If you just could have only one lens for your Contax G camera... What would it be?

[www.withheart.ca]

So I've gotten tired of lugging all my SLR gear around and have come across

the Contax G1 camera. ;)

 

So here's my question: If you could only bring one lens with you on your daily

adventures around life what would it be? I can't decide which one to settle

on. I'm tempted to do either 35mm F2 only or to go with 28mm & 90 mm set up.

Which lenses live on you cameras?

[wr1000]

I had the Contax G for a while but I just could not live with the way the rangefinder worked in manual focus. Other than that, I loved it and used the 50mm with it. It performed like a champ on a pretty big shoot I had (used it next to a Canon Digital SLR).

 

If you can get over the focus limitations, I say that the 21, 50, and 90 would be my choices if I were still in it. They can all three be had for about the price of one new APSH Leica lens today.

[kparratt]

Michelle, ...similar situation, if I had to go out and work with only one lens on the Leica, it would be a 35mm.

 

Kevin

[jeff_drew4]

I have the G2 and either the 45mm f/2 Planar or the Vario-Sonnar 35~70 are my faves! If ONLY one lens, then the Vario-Sonnar.

[wr1000]

Mmm...correction...it was the 45mm f/2 that I used.

[michael s.]

When William referred to "the 50mm" above, I'm pretty sure he meant the 45mm f/2.0 (there actually is no G-mount 50mm lens). I agree with him. It's an excellent lens.

[michael s.]

Ha :-)

[wr1000]

Thanks, Michelle...as I said, it was the 45mm after all. It sure was sharp, but like I said, there was no good manual backup for focus. Has anybody else had that problem with the G, or was I too nit-picky?

[andrew1]

I always have a camera with me, but it's never a Contax G. I usually have a Leica with a

50mm attached with me. If I don't want to carry a big camera, (Leica M's are big cameras

for me, in 35mm terms- one reason I don't like the G cameras) I might have an Olympus

XA with it's tiny 35mm lens, or sometimes I'll carry an old fixed lens RF with a 40mm.

<p>Most of my shooting is done with relatively normal focal length lenses. When working

(shooting events or documentary stuff) with my RF cameras, I tend to use two bodies and

four lenses- 21mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm. I'll mount two lenses, and it might be any

of these two, depending upon the situation; most often I'll have a 50 on one body, and

either the 21mm or the 90mm on the other body. My 35mm seems to be my least used

lens, but it comes out when I'm working close and don't want to go to wide angle. For

everyday walking around, I'll take just one, or possibly two of these, and one will almost

always be a 50mm.

[stuart_richardson]

From what I have gathered about the G system, the 28mm and the 45mm are the best lenses.

The 35/2 was not supposed to be one of the stronger ones. My own experience with the

45mm lens was that it was great. The 90/2.8 is also quite nice. So if I were going to get just

one lens, I would get the 45/2, or with a two lens kit, the 28 and 90 would probably work

well together, although there is a bit of a hole in the normal range...<P>William -- I pretty

much shared your experience. I had a G1 for a little while, but I could not get on with it. I just

liked the Leicas better. The difference in the noise, the finders and the focusing were the deal

breakers for me.

[michael s.]

My only experience has been with the G2, and I agree with you (again), William.

 

The G2 has the manual focusing wheel which nominally permits manual focus, but in practice, I did much better thinking of it as an autofocus camera. When used that way, it's quite fast and capable of producing excellent photos. The center af point (its only af point) is small and I think very reliable.

 

And again, I believe that 45/2 lens takes a back seat to nobody ... and I mean nobody. :-)

[wr1000]

Thanks (Michael) (sorry I called you Michelle).

[www.withheart.ca]

Andrew I also feel that the Leica m's are too big. Mainly too Heavy ;). Anyway which Leica were you suggesting? I'd be curious to take a peek at its specs.

[asher]

First of all, the G2 that I had was at least as big as an M, particularly a later M. But they're

both great systems with wonderful glass.<p>

As far as G2 focusing, it can be frustrating. Have a look at

<a href="http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000378.html">this link: Fastest Thumb in

the west</a><p>

I loved the Zeiss 35mm f2 + Tri-X combo. Just my personal preference. Shot with a G2 +

Zeiss 35mm f2 lens on Tri-X, developed in D76 n+1:<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5510223-md.jpg"><br>

Just shoot lots, regardless of what you choose (see the Winogrand video in the earlier post).

