Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Contax G1 or G2 lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 10:52 pm    Post subject: Contax G1 or G2 lenses Reply with quote
Is their an adapter to fit Contax G1 or G2 lenses to EOS?


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
No, not as I know.
First there is the problem of the register distance (one should need to remove the mirror from the EOS camera to focus at infinite)
Secondly, the adapter would probably be complicated, because the G mount has a strange thing that makes the lenses' aperture rings work "out of scale" (so to say) until they are locked in onto the camera. The adapter should replicate this condition, and I don't know if that would be easy or difficult to do.


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Orio.


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had a G45 adapted to M mount RF).
Also there is a way to adapt the G2.8/90 Sonnar to M42.
I think there is a Tutorial in the equipment gallery of the process.
Koji did one conversion. Maybe search his posts.

For that sonnar it is better to buy the C/Y 2.8/85 version. I think it's the same lens. I have one coming up if the person it was offered to declines. Rarish MMG version.

Maybe it's worth it. You can buy a EX one from KEH for about $100.
These poor G lenses will be orphans one day. Damn AF system makes them unusable unless put into a helicoid. Sad

Here is the Pbase page Koji made of the Mod
http://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/g90_mods

And here is a thread with a mod for Nikon mount
http://forum.mflenses.com/contax-g-90mm-f2-8-to-nikon-ai-mount-t9620.html


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If i recall correctly, the Contax G2 mount is 15mm shorter than the Canon Eos one. Probably they adopted such short length to shorten the entire camera+lens size...Contax G lenses are my dream too. Too bad they can be used only on the G cams which still cost pretty much (although not as much as in the past).


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
One more link. This for L mount or M mount RF shooters.

This fellow did my G45 to Leica M. A super quality job lthough a bit unconvetional to look at (I love that).

Scroll down the list you will see he can re-mount anything from these G-lenses to Yashica Electro lenses or Nikon P+S 28mm Cool

Click on modifications link to go to the right page.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.hayatacamera.co.jp/&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.hayatacamera.co.jp/index.html%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
After looking at and reading all of this, I think a person is better off to just buy C/Y or m42.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't know the lenses that well. What is the difference between a sonnar and a planar? Which is the better lense?


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Contrary to what Andy said about the difference between G-Sonnar 90/2.8
and C/Y Sonnar 85/2.8, they are optically very similar but their performances
are a bit different. G-Sonnar is much superior than C/Y Sonnar 85mm, BUT
practically speaking it is better to buy C/Y Sonnar 85/2.8 since adapted/modified
(M42 mount) G-Sonnar is not easy to use. (please check PHOTODO for this,
though this site is also sometime dubious too Very Happy)

I am using film(s) these weeks, using now Contax AX with the above modified
G-Sonnar 90mm together with G2+Planar 35/2 along side. Will show the results
if they are okay, including the shots in Denver Colorado USA in the past week.
The films are in EDP shop now, remember the word EDP shop?! Cool

G1/2 lenses are all pretty good, probably the best one is Planar 45/2 and least
expensive too. Very Happy

I like G-Planar 35/2 personally, G-Biogon 21mm is the best 21mm regardless of
the mount IMO. See a proof> http://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/image/109363740

Last edited by koji on Fri May 08, 2009 2:19 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the info Koji.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Schnauzer wrote:
I don't know the lenses that well. What is the difference between a sonnar and a planar? Which is the better lense?


they are different optical schemes and it's hard to say which one is better, it largely depends on the personal taste.

Sonnar is used for tele lenses (with the exception of the 50mm for the Contax rangefinder). Planar has a wider range of application, from moderate wides to medium teles.

The Sonnar scheme has less glass-air surfaces. It would offer better contrast than the Planar - however, with the technology of the multi-coating, this difference is pretty much a thing of the past.
Planars can be faster than Sonnars - and that is their main merit (and the reason they cost more).
Aesthetically, they produce different images. Both are sharp. The Sonnar however has a more pleasing bokeh and smoother colours. The Planar has more punch and more of that "3D" look.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
koji wrote:

I like G-Planar 35/2 personally, G-Biogon 21mm is the best 21mm regardless of
the mount IMO.


I cast my vote for the most forgotten of them, the Biogon 28.
In my opinion, it comes as close to perfect architectural rendition, as a lens can get. See this image:



No Photoshop correction in there. If you take an architect instrument and measure those diagonals, you will find them perfect.
You could trace them and port them directly into a geometrical drawing.
I have yet to find another wide angle lens that performs like this.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you Orio.

