I know that people here are probably going to assail me for saying this but I'm going to be adding a fairly inexpensive Contax SLR body to my Leica R outfit. I was skimming over the prices at Tamarkin's and it turns out that I'm going to be shopping for a set of SLR prime lenses which are fast, faster than f2 in all cases from wide to telephoto lengths.

Leica R-lenses:

1) 35 Summilux-R f1.4 - $2895 2) 50 Summilux-R f1.4 - $1995 3) 80 Summilux-R f1.4 = $2995

Dang this is very expensive. I would have to break the bank to spend like 8000 bucks for a set of fast primes from Leica? :( No wonder I only can afford a used Summicron ROM lens I got for 400 bucks (and that nearly killed me) for my wonderful Leica R4.

The corresponding Carl Zeiss primes are costing at B and H:

1) Wide angle Carl Zeiss Distagon T 35mm f1.4 MF lens = $1074.95 2) Normal angle Carl Zeiss Planar T 50mm f1.4 MF lens = $274.95 3) Telephoto Carl Zeiss Planar T 85mm f1.4 MF lens = $869.95

Okay the total is about 2200 bucks for the complete prime set of Carl Zeiss. Yes, I do know that Carl Zeiss lenses have some more plasticly parts than Leica does but come on. Leica is like 4 times more than Carl Zeiss for the nice sharpness and bokeh and granted the mystique is there but I can't go out and break the bank just to have some fast primes. Granted I must wait to collect up Leica primes but CZ lenses are a good temptation at the moment considering that their performance in comparable in a different way.

Also my Leica body and lens haven't been perfect either. The right strap lug is slightly loose and the so-called convenient built-in retractable lens hood for my Summicron is broken because it used to lock into a certain distance back but now the lens hood retracts back too far because the support is lost in the lens barrel. Yes, Leica lens are more durable but I'm more interested in lens performance.

Well, Carl Zeiss lens looks like a good temptation in terms of what you get compared to the amount of bank account at the moment :) Either that or my impatience is showing.

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002

Answers

So what was your question? If you want to go CZ, then go. There is no need to justify why you're doing that.

-- sunil (yatsunil@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002.

I for one, could never justify multiple 35mm SLR systems that were not compatible. I might consider it if I was fully invested in one system (that I was happy with) and there was one unique lens in another system I felt I just had to have. However, if I were unhappy with my current system (and it sounds like you might be) I'd do a total switch to another system without hesitation... But I would not get rid of my current gear untill I was sure the replacement was really better.

;-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 21, 2002.

Well, Carl Zeiss lens looks like a good temptation in terms of what you get compared to the amount of bank account at the moment :) Either that or my impatience is showing.

Why don't you learn how to use what you have so far? Awhile back you showed us some portraits that were a definite improvement over your previous images. If I were you I would be spending the $$$$ on film. The single most important ingredient that will breath life into your success as a photographer.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 21, 2002.

Well Alfie, If you've decided to go in that direction, good luck to you. But like Jack I don't understand the reasoning for adding another system. If financial strains restrict you from adding more Leica equipment, then just go Contax and forget about Leica. I also don't know why you'd want to keep the R4 for anything other that personal connection. It's a pretty unreliable camera. Regardless I think the Contax sounds like a great investment. If picture quality, rather than pride is most important, then the Contax is a better buy than Leica. I myself would never own a Leica R outfit. I'd rather have the Contax or Nikon/Canon with my current M6 setup. Good luck

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002.

First, you can buy anything you want, of course. It's none of our business. Some people like having loads of gear. As we all know, there are lots of gear heads on this site (which is perfectly fine). That being said, I'm curious as to why you continue to buy more and more equipment without really making a concerted effort to learn to use what you have. Not like I'm keeping track, but in your other posts, you've mentioned that you currently own a IIIf, an R4, a CL, a Bessa T, plus some Nikon gear. Why not take some time to learn what you have (which is not shabby by anyone's standards). The money saved could go to loads of film, a darkroom setup... or more practically, food. But again, it's your choice. Life is short, and it's your money.

If you do buy some Contax stuff, I wouldn't recommend buying so many lenses at once. You can buy three or four different lenses at once, but it's going to take you much longer to really "learn" a particular focal length. Plus, if you throw different SLR systems in the mix, that really adds to the time.

