Any better price-performance options to Contax G lenses?

[pooschey]

I just got the NEX 5N recently, having moved from the Sony A700. Loving the compact package as a whole and especially using MF lenses (M42s from my A700 days).

Seeing that this is not the best way to take advantage of the compactness of the NEX, I'm looking at options to go small at the lowest cost. I can't see myself using Leica M lenses, looking at the prices they go for. Browsing through various threads in various forums, it seems that the Contax G may be the way.

I'll like to know from if there're better price-performance lenses out there that are about the same size. I'll be looking at the G 28, 45 & 90.

[rbelyell]

hi

i get your philosophy completely and did the same thing myself this past year. i went from a system centered around my 5d and zeiss contax lenses to one centered around the fuji x100, olly ep2 and M mount/m39 small compact lenses.

i explored the G system because i am at heart a 'zeiss-head'. for me, i concluded that the lack of on lens focus ability was going to yield a poor user experience on my olly. so i started trying lots of other lenses. after much experimentationi found the summicron-c 40/2 to be perfect for my olly. it is as small as a thumble but has the incredible resolution and 'pop' of zeiss lenses. i found a great deal and got mine for less than $400usd. i put the following M/m39 lenses, all compact, as almost as good as the summicron: cv skopar 25/4, cv color heliar 75/2.5, leica elmar 90/4, cjz sonnar 135/4.

if you need fast wider lens that is not expensive you should check out the kiron 28/2.0. i am selling one in c/y mount and keeping one in konica ar mount because it is slightly smaller, but both are pretty compact and best quality to price ratio ive found. anoth much mor expensive option is the cv 28/1.9. it also comes in 2.0 but i understand that one has color shift problems when paired with nex cams.

hope this helps.
tony

[pooschey]

Thanks for sharing your experience, Tony.

I do have the same concern with focusing with the Contax G lenses, reading how different adaptors behave differently on the lenses.

I'm not so familiar with the M39. How is this different from the M mount? I keep seeing adaptors that connect the M39 to M, but am not sure how it works. Does it mean I can stack the adaptors, ie, M39>M then M>NEX?

Can you share with me what are the average price points for the cv skopar 25/4, cv color heliar 75/2.5, leica elmar 90/4, cjz sonnar 135/4?

My concern for the Kiron 28/2.0 is that it's prone to oily aperture blades. Regarding the Konica AR mount, my understanding is that it has the shortest adaptor length of all SLR lenses. How long is the adapter?

Thanks again.

[rbelyell]

m39 is a screw mount, just like m42, but made for rangefinder lenese, which are generally much smaller than slr lenses. it was the standard mount before leica came out with the M mount. m39>nex adapters are easily available, as areM mount>nex adapters. you just need one of each for each type of mount, no stacking. m39>M mount adapters are to mount m39 lenses on M mount cameras.

i would say that each of the lenses i mentioned sell for between $3-400usd, much like G lenses. you just have to look around for a good deal. check out the rangefinderforum.com, as people sell this stuff sometimes cheaper than ebay.

as for the kiron, ive had 2 copies, a beautiful c/y mount that i'm selling, and a pretty beat up AR mount that i'm keeping, and neither have had oil problems. AR mount adapters are the smallest ive found because the lenses sit closer to the film plane than other slr lenses. having said that, i found the kiron + c/y adapter to be pretty compact for what you get, an excellent fast 42mm on apsc, that is much much less expensive than other similar options.

comparatively the depth of adapters from large to small goes: m42, c/y, AR, M mount, m39, with the last two being almost even and very small.

[Attila]

Russian L39 or Kiev/Contax unbeatable in price performance ratio and small one too, but there is many other low priced and excellent performers, just look galleries , virtually you can mount any lens on NEX-5.

[pooschey]

Thanks for the tip. I'll need to do more research into these mounts as I'm totally ignorant of them.

[IAZA]

[ForenSeil]

It's absolutely true that the Russians have a better price/perfomance value but when you directly compare them in picture quality to the counterpart in the Contax G series they are optically weaker in all disciplines. I decided to stick with the Contax G lenses.

Little hint if you wan't to buy some russian RF lenses:
The same lenses in Kiev/old Contax mount are cheaper than Russian L39 bye the way as they can't be used on Leica cameras but they can be adapted easily to NEX with an "Nikon S" to NEX adapter.

And be careful... some russian lenses have 39mm screw mount but a completly different flange distance, as they are made for SLR cameras. They won't work on a normal NEX M39 adapter but should work with a NEX - M42 + M42 -M39 adapter.

And bye the way I would also suggest to also look after non russian Leica M and Leica M39 lenses.
You should also have a look for Steinheil M39 lenses and Voigtländer M39 and Voigtländer Leica M lenses.

[pich900]

[std]

The Contax G 28,45, and 90 are reasonably good lenses and not yet too overpriced.
If you cannot afford the Leica M they are a good alternative with comparably good IQ.

I cannot recommend the Russian RF lenses (they are maybe good but certainly not that good as Contax G)
Another real alternative will be the CV in L39 which you can get new and won't cost so much.