[charles_hess2]

I used a G1 then G2 for the past 10 years, the 45/2 an excellent lens. I also love the 90/2.8, but for a 1 lens set-up, the 45 for sure.

[alvin_hear]

</p><a href="http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/contaxg.htm">Contax G Lenses page</a>

[gaijin]

I do have only one lens for my Contax G camera and it is a 35/2 Planar.

[nels]

Forget this film nonsense and get a Canon G7.

[stan_belyaev]

get planar 35/2, while they are available.

 

the lens is very good. I compared it with my leica summicron 35/2 asph and i found no difference when shooting real life objects (not brick walls)

 

Those who say something negative about this lens usually have never seen one. It is virtually impossible to flare planar. It gives zero chromatic abberation. It is perfectly usable at 2.0. Bokeh is fine. Contrast is very good. The color is beautiful. For $250 one can not find a better 35mm lens.

 

Get Canon G7..... It is either a joke or delusion. Disregard this advise.

[stan_belyaev]

Another vote for Contax VS35-70. The lens is a killer.

Get it if you don't mind using a slower lens.

[mark_amos]

As someone who uses Leica M and has used plenty of other cameras including the popular classic fixed lens point and shoots (but has not used the Contax G), I'd have to say that unless you know you like portraits over wide angle architecture, or visa versa, you can't beat a true normal like a 40, 43, or 45 as your one lens + I have read so many phenomenal reports about the Zeiss 45 f2 Planar, and its small as well, as I recall. I have loved my 40 cron on my Leica CL, but I gave in to getting an M6 and a bit of the more-lenses-desire set in, but at least it was partly driven by actual work needs rather than just random "un-focused" experimentation (but there is nothing wrong with that either). I think the 45 zeiss would be great.

[lawrence_plummer]

For my G2's, I would have a tough time choosing between the 21mm, 28mm and the 45mm. The 21 is probably my favorite, but the 28 and 45 tend to get used more often. With the G1, I would make sure it has the green label, indicating that it can use the 21 and 35.

[andrew1]

MIchelle- I use a pair of M3's- talk about heavy! :0 <p>The specs are pretty damn simple,

which is another thing I think the Leicas have over the G. ;) The lens avaibility for Leica M/

LTM

might be

either an asset or a liability, depending upon your point of view, but you will probably settle

into the basic lenses with either system.

[archie_alcantara1]

I would recommend 45mm f2 for its sharpness. Kinda funny, OP asked for 'which contax lens....' but a few started talking about Leicas.....geez.

[kparratt]

I mentioned my Leica because it's a 'rangefinder' and with only one lens it would be an F2 35mm, which is still on topic. But I do agree with Archie's comment. It's amazing how throughout this whole photo.net community, there are so many males who simply have to tell us what they have without regard to the original question, ... like deviants waiting in the shaddows for the next opportunity to flash their wares.

 

However, following on from Andrew D's more relevant response, I too have an M3 which, for it's ruggedness, certainly is heavier than your Contax. I was interested in the Contax G when it first appeared, but what is really grabbing interest now is the Zeiss Ikon http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B58B9?Open not only because of some of the same magnificent optics as in your Contax system, but that Zeiss Ikon is completely interchangable with the Leica M equipment I already have. Even the Zeiss SW, which is the Ikon without rangefinder, which fits beautifully into the copy equipment I use. The early Leica M cameras have been burdened with collector and fashion status, thus inflating the going prices well beyond my interest.

 

I had been envying an offer in Germany of a Contax G Zeiss Biogon lens specially fitted with a Leica M mount. Not needed now, because the same is available as standard from Zeiss at a fraction of the price.

 

Also interested in Archies recommendation of the 45mm F2, I would like to see the out-of-focus qualities of those Zeiss lenses. The 45mm is a very nice focal length, just that little bit more open than 50mm. I mention the out-of-focus qualities, something that is discussed more amongst Japanese photographers than anywhere else, and they even have a name for it, which transcribes as "Bokeh". Whilst most of the West is obsessed with resolution and 'sharpness', the Japanese will discuss the background and forground fields beyond focus. And they have definitions denoting how light is painted with various optics. Once reading about this, it changed my view of photography. It is something else to consider when chosing a lens.