Zeiss has so many its confusing when its new to you. Biogon, planer, sonnar, tessar and probable others.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, Orio. G-Biogon 28mm is a near perfect lens, alas their AF system in
G-bodies is a weakest link. I guess those superb lenses are not deserved
such treatment, that is why some convert them to M-mount. Sad

But I still use and love G1 & 2 cameras, this summer I will consume more films
for these lenses. Cool

Last edited by koji on Fri May 08, 2009 1:24 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Schnauzer wrote:
Thank you Orio.

Zeiss has so many its confusing when its new to you. Biogon, planer, sonnar, tessar and probable others.


I think there should be a FAQ about it somewhere, anyway here's the basic:

Anastigmat (Protar) = one of the very first, if not the first, of the Zeiss lenses. If I remember correctly it was a symmetrical scheme with two groups of two elements each

Planar = as old as (I think) 1896, invented by Paul Rudolph, it is a "double Gauss" design, the rest of the characteristics I already described

Sonnar = a relatively fast optical scheme born to replace the Planar which (at the time) could not be used because of loss of contrast. The classic Sonnar scheme has 6 elements in 3 groups, one of which cemented. It was however often modified with the time. I described the characteristic already

Triotar = a triplet (three elements) scheme, based on the Cooke triplet. Used for both standard and tele lenses. Can be very sharp and, if well made, also have good control of aberrations. It is usually not very fast.

Tessar = an evolution of the Cooke triplet, it uses four lenses for better correction. It is the most successful and copied of all optical schemes ever. Still in use today, because it's cheap and high quality. It's been used for moderate wides and for standard lenses. The main feature is the great sharpness when stopped down. However it is slow, and tends to be soft wide open.

Tele-Tessar = it's bsically the Tessar scheme adapted for tele lenses. It often has one or two elements more than the standard Tessar

Biogon = rectilinear wide angle scheme, it is the most successful of all rangefinder wide angle lenses. It is not applicable on reflex cameras because it needs proximity to the film plane. The main feature of the Biogons is the almost perfect control of distortion. The weak point is the light falloff at corners wide open

Distagon = rectilinear wide angle scheme, build with retrofocus, i.e. on the back of the lens there is what is basically an inverted tele lens scheme. This allows to make wide angle and super wide angle lenses while keeping enough distance from the film plane to accomodate the mirror of reflex cameras. Today Zeiss is also making Distagons for rangefinder because it has less vignetting than the Biogon

Biotar = It's a double gauss scheme that is similar to Planar. A technician would be able to explain the differences, I am not Rolling Eyes

Biometar = it's sort of a crossover between Planar and Sonnar, basically it's a Planar with a Sonnar cemented group in it - certainly to save on production costs. It was only built by the Jena (DDR) factory

Pancolar = it's more or less the Jena equivalent of Planar

Flektogon = it's the Jena equivalent of the Distagon concept


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good lord, there are even more than I thought.

This should be made a sticky.

Thank you.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for that, Orio. I was unsure of the hierarchy of them.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Orio. Good and quick summary of differences among CZ.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's a link to a nice bit of conversion for the Contax-G 90 Sonnar to EOS. It's in Chinese though, but I think the photos say it all.

http://www.bootek.com/cgi-bin/ut/topic_show.cgi?id=2160&pg=1&bpg=1

It uses the original Contax-G helicoid, but is not as flexible as Koji's solution to M42.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio-

great summary there! I too was relatively unfamiliar with the CZ optics and seeing as there are so many people on this forum using them, I often find myself completely lost.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you Orio, that's very helpful. I have bookmarked this...

Koji, do you see any difference between the G 45 and C/Y 50? I've heard some claiming that G 35 is not up to the standard of other G lens, it might be true in MTF, but I wonder if the difference in performance is noticeable in real life?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, G35 has weakness at its wide open. It is getting better from F4 and up,
and extremely sharp too. But I like its dreamy image at its WO (wide open).

Recently I used G35 with Pana's GF1, it does perform quite well.
Both were shot at ISO 200, 1/30 handheld, real life shots. EFoV is ~70mm.
Of course at its wide open...



Difference between G45 and C/Y 50 is beyond my ken. Very Happy

BTW, G45 at its WO shot >


This G45 has usual Zeiss 3D-ness and has very nice bokeh, I mean it has none harshness and its creamy bokeh
does not looses too much what the object is. Like this (Fuji Reala + Contax G2) at both WO>



PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you Koji, your gallery at pbase is a great resource.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1