Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>The market for R-Series Leica and G-Series Contax is very soft. The market >for M-Series Leica and Contax SLR is stronger, and the only modern 35mm >equipment I buy anymore. Now, the question is "Why?" G-Series Contax have >remarkable lenses, R-Series Leica cameras are notable for durability (with >a few exceptions). Why are the Leica rangefinders and the Contax SLR >cameras doing well, when Leica SLR cameras and Contax rangefinders are not? >Kevin M. Bell I had an R3 and was poised to built a Leica SLR system until I got Contax RTSII and 50mm 1.4 Planar. After comparing the Leica SLR lenses with their Carl Zeiss T* counter parts and noting the 50% or more price difference, the Contax SLR system won. While the R bodies seem are exceptional, the lenses just don't seem worth the extra price for a minimal if any difference in results. As for the Contax G and Leica M, I have both. The AF comes is really an advantage in some situations and the G lenses are outstanding especially the 45mm and 21mm! But they are not for everyone. If you prefer the traditional rangefinder or want a P&S then the G system is not recommended. Many buy because it's an attractive product that can provide top quality results and end up selling. Just look at the online auctions to see many used G systems for sale everyday. The M system is a fine rangefinder system and many Leica lenses such as my pre-asph 35mm summicron yield some of the best result I have ever achieved with 35mm. Plus the new Cosina products prove a good value and encourage people to try the system. So it not too surprising that the Leica R8 and some R lenses are a slow sellers in the used market. I wouldn't trade my RTSIII and 50mm planar for an equivalent R8 + 50mm. Don Lawrence