This is one time that I really appreciate the high costs of Leica equipment. When I first bought my M6, I only had one lens to use with it for years. It really forced me to learn the nuances of that focal length (in my case a 35/2). I've since added a couple other lenses, but I find that the 35/2 still takes 90% of my shots.

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), February 22, 2002.

Alfie, old chum:

My innocent, trusting side thinks you'll find the Contax/Zeisses sharp, perhaps overly contrasty, a little pink, but basically nice lenses for anything except slide film (at least Velvia). They won't take better pictures than what you have now. (And a word of warning - out of 7 Contax bodies I've owned over the past decade - 4 had the strap lugs start to come loose!)

My jaded, cynical side recalls your 'enthusiasms' over the past few months and has the following suggestion. Why not just take the $500- $600 you will lose (through buying all that Zeiss glass in a fit of excitement and then selling/trading it 4 months from now) and just take Princess and the cat out in the back yard and have a ceremonial burning of the money - getting it over with all at once and without using up a bunch of Zeiss warranty cards.

Before you do anything, first spend $10 on a copy of the children's book "The Wind in the Willows."

And read it.

Especially the part about Toad of Toad Hall. Then decide if you really need to jump to yet another camera system.

"Poop-poop!!"

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 22, 2002.

Some people just like gears they don' take photo right , like me, I have all the gears you can ask for, but I don't really know how to get good exposures on my M6TTL, I can even do it right on the Hexar RF, the focus is not 100% on my F5 and F100,maybe I don't know how to use it, my 203FE print came out like $50 point shot camera. the only good result so far I have is the EOS3 and L lens, but I am still learning, I don't have much time, but I will spend few hours a month, play aroung all my gears then put it back, to me it feels better than looking good prints.

-- Mitchell Li (mitchli@pacbell.net), February 22, 2002.

Alfie

Yes I despair of you. Read "Wind in the Willows". Learn to take good shots with what you have. I hate to sound like Jeff Spirer but in this case "equipment does not maketh the photographer".

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 22, 2002.

Well, I was just browsing through a thread on the M7, and in that you write that you're going to buy an M7 and an R8 this summer.

Sigh. I should know better than to try and write a thoughtful response to you. My mistake. On second thought, but whatever you like. The 2nd hand market will love you for it.

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), February 22, 2002.

It's the Ying and the Yang Mr.Wang.

-- Fred Wyborson (freddysim@wybor.co.uk), February 22, 2002.

Aside from pure, unadulterated gear fetish, why do you need a set of fast primes all of a sudden? What are you shooting, or planning to shoot, that necessitates it? If you want to stick with Leica (and nobody blames you for that), then get Summicrons and up-rate your film a stop when needed. My philosophy for handheld 35mm photography is to get the fastest lenses you can afford to buy/carry. If you can't afford 8 grand, then you can't afford 8 grand. On the other hand, you can get... 35/2-R for $800 (mint)... 50/2-R you already have... 90/2-R for $800 (mint). Total $1600. Do you even want to compare the weight difference? If I were you I'd have just one more expense, dump the R4 and get an R7. All this for a heck of a lot less than 8 grand, and even slightly less than the full set of CZ primes.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 22, 2002.

Years ago John Isaac won a Leica in a photo contest. When he looked a the lenses and decided he could never afford to buy them he traded his Leica for a Minolta slr outfit with several lenses. He continued to use the Minolta system throughout his tenure as a UN photographer creating many beautiful images.

http://www.johnisaac.com

good luck!

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), February 22, 2002.

Oh Alfie, when will you learn? It's not the gear that makes the photographer. It's the eye, the effort, the patience and persistence. I'm grateful for the restraint you've shown over these past few weeks in not overwhelming the forum with bilge. You're learning. By the same token, I suggest you now learn the cameras and lenses you have. Whatever money you've reserved for the gear purchase would be better spent on film. The best photographers of my acquaintance have far less gear than you have; yet their work is published around the world and wins awards. You'll find this more is less approach will work for you if only you give it time.

-- Eve Hessler (evehessler@hotmail.com), February 22, 2002.

