Leica M6 and Contax G2

[Larry Kopitnik <kopitnil@mra-inc.com>]

I've been reading with interest the recent comments on the Contax G2.
Because since deciding not to replace my Nikon system with a Leica M6, I've
been looking at complemeting it with a smaller camera.

In test shots I've made, the lenses of both the Leica M and Contax G
systems yield results more appealing than my Nikkors. And in examining
those test shots (on Velvia rated at ISO 40) under a 7x loupe, the 28,
45/50 and 90 mm lenses of both the M and G systems are, to my eye, very
much equals.

Obviously, Leica offers a much wider selection of lenses than does the
Contax G. And when thinking of replacing my Nikons with a small camera, the
M6 was the only one I'd consider because fast glass is important to me. But
now that I'm looking instead for a carry-anywhere small supplement system,
the G2 is a very real consideration.

I do have a question for those who have shot with the M6 and G2 concerning
the viewfinders.

My impression is that the Contax viewfinder, though definitely smaller, is
preferable to Leica's with a 28 mm lens attached (because I can easily see
the entire image on the G2; I wear eyeglasses). At 35 mm and 45/50 mm,
Leica's large finder clearly has the edge. At 90 mm, my impression is that
the viewfinder section representing 90 mm on the M6 is a bit smaller than
the G2's 90 mm viewfinder image. It appears to me, then, that the G2
viewfinder has the advantage at 28 mm and 90 mm, the two focal lengths I'd
use most.

But that is not much more than a play-in-the-store-and-take-it-out-front-for-
test-shots impression. Those of you who have had a chance to shoot with the
M6 and G2 more extensively than I have: How correct or how far off is that
impression?

(And by the way, this will be the first message I've sent with a new e-mail
system. If something goes wrong here, my sincerest appologies!)

Larry