Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric - You're wrong about the Contax G2 when you say it isn't a rangefinder camera. The camera views the subject through two different windows and compares the views just as the the Leica does. But the decision as to the correct point of focus is made by microprocessor rather than the user. It works quite well. What is your definition of a "rangefinder camera"? As for the viewfinder that you describe in two works ( "it stinks"), many of us really like it! You seem to have simplistic answers to not so simple and clear-cut questions. - JB. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Eric Welch > Sent: Friday, March 06, 1998 11:32 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] contax g2 lenses - comparable to Leica M? > > > At 01:19 PM 2/25/98 -0800, you wrote: > > >lenses are equal in quality to the Leica M lenses. It seems that > >Contax has taken care of the frames problem and parallax. They have > >also developed AF for their rangefinder before Leica. Any opinions > > Their lenses are great, but as good as Leicas? Well, depends on what you > mean by good. THey dont make an F/ 1.4 lens, for one. That's not a big > thing. And who careas about AF for a rangefinder camera. The G2 is > technically not really a rangefinder camera. But it IS a viewfinder camera > (not SLR). > > As for the viewfinder: two words. > > It stinks. > ========== > > Eric Welch > St. Joseph, MO > http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch > > When there's a will, I want to be in it. >