contax, 15, 24, 35, 50, 90 for the Leica). The lenses were excellent in both systems, and mostly indistinguishable at most working apertures.

I found the Contax G very irritating to use, ended up selling the Contax system and keeping the Leica.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2015   #4
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,084
The 45mm contax G is an absolute honey of a lens. I don't think there's really an M-mount equivalent personally. The 35mm is a bit rubbish though..
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2015   #5
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,869
I have two Zeiss Planar 45/2 lenses; one for the G1 camera and one in M mount for the Leica cameras. Someone compared this lens with the ZM 50/2. The 45/2 may have come out slightly ahead of the 50/2.
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2015   #6
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
 
LeicaFoReVer's Avatar
 
LeicaFoReVer is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Turkey
Posts: 1,333
I have both systems, I currently use G-system after dumping the system twice due to faulty focus mechanisms. I finally found a non-faulty body/lenses and I enjoy using it (more often then the M-system nowadays). The photos coming out (by 45mm lens) are absolutely stunning. Check out the latest images in my gallery. I agree that G-system is tricky to use but once you get the hang of it, it is very enjoyable! I plan to buy a 28mm G lens.
__________________
Leica M6 TTL x.72
Leica iiif
Leica Elmar-M 5cm f2.8 (rare early version)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 LTM
Voightlander Color Skopar PII 35mm f2.5
Contax G2 + 45mm & 28mm
Contax RX + Zeiss 50mm f1.4
Olympus OM-4 + 24mm f2.8 + 35mm f2
Fed 3 + jupiter-12
Sony NEX 7


websites:
http://www.blurb.com/user/store/aykutkaraca
http://flickriver.com/photos/2851236...r-interesting/
http://sites.google.com/site/aykutphoto/Home
http://aykutkaraca.webs.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2015   #7
jarane
Registered User
 
jarane is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Thanks guys,
if any of you decide to do a face-off of the 2 lens systems (hint LeicaFoReVer), please post it here.

I think it would definitely be interesting to compare both.

Thanks in advance & all the best,
E.C.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2015   #8
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinlg View Post
The 45mm contax G is an absolute honey of a lens. I don't think there's really an M-mount equivalent personally. The 35mm is a bit rubbish though..
It also produces some of the nastiest bokeh of any modern lens. Extremely sharp yes, but I'll take a 50 cron any day.

The 90 is a good sharp Sonnar, but a number of Leica 90s, I would take before: Elmarit-M, Summarit, and the cron.

At 28 the Summicron is worlds ahead of the contax. At 21 the SEM is the gold standard today.

Contax G was very good effort yes, and lenses are fun to use today. 45/2 is very high resolving. But they have the performance relationship to the modern Leica lenses that respective prices would suggest.

No free lunch, sorry.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2015   #9
CK Dexter Haven
Registered User
 
CK Dexter Haven is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,444
I disagree, re: the 45's bokeh. I quite liked it, and definitely preferred that lens to the 50cron, DR, or pre-ASPH Summilux, or zeiss Planar 50. Maybe a toss up between the G45 and the 50 Summilux-ASPH.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2015   #10
ProviaFan
Registered User
 
ProviaFan is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 14
Yeah I completely disagree about the bokeh being harsh too. It is really smooth and pleasant to me. Hard to beat the 45 for the price it goes for now days.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2015   #11
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
I also disagree, particularly regarding the value statement.
__________________
Jeff
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2015   #12
jarane
Registered User
 
jarane is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
The beauty of a face-off would be that we could all view & review the results side-by-side.
The subjectives will always be subjectives, but the actual data would be there for all to analyze.
E.C.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2015   #13
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,602
The Planar 45mm f/2 Contax G lens is superb.

Contax G1, Planar 45mm f/2, Tmax400.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2015   #14
thompsonks
Registered User
 
thompsonks is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 751
Erik, it looks like you proved your point!

Kirk
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #15
jarane
Registered User
 
jarane is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Nice shot!!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #16
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,045
All G lenses are fine...the planar 45/2 it ridiculously sharp from f2 on!
__________________
M9 Vc 28/3.5 Ltm 5/3.5
Leica IIIF Black Paint
Fuji Gf670
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #17
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinlg View Post
The 35mm is a bit rubbish though..
I disagree.
My Contax G35/2 is superb.

Shot wide open, on Kodak Ektar.
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #18
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 75
Posts: 3,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinlg View Post
..... The 35mm is a bit rubbish though..
I shot with the ContaxG system for about 7-8 years. I had the 21, 28, 35, 45, & 90mm lenses. Probably 90% of what I shot during that time was with the 35mm lens. The 35mm was merely very good while the 21, 28, & 45mm lenses were technically spectacular by both MTF charts and much user opinion.

The old ContaxG website, which was up for about 7 years, was very active similar to RFF. It was much more photograph oriented than RFF but there was some gear discussion. There was essentially no question in the minds of the 35mm Planar users that the lens was very good.

BTW, the ContaxG site was taken down not because the user base dwindled but because the site owner and software developer, Glen Campbell, did not have the time to keep the software ahead of hacker technology. That was too bad as the site software was incredibly good. Photos were uploaded directly to the site. Photos could be rated 1-10 and frequent user generated contests were scored automatically by viewer votes. And the functionality of the site software kept Glen Campbell employed as a software development manager with some big time web companies.
__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #19
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,869
I have the 28-45-90 set of lenses, and each of these lenses is excellent overall. The 90mm lens is great for portraits. The 28mm lens is an excellent wide angle lens, while the 45/2 Planar is stellar. The G cameras are not of the same quality level as these lenses. I like the 45/2 so much that I got a second one in M mount. It is an amazingly good lens.
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #20
plummerl
Registered User
 
plummerl's Avatar
 
plummerl is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Michaels View Post
I shot with the ContaxG system for about 7-8 years. I had the 21, 28, 35, 45, & 90mm lenses. Probably 90% of what I shot during that time was with the 35mm lens. The 35mm was merely very good while the 21, 28, & 45mm lenses were technically spectacular by both MTF charts and much user opinion.

The old ContaxG website, which was up for about 7 years, was very active similar to RFF. It was much more photograph oriented than RFF but there was some gear discussion. There was essentially no question in the minds of the 35mm Planar users that the lens was very good.

BTW, the ContaxG site was taken down not because the user base dwindled but because the site owner and software developer, Glen Campbell, did not have the time to keep the software ahead of hacker technology. That was too bad as the site software was incredibly good. Photos were uploaded directly to the site. Photos could be rated 1-10 and frequent user generated contests were scored automatically by viewer votes. And the functionality of the site software kept Glen Campbell employed as a software development manager with some big time web companies.
Bob, the site has actually been revived, as well as an archive site with the previous contents (and 96 images of yours!).

Archive: http://www.contaxgarchive.com/

New ContaxG: http://contaxg.com/
__________________
larry
My RFF Gallery
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2015   #21
jarane
Registered User
 
jarane is offline
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Thanks guys,
I just did a comparison of UV filters and posted it here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...=1#post2494198

It would be nice to see something similar done with the Contax G and Leica M lenses.

Best to all,
E.C.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 23:50.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.