Alfie, My Pal:

You are right with you maths. The Carl Zeiss lens are less expensive and as elitist as the Leica.

If the rendering is globally softer, the CZ have a very good rendering.

An interiesting fact: the ContaxG pages show tons and tons of wonderful pictures, color and B&W. A great club of enthousiasts.

But you said SLR. Hmm, they sell as good as the Leica Pre-ROM. Good bargains in used columns though. Be aware that Contax is not perfect, they had quality control difficulties.

Keep up posted. X.

-- Xavier d'Alfort (hot_billexf@hotmail.com), February 22, 2002.

I hate to sound like Jeff Spirer but in this case "equipment does not maketh the photographer".

I don't like sounding like me either :-)

After following all these Alfie postings, which have their amusing moments, and seeing the Alfie photos, I would go back to my original recommendation which is to find a local school offering Photography 101. That will help far more than spending all this time on equipment. Also, sell all the equipment, or give it to Mike Dixon, and buy an Olympus Stylus. You will find that you have far less to worry about and take photos that are equal to what you have shown so far.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 22, 2002.

"What's it all about...Alfie?"

I think we may have the same mental illness: we substitute STUFF for a relationship or self-esteem. But, I have the money and you don't seem to. I grew out of it in college; got one Leica, one lens; went overseas to work; Nikons got stolen out of storage; got more Leica with the ins. money. I mostly buy good deals now (getting better?), rather than by perceived need. I didn't have a 50, 1:2.0 for 13 years until I got a good deal on one (<$300).

Buy film and join a photo club that provides darkroom space. You'll meet your next princess who has the same hobby as you do. Chics at cooking clubs are cool too. Don't date one you work with or work for, though.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), February 22, 2002.

Alfie, I have a Contax Zeiss system with some lenses(18mm; 28; 50/1,4; 85/1,4; 100/2; 135/2,8; 135/2; 200/3,4), but after a while I accrossed the road and started to shot with Leica M system. Why? It is simple, and you know the why. Actualy, I ought to say that up to 135 mm Leica is better and useful, but after 135 mm you need a SRL. And Contax is the best. Only with the 21mm Contax is superior to Leica 21 SA and 21 pre aspherical. The new asperical 21 mm is better at the corners, but the old 21 mm of Contax is still better at the center at every aperture. The difference is not the price (even with Nikon or Canon at a certain level the prices are quite equal!!!!) but the weight. With a M system you can shot without problem everywhere and with every condition of light. The G system? Not bad, for the lenses, but not reliable for the autofocus of the cameras. If you want to have a SRL and you cannot afford a Leica system, buy Contax, but ib my opinion only if you want top quality, you need to buy the 100/2 and the 135/2, but for the 180 or 280 Leica is the best of the best in the SRL system, For the normal and the wide angles the new M system lenses are winner all over the line!

-- Joe Pelizza Salusso di Volpedo (breglumasi@hotmail.com), February 23, 2002.

Alfie:

Many have already said this, but sometimes less is really more... Why not focus (double-entendre intended[:)]) your attention on making a few good images with what you already own? When I get in a photographic slump, I'll often go out with only one camera, one film and one lens (usually a film and focal I don't use much) and see what I can do. It gets my creative juices working, and maybe it will work for you too.

If I were you, I would decide first whether or not you want to shoot primarily with the RF or SLR in 35mm. Then I would procure a minimal system -- 3 lenses tops -- that would let me explore that system in more depth. Then, after the system started to become an extension of my creativity, I would add to it. Not before.

Lastly, I contemplated getting into an R8 and 3 or 4 lenses after selling my Nikon gear. I wanted an SLR for longer lens work (90 to 180 range) and quality macro. Guess what? I got all of that in a Contax 645. And for less money (used compared to used), and with about the same size and weight! (Actually even a little less weight, if you figure an extra back and the Contax weighs much less than two motorized R8's.) As for quality, the final verdict is still out, but the initial results sure look promising!

Food for thought only,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 23, 2002.

How about selling all of your photo stuff and getting a 4 x 5 camera . It will slow you down , and force you to think about every shot take .

-- leonid (kotlyarl@mail.nih.gov), February 24, 2002.