Leica M6 v. Contax G2

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Camera Equipment : One Thread

I have seen some very favourable reports of the Contax G2. Has anyone carried out a careful comparison with the Leica M6 ? has anyone used both cameras for a while rather than a quick test ?

-- Tony Brookes , January 27, 2000

-- Tony Brookes (gdz00@lineone.net), January 27, 2000

Answers

There's pretty comparison in the photo.net static content, plus a lot of photo.net'r input following.

I've been trying the contax G2, and it's pretty good. I don't think I would ever drop the money for the Leica, and the film loading is sort of irritating to me (I'm sure this is all heresy to Leica users)

The one edge you've got to give to Leica, though, is that you know exactly on what the camera is focused (assuming the rangefiner mechanism is in alignment). With the Contax, you're doing some guess work, which is disconcerting.

The new Konica Hexar may be the solution -- interchangeable lenses, manual focus, and enough electronics to make your life easier.

-- john beckman (john.beckman@nyu.edu), January 28, 2000.


That should be "there's a pretty GOOD comparison..."

-- john beckman (john.beckman@nyu.edu), January 28, 2000.

Tony - habve a look here if you have not already done so:

http://www.novia.net/~jlw/contax/index.html

-- John (John.MacPherson@btinternet.com), January 28, 2000.


It is hard to compare the G2 and the M6 directly because they operate in a such a different manner. The best thing you could do is try them at a photo shop. From inspection, I found the G2's viewfinder to be very small, like a point-and-shoot. The M6 is fully manual, with a great rangefinder mechanism. I think it is more fun. Both will take great pictures, and neither of them is cheap, so check them out yourself!

-- Julio Marcos (jmarcos@earthlink.net), January 29, 2000.

Tony,

I have used both systems for more than a year now. While both systems are excellent in their own ways, they are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT as the previous poster has indicated. If you do lots of color slides for travel and landscaping photography, Contax G2 and its G lenses are the best there is for 35mm system, IMHO. Leica M lenses, on the other hands, perform better at wide-open f-stops, particularly for the new ASPH generation lenses. Leica M6 and M lenses better suited for available light or B&W photography.

Hope this helps.

Cing-Dao Kan

-- Cing-Dao Kan (cdkan@hotmail.com), January 31, 2000.



I have used both systems for a while, and as an said earlier, the M6 and the G2 are completely different cameras. The G2 has the advantages (or disadvantages) of autofocus and motordrive. But then I found it to be to noisy for my jind of photography. The M6 is a very quiet, unobtrusive camera. And the M6's viewfinder is far better than the G2. As for the optics, both Leica and Contax are exellent, probably the best you can get.

Arild Reppen, february 2, 2000

-- Arild Reppen (arildr@sffarkiv.no), February 01, 2000.


These two cameras do the same thing in such completely different ways that I doubt anyone would be equally happy with both. About all they have in common is that they're not SLRs.

The Contax doesn't offer any fast lenses, and lacks even the pseudo- focus confirmation of the Leica.

The Leica lacks automation, uses an archaic shutter, and is ungodly expensive.

If you don't need the jewelry factor, the Hexar RF looks like a much more capable machine than either one (and you'd still be able to buy the fast Leica glass if you HAD to).

-- John O'Connell (joconnell@adelphia.net), February 03, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