Leica Cl VS Contax G1

[ForenSeil]

I have the chance to swap my G1 with Planar 45/2 T* against a working Leica Cl with Leica Summicron C 40/2 and Leica Elmar 90/4 or 450€ (which I currently don't have, but I could also sell my CV Heliar 15 and CV Ultron 35 for it; I don't like them anyway)

Is that a good deal?

I heard that the focus of the Leica Cl is very unprecise and does not work well at <2m distances (which would be important to me).
But the Contax AF is also sometimes a little aside with the 90/2.8

How good is the Summicron compared to the Planar?
And how good is the Elmar compared to my Sonnar 90/2.8?

Is that a step up or a step down in quality?

[Orio]

I don't know the Leica stuff well enough to say if it was a good deal or not.
What I know is that I would never trade my Contax G2 + Planar 45 for anything else that wouldn't cost at least 3 times as much
(in which case I would rebuy the G2+Planar 45 and cash the difference )

[rbelyell]

just by the numbers, with absolutely no comment on emotional or qualitative differences, G1=$150-200, G 45/2=$350-400. by contrast CL=$450-800, cron 40=$4-600, elmar90=$300. i'm very current on all these prices, at least in US market.

cl's are tricky though. the prism has a tendency to wear such that the RF patch becomes nearly invisible and this is expensive to fix, so be sure the patch is bright and meter works properly!

i have bothe the cron and elmar and the cron is simply one of the best lenses ive ever used, and the elmar, while slow, is very compact and beautiful color rendition. i say this not to vault the leica's over the zeiss in IQ, because ive not shot with the legendary G system. i say it merely to provide comfort that you are receivng excellent quality gear in return.

as far as 'close up' accuracy, no RF performs well in this zone. you will find it either front or back focuses and then you can adjust accordingly.
tony

[scsambrook]

I have no experience of the Contax so can't comment on the relative desirability of the two cameras, but I have had a CL and can say that:

If the CL is in correct working order, the rangefinder IS perfectly accurate for the lenses meant to be used with it. In other words, if you use a 90mm f2 or a 50mm f1.4 you might find it less than totally precise. The measuring base is relatively short.

The 40mm f2 is a very nice lens and the 90mm is very light and compact. It's reputation seems to have improved over time though . . . I have no doubt that they will both be "different" to your Contax lenses but the only way for you to know which is "better" to your eyes will be to own them both and use them side by side over time.

If you decide to sell the two CV lenses, let me know how much you want for the 15mm I have the Ultron already and think it's a splendid lens.

[iangreenhalgh1]

I'd keep the Contax because you see a lot of not working CLs, so I doubt it's a very reliable or robust camera.

[rbelyell]

stephen, was it your experience that the cl/cron-c 40/2 focused perfectly close up, lets say up to 5-6 feet? tmk, the only RF that can make this claim is the bessa t...
tony

[scsambrook]

Tony - yes, my CL lenses coupled perfectly down to 1 metre. No problems at all. I had a CLE later on and all three of its lenses worked perfectly too. although I didn't think then that my Minolta 90 was as good as the earlier one on the CL.

Ian - I don't think it's true to say the CL hasn't been a reliable camera over the years. After forty years or so, age will be starting to show its effects in some cases. Cds cells often suffer the passage of time poorly, and when rangefinder cameras get knocked around the focusing arrangements often suffer. I wonder what proportion of Contax Gs will be worn out when they eventually reach their 40th birthdays? (or any digital SLR, come to that?)

[iangreenhalgh1]

Oh, not knocking the reliablity really, just a comment on how many ones with issues I've seen for sale, maybe they weren't looked after so well? I just think a CLA should be considered as part of the purchase cost of one.

That said, there are lots of broken Contax Gs around too...

[rbelyell]

[Orio]

[rbelyell]

oh, ok, maybe its a lens-specific focus shift issue. ive had two RFs that couldnt close focus under 5feet, but maybe its because most of the time i was using the wrong lens with it. i do recall reading that RFs in general have 'close focus' issues, which is why i got the T, but again, perhaps i didnt fully understand the context of those complaints.
tony

[Orio]

Generally, the issue with close distances is about the framing, which does not correspond to what you see in viewfinder due to parallax error.
But yes, cameras with a small rangefinder base (such as some compacts) may have some trouble with focus precision at close distances.
But those cameras usually are not used for precision focusing anyway.

Focus shift of fast lenses is another matter and this is why rangefinder cameras should better be tested for focus precision using not so fast but reliable lenses such as f/3.5 Tessar/Elmar

[rbelyell]

oh, that explains it, because ive had that problem with fast lenses wide open...

[ForenSeil]

Thank you for the replies!
Finally I didn't swap it with the Contax G1 + CZ Planar T* 2/45 but bought the Leica Cl + Summicron-C 2/40 + Elmar 4/90 together for 450.-€
It's on the way to me now.
My Heliar and my Ultron have to leave me instead of the G1+Planar for this for the financing.
http://www.ebay.de/sch/metasynthese/m.html?item=261013942041&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&_trksid=p3984.m1558.l2649&_trksid=p4340.l2562

I hope everything will arrive in good condition. If yes I think it was a really good deal

[rbelyell]

congratulations! great choice, you will love that gear, and the lenses will not only be great on film, but on your mirrorless digi as well!
tony
btw that cron-c40 is killer!

[ForenSeil]

[Orio]

[skida]

I got a battery for an old light meter from:

http://www.smallbattery.company.org.uk/


which was a replacement for a mercury cell. The service was excellent and I didn't find them expensive (certainly cheaper than sending a camera to a technician for recalibration).

[rbelyell]

mine had what seemed like a pretty common type of battery adapter.

as for the lens, i take a very different philosophical approach to what i want/expect from a lens than i guess many folks do nowadays. i dont expect, or care, about tack sharpness wide open. my feeling is that god created different apertures so the photographer can make different decisions. from 2,8-5.6 the lens is just as sharp as any other ive seen, save the distagon 35/1.4. my feeling, and i respect other opinions on this, is normal-portrait lenses are not supposed to be at their sharpest wide open.
tony

[ForenSeil]

I don't know any technicians in my city. I would have to go to Hamburg by train.

I found an battery adapter for 8,50.-€ on Amazon.de
Hope it will works fine and I hope the Summicron and the Elmar will be optically excellent to my eyes.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Mercury batteries were 1.3V, the modern alternative is 1.5V so you can use them but need to set the film speed one setting off, such as 200 for a 100 speed film. I did this with my Yashica 35-ME and it worked fine, if you set the film speed to the same as the film everything is overexposed a bit.

[skida]

[Orio]

[scsambrook]

To get reliable functioning with non-mercury batteries you need something like the Small Battery Company's MR-9 adapter - see http://www.smallbattery.company.org.uk/sbc_mr9_adapter.htm -
it's not cheap at around GBP30 but by all the accounts I've read it does the job. the comnpany's webpage explains how/why it does the job.

[ForenSeil]