Contax G to Micro 4/3 adapter ?

[std]

Hi guys,
I'm looking for an adapter for Contax G lens to Micro 4/3 body

There are 2 posibilities on ebay (2 designs)

Click here to see on Ebay
and
Click here to see on Ebay

The second looks more comfortable to use - it has large focusng ring.

Have anyone tried those .. does it worth the extra $30 ?

Thanks,
Stefan[/url]

[wilson.c]

Stefan,

Here's a thread that discussed this adapter and others for Contax G to m4/3.

http://forum.mflenses.com/contax-g-lens-to-micro-4-3-adapter-t22014,start,45.html

I've got both the original one and the one with the big focus ring. In short, the one with the big focus ring is easier to use, however fine tuning is a bit more difficult. The original one is difficult to use due to the focus roller's position, but you get tack sharp shots easily.

[Rolf]

Wilson has right. I own both too and the cheaper one will be ok.

[std]

Thanks guys ,
i've ordered the cheaper one.

it's on it's way to me already . and the 90 sonnar also

[wilson.c]

You won't be disappointed with the results of the Contax G lenses. If you look in the m4/3 area of this forum, you will see my Contax G 28/2.8 with the rear element protector trimmed to fit on my GF-1. I figured trimming my 21mm would not make sense as it's too close to the Panny 20mm/1.7 pancake lens. So these adapters will work with lenses wider than 35mm, they just need the rear element protector trimmed. It will affect resale value though.

[std]

Thanks Wilson,
Which one is more usable for second lens after the 90 sonnar? 45, 35, or 28?
I think 28 should be ok for micro 4/3.
Br,
Stefan

[wilson.c]

I've got both the 28mm, 45mm and 90mm working on on my adapter. As I mentioned the 28mm needs the rear protective tabs trimmed in order to fit. I don't have the 35mm so I can't comment on it.

For me, at least, in terms of usability I have the Panny 20mm/1.7 pancake lens so the three lenses I mentioned are a pretty good options for a second lens, depending on the type of photography you do. I was lucky that I did not get rid of my Contax G lenses when the GF-1 was announced.

28mm would be 56mm equivalent and good for a second standard lens.
45mm would be 90mm equivalent for portraits.
90mm would be 180 equivalent for longer portraits.

Hope that helps a bit.

[std]

Just got the 90 g sonnar and the 'RJ CONTAX G-m4/3' adapter
but i can't figure out how to mount the damn thing



When i lock the lens to the adapter the small wheel rotates but the focus doesn't change

any ideas?

seems the adapter is crappy..even if align the screw which moves the lens properly to the adapter it cannot rotate the AF mechanism from the small wheel for more than half a turn.

should get the other version i guess..

[std]

Any ideas here?
Which should be the quality m4/3-contax g adapter?


The rj is crap.

Ebay links are appreciated

[calvin83]

FYI:Kipon release a new adaptor:
http://www.dl-kipon.com/onews.asp?id=62

The old one:
http://www.dl-kipon.com/onews.asp?id=56

Check if the new one is avaliable. They says 28,35,45,90 can use with this adaptor.

[std]

kipon are Chinese ?
Have anyone tried those?

They look very simmilar with the one i have ... which is not useable at all.
On mine the focus screw is missalligned for about 1-2 milimeters.

[std]

and we have sucess

turns that in RJ adapter there is a locking pin which keeps the lens in position when it's mounted on the adapter. And this pin was not in the correct place.

I have bent it allittle bit to the right and now it's ok and the lens mounts properly.




and it woorks

The bokeh of the sonnar is very smooth

[/img]

[amoebahydra]

[std]

It works yes

I got both the Sonnar 2,8/90 and Planar 2/35
I haven't tried them on film yet but on e-p1 they are very nice.

[gcogger]

How do you guys find the performance of the 35/2 wide open? I'd love to go down the 'small and light' route, but my (big and heavy!) Canon FD 35/2 is hard to beat for wide open performance...

[std]

[gcogger]

Thanks, that's useful. I'd mostly be using the lens indoors in low light, so I'd probably be OK with the out of focus rendering.