Leica Minilux vs. Contax T2/T3 and Ricoh GR series

[jtdnyc]

Robert, I have to agree with you that the T2 has a terrific lens, at least from f/4 down. At f/2.8, the results I have gotten have been a little soft, but that may be because I end up using f/2.8 only when the light is relatively low, and thus the softness might be due to my own unsteadiness during longer exposures, rather than any shortcoming in the lens.

 

If it weren't for the shutter lag, the T2 would be, in my opinion, close to perfect as a P&S.

 

But I wonder what you mean when you say, "I use it only in AE mode; otherwise, it vignettes severely." My T2, which I bought new in 1997, only offers AE (Aperture Priority, and Program), with exposure compensation but no user-setable shutter speeds; and I can't imagine what the relationship could possibly be between exposure mode and likelihood to vignette. Care to elaborate?

 

Again, I fundamentally agree with you that the T2 is a great little camera and produces results that I don't hesitate to show alongside my Leica M prints.

[MTC Photography]

I have Contax T2 and Contax T3, I like the ergonomics of Contax T2, bright viewfinder, genuine thick titanium body (Unlike Leica Minilux with only coated titanium), and much more easy to operate than Contax T3. However T3 is smaller and has a visibly better

lens. The 5 element Sonnar on T2 has a slight color fringing, visible

on white object on dark background,the six element Sonnar on T3 corrected this problem.

[robert goldstein]

Jonathan, my mistake. I meant to say that I use the T2 in Program mode only, because it

vignettes severely in AE mode. It was very late at night when I posted that message.

 

Regarding the shutter lag, there is no escaping it, but I have come to accept it as one of

the limitations that are inherent in compact cameras. I do not expect them to have all the

features and functionality of larger cameras. For the same reason, I accept Program mode,

although I would much prefer AE mode.

[james_hughes5]

One important difference between the Leica Minlux/Contax T2, and Leica CM/Contax T3, is - the flash output on the latter cameras is related to aperture as well as focussing distance. With the Minlux and T2 the flash always fires at full power, and a suitable aperture is set according to focus distance. This gives accurate flash exposures (assuming you focus correctly!) regardless of subject reflectivity, but can lead to dark backgrounds as the camera has to set a small aperture if you're close to your subject. Suppose you manually set f2.4 on the Minilux and photograph something at (say) 1m distance using flash, the shutter itself acts as an aperture diaphragm and overides your selected aperture to prevent over-exposure. With the CM and T3, flash output is again related to focus distance, but the chosen aperture is also factored in. To demonstrate this, try taking a test shot at full aperture with a CM or T3 using flash, and note the brightness of the light. Then, (keeping focus distance identical), take a second shot at f8; you'll immediately see the increase in flash output. The result is that flash shots (especially those taken outdoors at close range) look more natural with the CM and T3. The Ricoh GR-1's flash works in a similar way to the Minilux/T2, but it's output is so weak it tends to underexpose unless you use very fast film. It's my only criticism of what is otherwise a very good camera. One other important Minilux/T2 CM/T3 difference is that the earlier cameras have active (infra-red) autofocus, whereas the newer cameras use passive autofocus - and therefore need a focus assist light. Both the Minilux and T2 can focus accurately in near darkness and on plain surfaces - though not to infinity of course - making them great for low-light work.

[marc_lieberman1]

Thanks for the infromative responses.